Posted: 1/23/2001 7:18:00 PM EST
Well I guess it has been about 6 weeks since several of us fired off our email's to the editor of F&S voicing our opinions of the way they will throw us and our "EVIL, NO SPORTING PURPOSE" rifles to the Elitists in our government in order to save themselves.
Well, this is their response to me....
In 105 yrs, F&S has never supported registration or gun regulation. We do,
however, support good journalism, and we are not a closed minded, fascist
tool meant to represent only one side of a political issue. For your side of
the debating fence, check out the March issue.
Spunky, but yours truly,
Well, has anyone else received a reply?
I missed the call to email FnS and didn't get to read the article or opinion that started this.
The email response is hypocritical. Either they support us:
"In 105 yrs, F&S has never supported registration or gun regulation"
or they don't...
How can you oppose gun registration but represent both sides of the issue. They are speaking out of the side of their mouth.
"We do, however, support good journalism"
that means you don't lie about the facts
"and we are not a closed minded, fascist tool meant to represent only one side of a political issue"
What BS is this??? We are fascists? Right! They ought to represent the right side of the issue. I always thought of myself as a patriot. Fact is, there is some common ground between the sides, not much but there is. That last statement clearly shows their true colors. We ought to boycott the mag. They want to travel the "middle of the road" (I call that a moderate) and not take a stand. Isn't the parent company for FnS, Times Mirror? Maybe I have it confused with SA or OL. Sounds like a female sent that email. Not meant to flame the females on our board who are enlightened and are willing to take a stand. My .02
I stopped my subscription a few years back, and told them why.
Now OUTDOOR LIFE hasn`t come out and said similiar things but I get the feeling they(hunters) are trying to dissassociate themselves from the AW crowd.
You are wrong with the "either they're with us or against us" argument, IMHO. We constantly bitch about the liberal rags and why they won't print our side of the issue etc. Journalists are supposed to be neutral. If it's an "us or them" system, then we can't complain about media bias.
Not sure I am fully grasping what you typed but I will try to answer and not go off on a tangent. No flames intended. I must say that I did not read the article in question and my initial reply is to the return email. Also, I have been seeing a more leftist bent on the part of the "Big 3" for years when reading the mags while in the eye doctors waiting room or at the dentist, etc. I am complaining about writers that are supposed to be hunters and shooters and therefore should know better. Maybe I am out of touch because I stopped buying the "Big 3" when I was a kid and am now 36y/o.
"You are wrong with the "either they're with us or against us" argument, IMHO. We constantly bitch about the liberal rags and why they won't print our side of the issue etc. Journalists are supposed to be neutral. "
In the real world there are very few neutral journalists. At least not what I have seen or read over the last 8 years. I respect the writer that can report on an issue without injecting venom into the issue. Look at what happened with Mr. Newt and his book deal or feeding dogfood to elderly people that have to live in the streets or taking free lunches away from school kids... Did Hillary have to endure this with her 8 million dollar book deal, no way. That is the difference between us and them. The Dem Left are mindless drones to their perceived notion of what is right, read total unity. We have trouble unifying behind issues because we are independent thinkers (patriots). That is what seperates them from us. But, that is going to be our downfall. The duck hunters, squirrell hunters and target shooters better get up to speed. This is not Time or Newsweek that we are discussing. Those mags will not report another side of the issue because "They" are the true fascists in this debate. They want the total and unequivocal ban on all guns, period! No quarter given is given to us at all. They won't report another side that is different and may actually be right.
"If it's an "us or them" system, then we can't complain about media bias."
I will complain because it is an "us against them" fight. I will continue to complain until I see some truthful reporting for a change. (I hope that the FnS article was like that) Not sensationalizing of details that have no place in reporting of gun issues. I grow weary of the opposition painting me as an outlaw because I choose to use a certain rifle or pistol or am an NRA member, or that I advocate a Natl CCW or my many other nonPC views. In fact, I think they have rascist views toward me. Ok, maybe that is a bit extreme but I have to wonder sometimes, am I becoming an endangered species? Maybe I am a hypocrite, but you know what, I think I am right. Look at history and see the many examples of opression. Even if the 2nd Amendment didn't exist, I would still be right. A people should have the means to oppose aggression!
Too many people believe what they hear and read on the tube and radio. To help fight this we need to introduce younger shooters to the sport and to show responsible gun ownership. As owners of the dreaded black rifle, we need to show that we are no different than other Americans. We are the Minutemen of our time. What other group of gunowners have been hammered the way we have been. We need to get our message out and it is an uphill road it seems. My .04
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.