Tag Archive: NY Times


The Assault Weapon Myth

 

 

 

” OVER the past two decades, the majority of Americans in a country deeply divided over gun control have coalesced behind a single proposition: The sale of assault weapons should be banned.

  That idea was one of the pillars of the Obama administration’s plan to curb gun violence, and it remains popular with the public. In a poll last December, 59 percent of likely voters said they favor a ban.

  But in the 10 years since the previous ban lapsed, even gun control advocates acknowledge a larger truth: The law that barred the sale of assault weapons from 1994 to 2004 made little difference.

  It turns out that big, scary military rifles don’t kill the vast majority of the 11,000 Americans murdered with guns each year. Little handguns do.

  In 2012, only 322 people were murdered with any kind of rifle, F.B.I. data shows.

  The continuing focus on assault weapons stems from the media’s obsessive focus on mass shootings, which disproportionately involve weapons like the AR-15, a civilian version of the military M16 rifle. This, in turn, obscures some grim truths about who is really dying from gunshots.

  Annually, 5,000 to 6,000 black men are murdered with guns. Black men amount to only 6 percent of the population. Yet of the 30 Americans on average shot to death each day, half are black males.

  Democrats decided to push for a ban of what seemed like the most dangerous guns in America: assault weapons, which were presented by the media as the gun of choice for drug dealers and criminals, and which many in law enforcement wanted to get off the streets.

  This politically defined category of guns — a selection of rifles, shotguns and handguns with “military-style” features — only figured in about 2 percent of gun crimes nationwide before the ban.

  Banning sales of military-style weapons resonated with both legislators and the public: Civilians did not need to own guns designed for use in war zones.

  On Sept. 13, 1994, President Bill Clinton signed an assault weapons ban into law. It barred the manufacture and sale of new guns with military features and magazines holding more than 10 rounds. But the law allowed those who already owned these guns — an estimated 1.5 million of them — to keep their weapons.

  The policy proved costly. Mr. Clinton blamed the ban for Democratic losses in 1994. Crime fell, but when the ban expired, a detailed study found no proof that it had contributed to the decline.

Should it be renewed, the ban’s effects on gun violence are likely to be small at best and perhaps too small for reliable measurement,” a Department of Justice-funded evaluation concluded.

  Still, the majority of Americans continued to support a ban on assault weapons.

  One reason: The use of these weapons may be rare over all, but they’re used frequently in the gun violence that gets the most media coverage, mass shootings.

  The criminologist James Alan Fox at Northeastern University estimates that there have been an average of 100 victims killed each year in mass shootings over the past three decades. That’s less than 1 percent of gun homicide victims.

  But these acts of violence in schools and movie theaters have come to define the problem of gun violence in America.

  Most Americans do not know that gun homicides have decreased by 49 percent since 1993 as violent crime also fell, though rates of gun homicide in the United States are still much higher than those in other developed nations. A Pew survey conducted after the mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn., found that 56 percent of Americans believed wrongly that the rate of gun crime was higher than it was 20 years ago.”

 

 

    While the Times shows quite clearly the depth of the public’s erroneous beliefs regarding the nature of the demonized “assault weapons” , nowhere does it acknowledge it’s and it’s fellow MSM compatriot’s responsibility in creating that public misconception in the first place .Read the whole thing

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

About these ads

The Golf Address

 

 

 

 

 

” FORE! Score? And seven trillion rounds ago, our forecaddies brought forth on this continent a new playground, conceived by Robert Trent Jones, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal when it comes to spending as much time on the links as possible — even when it seems totally inappropriate, like moments after making a solemn statement condemning the grisly murder of a 40-year-old American journalist beheaded by ISIL.

  I know reporters didn’t get a chance to ask questions, but I had to bounce. I had a 1 p.m. tee time at Vineyard Golf Club with Alonzo Mourning and a part-owner of the Boston Celtics. Hillary and I agreed when we partied with Vernon Jordan up here, hanging out with celebrities and rich folks is fun.

