Rampage Nation: Perhaps ABC News is awakening from the slumber
April 06, 2009 11:03 am ET by Eric Boehlert
From its Friday night network newscast came this programming note from guest anchor Diane Sawyer:
And, also, a week from tonight, ABC News is going to bring you the results of a year-long exploration of this epidemic of mass shootings in America – why it is happening and what lessons there are about staying safe if it is happening to you. And that is one week from tonight.
The national press has been playing dumb about gun violence for years now. It will be interesting to see if ABC News takes off the blinders with its upcoming Friday-night special.
UPDATE: There was another mass murder over the weekend. This one in Graham, Washington, where police report James Harrison, 34, distraught over the fact that his wife was leaving him, shot and killed his five children and then killed himself. By my estimates, that's five mass murders in the last eight days in America, with nearly 40 people shot dead.
Question: Will others in the news media soon join ABC News and begin to connect the dots?
And that Muslim would be labeled a "terrorist". When will the right-wing media start calling these conservative mass murderers for what they are, i.e., terrorists?
I am not sure how many of these rampage shooters are conservatives gone wild, though, I do not doubt some are. However, there does need to be a discussion in the American Press about this that includes more than a gun control vs anti gun control debate. We need a discussion in this country about what constitutes arms. We have the right to bear arms granted by the constitution but I ask our constructionists friends on the right to tell me what an arm was in the 1770's and have we gone too far in gun manufacturing in the 2000's that many guns should not be classified as arms but as public safety violations? A musket in 1770 has been transformed into an automatic weapon that can fire 50 rounds in less than a minute.
That could be a slippery slope. Then we would have to start examining all our rights and amendments for some sort of "temporal technological relevancy". For example, the freedom of press shouldn't extend to the internet, or for that matter, any news print that wasn't generated using the methods of the day.
Now, I certainly believe in a common sense approach to what defines "arms" and restrictions of ownership to the public. And many of these restrictions are in place. For instance, civilians cannot own functional anti-aircraft guns or a helicopter gunship. However, I do find it a bit troubling that there are not stricter standards for certain weapons as well (e.g., the Barrett .50 cal). But, at present there isn't a Constitutional precedence to define "arms" by 1770 standards and there never will be.
I see your point. How can we classify the automatic assault weaponry of today in the same manner as the other outlawed arms you mention? One other thing I might mention is a free press can't kill 13 people in less than an hour. Declaring an assault weapon unconstitutional seems reasonable. If they can declare that the right to an abortion is not in the constitution, why can't I declare that a right to an assault rifle is not in the constitution. If they say "well arms is" can't I say "well privacy is in there". We should not mass produce a weapon to sell to our citizens that serves one purpose and that purpose is to kill as quickly as possible. I guess I am a brown shirt or something.
To their credit, CNN asked the same question this morning about "guns."
Someone's been reading MMFA last week....
"...and what lessons there are about staying safe if it is happening to you."
I can just see it now: ABC will cover all the abc's of not getting shot by a rampaging gunman, and that the best known technique is to hide, preferably under a desk... and then they'll air film of children rushing frantically to get under a desk, you know, just like the film from the 50's, that showed children how to protect themselves from a rampaging thermo-nuclear red menace.
Who thinks ABC is going to cover these many shootings of late, and cover them informatively and to any depth, as opposed to sensationally shallow?
There's a single thing I want ABC to do whenever they air their special on this matter.
They could do it now, but seeing as they and everyone else in the media aren't doing it, then I guess they're waiting for some special time, and so ABC's special is maybe when they'll do it.
They can tell us exactly where the murderous phuck in Pittsburgh (to take a single example, of the phuck who surprised three cops who were only doing their job and who never had a chance), ABC can profile not only the weapon that the murderous Pittsburgh phuck used, an AK-47, but they can tell us exactly where and how and from whom that phuck got that AK-47.
Exactly, and in great and informative detail: ABC can go to the exact gunshop, and interview the owner or other spokesperson (or else state that they refuse to be interviewed or to comment), and they can ask if everything about the sale was legal and proper, and what if anything do they recall about the murderous phuck they sold an AK-47 to, and did he buy much ammo or anything else...
1. This information is all a simple matter of Public Record, and was found out by the Pittsburgh Police (who lost three of their own by way of this murderous phuck's AK-47), they found this information out but quick, in less than a day's time, and it's a matter of Public Record for ABC and any other media to report.
2. There can be nothing improper or foul about reporting this information and even going to and interviewing the gunshop owners and employees, if there was nothing foul or improper about the sale, right? I mean, when you have no reason to hide something, then you have nothing to hide, right?
It's about as important, if not the most important fact, that the media can report in every one of these shooting incidents: the fact of where the murderer purchased or otherwise got, the firearm they used... exactly where and exactly how and exactly from whom, complete with video interviews.
ABC can start with the case of the murderous phuck in Pittsburgh: where and how and from whom, did he get his AK-47, to gun down three cops who never had a chance.
ABC will not profile this information, I say: or if they do, they will downplay it, and pass it over quickly and quietly, without any pictures of the gunshop or interviews of whoever sold that murderous phuck an AK-47.
Most likely ABC will not only prattle on about the idiocies of what you should do if caught in one of these shooting incidents...
"...and what lessons there are about staying safe if it is happening to you"
...but most likely it will involve hiding, like in a closet or under a desk... you know, like you would in the case of a thermo-nuclear attack.
ABC can even use that old film, from the 50's, of children being drilled to hide under their desks.