Posted: 8/8/2007 4:16:56 AM EDT
|
Why is it that a large portion of our membership assumes that every time the news media reports that a person was arrested with some quantity of weapons and or ammunition, that this person was likely an innocent firearms enthusiast who was somehow wronged by the police and villified by the media? We then get the whole story only to find out that they were a convicted felon, had long violent arrest records, or were just plain up to no good. This finding usually occurs after numerous pages of decrying the horrible tactics of the police and poor reporting of minutae by the media. In short, why do folks here pile on time after time before the facts are in? In the latest case, it seems no one looked at the report long enough to hear that the dude had a previous record for armed robbery. |
There is just as many examples of over zealous police work. |
Please point them out, because it seems each and every time we get all the facts presented, we find the problem was not the cops. We even have a retraction floating around page one or two where it appears the OP upon learning the facts, decided the cops were correct in their actions to raid his house and arrest his kid. |
You're the one with search, go nuts 
|
|
It's a gun board. part of it is probably an eagerness to spin it in whatever way to prevent any more negative publicity from being directed towards us "gun people." kind of a tangent- isn't the justice system supposed to be based on that very assumption? innocent until proven guilty. |
|
Probably because we are all just one bit of misinformation away from being a news story ourselves... "Police Serve Warrant to Wrong House - Cache of Machineguns and Ammunition Found" Some of the "caches" of weapons in these stories are real amateur compared to some of us here. Reporters' heads would spin at some of you  |
I think you answered your own question. Why aren't you asking the media why they are only reporting about the number of guns or ammo found in the house? Why do we have to WAIT for the facts? Why aren't they reported from the start? Stop blaming us for a lazy media. |
True, but most of us are not convicted felons, and most of us are not doing things that would cause the cops to search our homes. Each actual mistake I've ever read about was corrected by the police themselves. |
It seems to me that most people find themselves guilty until said person proves they are innocent....or you purchase a good lawyer  Police are our friends!    
|
Hmmm. True. As I read them, there's at least an implied sense of no wrongdoing on the part of the accused. The "wait and see" bit often comes off as a CYA measure, even while it's technically the appropriate response. On the civilian gun owner side of things, I'd agree that support for the accused isn't implied so much - it's frequently stated. A great deal of us (myself included) can relate to other gun owners with dozens of firearms, and thousands of rounds on hand. We grudgingly concede that a criminal element with similar purchasing habits does indeed exist, but we have little first hand knowledge of such, collectively. This, coupled with the ever present suspicion (if not fear) of big brother leads to assumptions. It'd be nice if all we ever said was "let's wait and see". After all, given our nearly unanimous view that the media tends to gloss over or outright omit important details, it would be the most reasonable and proper reaction. It sure makes for boring conversation, though. |
For me it was a past experience in Baltimore City. I went hunting and got a deer, brought it back home to butcher it. So I bring the deer to my back yard and string it up. Now my back yard is surrounded by over twenty 30' plus tall trees and the only way to see in is to look through the gate. Well here I am skinning the beast when along comes a cop. It seems some concerned citizen made a complaint and the cop came to investigate. I explain to him that I got the deer and was dressing it out. That went well. About 45minutes later a couple of cops show up. It seems someone had reported that I was in my backyard hacking up a body. That went really well. So I'm almost done cutting up the beast when another couple of cops show up. It seems that there was a call that I was performing unnatural acts with an animal. Another incident was when I came home from the shooting range with my cased M1A and a couple of handguns. I think it was my Glock and my Bulgarian HP copy. Well you all know how much crap goes along with shooting. I mean the multiple targets, target stand, ammo cans of ammo, etc... So I pull up in front of my house open the trunk and belt on my pistol belt for the Glock, put on the shoulder holster for the HP sling the cased M1A on my shoulders, grab one ammo can and stuff the targets and stand under one arm on top of the ammo can, take out the other ammo can, close the trunk, pick up the second ammo can and wallow 20' to my house. All told about 5 minutes. About 30 minutes after I get into the house and put my stuff away I get a knock on my door. I open it and I see three Baltimore City cops on my porch with guns drawn. It seems there was a report about some crazed heavily armed maniac walking through the neighborhood. So yes I am a little bias since for the majority of people in Baltimore the mere sight of a gun seems to engender extreme fantasies. Also there is that little thing about being presumed innocent until proven guilty. So I will assume that a person who has not used his firearm against another human being innocent until proven guilty. |
They should use that to replace 'home of the black rifle' with the logo up there.