  Now we are engaged in a great civil divide in Ferguson, which does not even have a golf course, and that’s why I had a “logistical” issue with going there. We are testing whether that community, or any community so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure when the nation’s leader wants nothing more than to sink a birdie putt.

  We are met on a great field of that battle, not Augusta, not Pebble Beach, not Bethpage Black, not Burning Tree, but Farm Neck Golf Club in Martha’s Vineyard, which we can’t get enough of — me, Alonzo, Ray Allen and Marvin Nicholson, my trip director and favorite golfing partner who has played 134 rounds and counting with me. “

    While we seldom find anything to recommend in Ms Dowd’s work , being the predictable progressive mouthpiece that she is , this scathing piece on the Golfer-In-Chief deserves to be read by all …  you will be glad you did …

Dinesh D’Souza’s ‘America’ Banished From New York Times Best Seller List

 

 

 

 

 

 

” The New York Times bestseller list hasn’t waited a millisecond to put Hillary Clinton‘s book atop its influential chart after just a week of sales, but has totally ignored another top-10 hardcover from noted conservative and critic of President Obama, Dinesh D’Souza.

  His new book, on sale for three weeks, isn’t just absent from the top 10 lists already set for the next two Sundays, but totally missing from the list of the nation’s top 25 nonfiction hardcovers despite having sales higher than 13 on the latest Times chart.

  According to sales reports provided to Secrets, D’Souza’s new book America: Imagine a World Without Her, sold 4,915 in the first week and 5,592 in the second week. Had it been included on the upcoming June 22 Times hardcover nonfiction list, it would have ranked No. 8, and then No. 11 on the June 29 list that puts Clinton’s sales at 85,721. The lists are widely circulated in the publishing industry before they go public.

  The Times is somewhat mysterious in how it calculates its list, but it includes several books selling well under 3,000 copies in a week. A spokeswoman said, “We let the rankings speak for themselves and are confident they are accurate.” “

 

Washington Examiner

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Full Clip Of Cliven Bundy’s Non-Racist, Pro-Black, Pro-Mexican, Anti-Government Remarks Vs. NYTimes’ Deceptively Edited Version

 

 

Here is the edited version produced by the Obama shills at Media Matters …

 

 

 

 

 

 

” Watch Bundy explain how we need to keep things from going backwards for blacks, and how the Federal government has created a neo-slave class via entitlement dependency that is so bad it is arguably worse than plantation slavery was. It is 100% clear that Cliven Bundy is not saying that blacks should be slaves picking cotton, but that the Federal government has created conditions for them so terrible, that their current situation may actually be worse. (If you are person of low intelligence, the fact that that is his point might be too hard for you to understand.) And he’s not blaming blacks for the issues of abortions, and crime and broken families, he’s blaming the Feds.”

 

    Here are Mr Bundy’s unedited remarks . Compare them to the NY Times/Media Matters selective edit above that is the version that has caused all of the uproar and revealed portions of our GOP “allies” to be craven cowards .

 

 

 

    Much thanks is due to Patrick Dollard for bringing the two versions to light and exposing the MSM’s agenda that is basically a piece of Statist propaganda . Stalin and Pravda would be proud .

How Now White Cowman?

 

 

 

look-a-squirrel

 

 

 

” Like everyone else, Gavin McInnes has weighed in on Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy’s observations on “the Negro”. Mr McInnes concludes:

  This isn’t about some old guy’s views on slavery. It’s about government control. We’re not saying Bundy is the messiah and we accept him as our personal savior. We’re saying the government is wrong.

  Let’s stipulate that Cliven Bundy is a racist. Let’s also assume, if only to save time, that he’s Islamophobic, homophobic and transphobic. So what? Does that make criticizing the Bureau of Land Management “racist” or “homophobic”?

  During my battles with Canada’s “human rights” commissions, defenders of the racket liked to point out that the people it targeted were generally pretty unsavory. And I’d respond that the reason the standard representation of justice in statuary is a blindfolded lady is because justice is supposed to be blind: If you run a red light and hit a pedestrian, it makes no difference whether the pedestrian you hit is Nelson Mandela or Cliven Bundy. Or at least it shouldn’t: one of the basic building blocks of civilized society is equality before the law.

  Likewise, if what the Bureau of Land Management is doing is wrong, the fact that Cliven Bundy is a racist sexist homophobe whateverphobe doesn’t make it right – any more than at Ruby Ridge FBI sniper Lon Horiuchi shooting Vicki Weaver in the back of the head as she was cradling her ten-month-old baby and running away from him is made right by the fact that she allegedly had “white supremacist” sympathies. As I wrote last week, I’ve little doubt that, in the era before cellphone video, the bureaucratic enforcers would have been happy to off Bundy and then come up with a reason why it doesn’t matter. At Waco, there were supposedly children being abused. So Generalissimo Janet Reno killed them all, and now they’re not being abused. In that sense, Mr Bundy is a lucky man: He got to live, and to trash his own reputation rather than having the feds do it for him.”

 

 

Mr Steyn knows a “squirrel” when he sees it … Read The Whole Piece

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Niger Innis: Cliven Bundy ‘Clumsily’ Stated An Important Point

 

 

Niger Innis

 

 

 

” After a lengthy conversation, embattled Nevada cattle rancher Cliven Bundy finally understood the racist tone of his remarks and apologized privately, according to Niger Innis, the national spokesman for the Congress of Racial Equality.

  Many of those who came to the support of the 67-year-old fled for cover when The New York Times quoted him as saying he was “wondering” if blacks are better off now than they were under slavery.

  Innis, who is running for Congress in Nevada, told J.D. Hayworth on “America’s Forum” on Newsmax TV that he spoke with Bundy for about an hour on Thursday and finally got him to realize the repugnant nature of his comments.

  Innis said that he does not believe Bundy to be inherently racist but said that he “clumsily” used a bad metaphor to try and make an important point.

” What would’ve been better is if Cliven had said, ‘Look, there are a number of blacks and Latinos and poor whites now that are involved in a real slavery which is the slavery of government dependence,'” Innis said. “I’m up here in Tonopah, which is part of my district, and I was just talking with a local businesswoman who pointed across the street and talked to me about low income housing or free government subsidized housing and how the people there do not work because they don’t have to.

They may not even know that they are slaves, but there is in fact a neoslavery that exists. When you take out individual initiative, individual responsibility and the hope that every individual is born with, to better their lives, to climb the economic ladder, to pursue happiness, that is in fact a neoslavery.”

 

Read on

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

McConnell On Tea Party: ‘We Are Going To Crush Them Everywhere’

 

 

McConnell Crush Tea Party

 

 

 

” Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) predicted that GOP incumbents would “crush” insurgent Tea Party-backed candidates in primaries this year. 

“ I think we are going to crush them everywhere,” McConnell told The New York Times during an interview on Saturday. “I don’t think they are going to have a single nominee anywhere in the country.”

McConnell added: “I know this: Politics doesn’t like losers. If you don’t have anything to point to, it is kind of hard to keep it going.” “

 

 

    You’re right about one thing McConnell , politics doesn’t like losers … You and Boehner being perfect examples . Read more about where McConnell’s true allegiance lies here and be forewarned it is not with the people or fiscal responsibility …

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Exclusive To Power Line: Koch Industries Responds To New York Times Smears

 

 

 

 

” Indeed. It is revealing to compare Charles and David Koch with the owners and managers of the New York Times Company. The Koch brothers employ a growing, highly-paid work force of 60,000 in the United States, around one-third of whom are unionized. Koch Industries enjoys excellent relationships with its unions. The New York Times Company, on the other hand, employs a shrinking, largely ill-paid work force, and is embroiled in a long-running feud with its unions.

  Koch Industries and its subsidiaries produce tangible products that enrich the lives of Americans–among other things, Koch transports and refines oil, makes products that are used in construction, and manufactures a wide array of consumer products that are staples in most American homes. The New York Times Company produces nothing but shoddy left-wing journalism that is of questionable benefit to anyone.