With crackerjack reporting like this
I don't think anyone here gives the media or the police the benefit of the doubt. |
I did not say it was the cops fault. I simply explained the two reasons why I generally give the accused presumption of innocence. I found the entire experience in both instances ludicrous and so did the cops. I will make it a little easier for you if you missed my two points. 1. Personal experience has taught me some individuals are paranoid of anyone having a firearm. 2. A person should be presumed to be innocent until proven guilty. It is just as wrong headed to assume everyone with a gun or has multiple guns is there to do you harm as it is to be suspicious of your black neighbor if you live primarily in an all white neighborhood. Innocent until proven guilty is a fundamental principle of the American mindset. Or at least it was when I became a citizen. Then again if you want "guilty until proven innocent" you are certainly free to emigrate to China, which is where I came from. For me "innocent until proven guilty" is simply one of the things I love about America. |
|
I get more pissed at the reporting tactics of the liberal, bias press than I do at the Police usually. It is the press that do not disclose both sides of the story in most of these cases. This, I think, causes people to react to the responding officers as JBT's when a lot of times they probably have checked in advance and know they are dealing with a convicted felon. Then again sometimes it is the police themselves that jump to conclusions and perform knee jerk arrests. No matter who is right in any situation involving a gun owner with more than a few guns you can bet the press is going to make them out to be a crazed, baby killing, psychopath who plans to someday over throw the government. |
|
I agree, to some extent with the OP, except that regardless of guilt or innocence on the part of the suspect, the press (and any police agency involved or quoted) should at least report the facts, not some hyperbole designed to further the apparent (or assumed) anti-RKBA agenda of the reporter/paper/city/etc... Yes, the suspect may be a felon, but for the same reason there are rules of evidence the investigating agency must follow to obtain a conviction, the media should also report the facts, and be certain that what they report it indeed, factual. Also, if you repeat a falsehood enough times, people begin to believe that it is the truth, and then will act to make it the truth when they find out it actually isn't - because "I always thought it was that way, so it should be!" Yes, I know, someone here will comment I am sure, that the media isn't held to the same standard. True. But I would ask, why not? Isn't one of the purposes of a free press to be one of the guardians of freedom? Currently, a lot of the press seems to be a 5th column, helping to erode away our liberties. ETA: In the one instance that the OP references, currently an active thread, any letters to the editor, etc... should include something to the effect of, "while I realize that the suspect my have violated NYC law, and that possession of a silencer/suppressor is prohibited in NYC, the statement that they are illegal in all states, and are used only for killing people is a falsehood" This acknowledges that the writer knows some wrongdoing may have happened, but is trying to help get the facts straight - and defuses the reporters ability to say, "see, gun owners don't want to obey the laws" or some such stupid thing |
If you'd given the first cop the tenderloin the rest wouldn't have bothered to stop by. 
|
Are you nuts? If he'd given the first cop a steak the whole rest of the force would have shown up. |
|
Simple: Its the press coverage. These stories are always written as if the "criminal act" were the mere fact of having a lot of guns and ammo. That gets people thinking: "Gee, Gonzo has a lot of guns I should drop a dime on him." If the stories practiced actual journalism and said, the following that would be fine: "The defendant, who is a convicted felon and not permitted to have weapons, had a large arsenal. Ordinarily, the possession of a collection of legal guns is not a criminal act." Instead, they make it sound like "too many" guns is a crime in and of itself. They always trot out a CLEO who says: "Imagine what...." or some shit like that. |
Bingo. Hit the nail on the head. I think a lot of people here try to mentally compensate for the media bias we see time and time again. |
I believe because we are a rapid reaction force. Our first thought is to guard our 2nd Amendment rights and our second (or maybe fourth) thought is to think and analyze the situation. 5sub |