  Then we have the roles of the two companies in their communities. Koch Industries and its subsidiaries have been recognized countless times for their many contributions to the communities where they operate. It is fair to say that there is no better corporate citizen than Koch. To take just one instance, Koch and its subsidiaries have been honored hundreds of times by the EPA for their environmental stewardship, which is second to none. And, as most people know, Charles and David Koch are two of the world’s most generous philanthropists. David alone has donated well over $1 billion dollars for medical research, the arts, and so on. You can read generally about the Koch Family foundations and philanthropy here.

  The New York Times? Not so much.”

 

Rest the rest . It’s devastating 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

New York Times Reporters Embarrassed By The Paper’s Editorial Pages

 

 

 

 

 

” Reporters in The New York Times newsroom deeply resent the paper’s editorial page, and the dissent has “reached the boiling point,” the New York Observer reports Tuesday.

  It’s not an ideological dispute, the Observer says, but rather the sense that the paper’s editorials and columns are boring, ineffectual, poorly written and poorly read. The story was based on interviews with more than two dozen current and former Times staffers, mostly on condition of anonymity out of fear of editorial page editor Andrew Rosenthal.

  Rosenthal was described as a petty tyrant, and lazy in his supervision of an opinion staff that is widely seen outside the newsroom as the voice of the Left-wing establishment.”

 

   The most biting comments were reserved for Mr Friedman and Ms Dowd and should not be missed . Mr Friedman has become so predictably wrong that there exists a webpage called the Thomas Friedman Op/Ed generator that produces a new column at the touch of button , which results in columns such as the one below :

 

 

Thomas Friedman Op:ED Generator

 

    The reader will note of course that the reporters don’t have any issue with the politics of the Op/Ed page , they are in full agreement with the Statist slant of the opinion page , their only beef is with the poor writing and not the bias .

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

—-

Why Is The New York Times So Upset With GOA?

 

 

 

” Of special note, the magazine reports how one week after you received an important email alert from GOA in April, the key players on Capitol Hill who were trying to pull off a compromise “suddenly and without notice backed away from the background-checks bill.”

  This is not a new revelation for the news agency that supports greater firearm restrictions. On April 3 of this year, the New York Times said that “Gun Owners of America, with its war chest, membership and lobbying strength dwarfed by the National Rifle Association, is emerging as an influential force….

“ The group [GOA] has already been successful,” the Times says, “[in] freezing senators, particularly Republicans, who have appeared to be on the fence about supporting bills to expand background checks.”

  You can read Sunday’s article about GOA here and the April article here.

  As you can see from these media reports, your loud voice convinced Republicans (and key pro-gun lobbyists inside the Beltway) to back off of gun control compromises — and that has safeguarded our gun rights through a very intense battle.”

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Health Law Rollout’s Stumbles Draw Parallels To Bush’s Hurricane Response

 

 

” Barack Obama won the presidency by exploiting a political environment that devoured George W. Bush in a second term plagued by sinking credibility, failed legislative battles, fractured world relations and revolts inside his own party.

President Obama is now threatened by a similar toxic mix. The disastrous rollout of his health care law not only threatens the rest of his agenda but also raises questions about his competence in the same way that the Bush administration’s botched response to Hurricane Katrina undermined any semblance of Republican efficiency.”

 

    Earning back a trust that was non-existent in nearly half of the population is an impossible task  , especially given the fact that the Obamacare fiasco is just one small part of the complete loss of trust in our Dear Leader . If he has been consistent in one thing it’s been in his ability to screw up virtually everything he touches and then look us right in the eye and say ” I didn’t do that ” , or “I didn’t know that ” . A more shameful liar has never occupied the White House and that includes Tricky Dick and Slick Willie .

 

” But earning back the confidence of Americans, as he pledged to do, will require Mr. Obama to right more than just the health care law. At home, his immigration overhaul is headed for indefinite delay, and new budget and debt fights loom. Overseas, revelations of spying by the National Security Agency have infuriated American allies, and negotiations over Iran’s nuclear arsenal have set off bipartisan criticism.”

 

    While the Times is correct in acknowledging Obama’s loss of trust and should be lauded for admitting it , being the partisan hacks that they are they just can’t resist trying to place a share of the blame for the Obamacare disaster at the feet of the Republican Congress comparing how during Katrina Bush got some assistance from the Democratic side of the aisle  , yet all Obama gets from the Right side of the aisle is an obstinate refusal to help.

 

” But unlike Mr. Bush, who faced confrontational but occasionally cooperative Democrats, Mr. Obama is battling a Republican opposition that has refused to open the door to any legislative fixes to the health care law and has blocked him at virtually every turn.”

 

    There’s only one problem with the Grey Lady’s comparison of Katrina to Obamacare … while Katrina was a natural disaster that no one brought about and thus was easily a non-partisan issue resulting in bi-partisan co-operation , Obamacare is a self-inflicted wound that was created in the most partisan fashion against the will of ALL republicans in congress and a majority of the American public so it should come as no surprise that no one of the opposition party would be anxious to help it be salvaged .

 But maybe even more to the point of why the MSM is suddenly so interested in in-depth analysis of the flies in the Obamacare ointment is not that they want to save the public … they could give a s**t about us peons in “flyover” country … no , their only concern is to try and stave off a potential massacre of Dems at the polls in November of 2014 . The Times itself is nothing if not a loyal partisan propaganda machine .

 

Heck of a job Sebelius .

 

Read more

 

Illustration by Nate Beeler

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

John Merline Of IBD Reports:

 

 

 

 

” Last week, CNN’s Wolf Blitzer made waves when he opined that the ongoing problems with ObamaCare might be reason to delay the program.

“They had three years to get this ready,” he said. “If they weren’t fully ready, they should accept the advice Republicans are giving them, delay it for a year, get it ready and make sure it works.”

Blitzer later said he was only referring to the ObamaCare exchange website. But as the rollout continues, there’s increasing evidence that an across-the-board delay would make sense — even to supporters of the law.

Enrollment Glitches. The problems marring the first days of the federal ObamaCare exchanges have not abated much over the past two weeks, despite administration promises that they’d quickly be fixed.

People who showed up at a Pittsburgh enrollment rally late last week, for example, couldn’t sign up for coverage on the federal exchange. The New York Times reports that one of its researchers hadn’t been able to log in despite more than 40 tries. A CNN reporter spent nearly two weeks trying to sign up and “failed again, and again and again.” “

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Criminal N.S.A.

 

 

 

” THE twin revelations that telecom carriers have been secretly giving the National Security Agency information about Americans’ phone calls, and that the N.S.A. has been capturing e-mail and other private communications from Internet companies as part of a secret program called Prism, have not enraged most Americans. Lulled, perhaps, by the Obama administration’s claims that these “modest encroachments on privacy”were approved by Congress and by federal judges, public opinion quickly migrated from shock to “meh.”

It didn’t help that Congressional watchdogs — with a few exceptions, like Senator Rand Paul, Republican of Kentucky — have accepted the White House’s claims of legality. The leaders of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Dianne Feinstein, Democrat of California, and Saxby Chambliss, Republican of Georgia, have called the surveillance legal. So have liberal-leaning commentators like Hendrik Hertzberg and David Ignatius.

This view is wrong — and not only, or even mainly, because of the privacy issues raised by the American Civil Liberties Union and other critics. The two programs violate both the letter and the spirit of federal law. No statute explicitly authorizes mass surveillance. Through a series of legal contortions, the Obama administration has argued that Congress, since 9/11, intended to implicitly authorize mass surveillance. But this strategy mostly consists of wordplay, fear-mongering and a highly selective reading of the law. Americans deserve better from the White House — and from President Obama, who has seemingly forgotten the constitutional law he once taught.

The administration has defended each of the two secret programs. Let’s examine them in turn.”

Read The Whole Thing

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Austerity Kills Government Jobs as Cuts to Budgets Loom

 

sequester-cartoon-ramirez-3

 

 

The federal government, the nation’s largest consumer and investor, is cutting back at a pace exceeded in the last half-century only by the military demobilizations after the Vietnam War and the cold war.

The reductions are designed to be indiscriminate, cutting everything from air traffic control to nursery schools.

And the turn toward austerity is set to accelerate on Friday if the mandatory federal spending cuts known as sequestration start to take effect as scheduled. Those cuts would join an earlier round of deficit reduction measures passed in 2011 and the wind-down of wars in Iraq and Afghanistan that already have reduced the federal government’s contribution to the nation’s gross domestic product by almost 7 percent in the last two years.”

   Left unsaid in all this talk of sequestration , budget “cuts” and austerity is the fact that if this government cannot even find a way to scale back annual growth by a measly 2% without “catastrophic” consequences then ANY HOPE for getting the deficit under control and limiting the endless growth of government is hopeless . If this is in fact the case then we are doomed . You’d better brush up on your Chinese .

 

Illustration By Michael Ramirez

 

Some Sheriffs Object to Call for Tougher Gun Laws

 

 

 

” Over the past several weeks, dozens of other sheriffs from across the country have reacted with similar public opposition to Mr. Obama’s call for stiffer gun laws, releasing a deluge of letters, position papers and statements laying out their arguments in stark terms. Their jurisdictions largely include rural areas, and stand in sharp contrast to those of urban police chiefs, who have historically supported tougher gun regulations.

“I don’t plan on helping or assisting with any of the federal gun laws because I have the U.S. Supreme Court and the U.S. Constitution on my side,” said Sheriff John Cooke of Weld County, Colo. Sheriff Cooke said that he believed a ban on assault weapons would do little and that universal background checks would unfairly halt private gun sales.

“Let the federal government do their own dirty work,” he added “

The din was so loud that even the ” Greying Lady ” had to report on it … finally .

Did a Newspaper Act Irresponsibly by Publishing the Addresses of Gun Owners?

 

 

 

 

 

” The Journal News, a newspaper serving the northern suburbs of New York City, published the names and addresses of handgun permit holders in two counties in New York State. The interactive map received more views than any other article in the paper’s history and generated significant outrage across the nation. Calls and e-mails to the newspaper became so threatening that it decided to hire armed security guards to protect the safety of its employees.

Did the newspaper act irresponsibly by publishing the names and addresses of handgun permit holders online?

In “Outcry Over Newspaper’s Map of Handgun Permit Holders” J. David Goodman writes about the controversy surrounding The Journal News’s decision.

In the days after the Connecticut school killings, a newspaper in nearby Westchester County, N.Y., decided to respond by publishing the names and addresses of handgun permit holders in its readership area. The newspaper, The Journal News, said that informing people about legal weapons in their neighborhoods was a public service.

Not everyone agrees.

 

 When the Times proposed these questions to students 13 and older, the resulting comments proved very enlightening and can’t have been what the editors of that liberal fish-wrap were expecting . Apparently the youth of today , even in the liberal bastion of the NYC metropolitan area , are much more liberty-minded than their parents and teachers . Another sign that all that education spending (read:propaganda) has been a failure at creating wards of the state . Perhaps there is hope after all . 

 

 

Students: Tell us …

  • Did The Journal News act irresponsibly by publishing the names and addresses of legal gun permit holders? Did the newspaper stigmatize gun ownership or give gun owners a scarlet letter? Or did it make a positive contribution to the gun control debate?
  • Does publishing the names of handgun permit holders provide a public service in any way? Do people have the right to know who the gun owners are in their community?
  • Should gun owners have a right to keep what they own, including guns, private? Does revealing the addresses of gun owners, including police and corrections officers, endanger anyone’s safety?
  • In response to the newspaper’s article, some legislators in New York are rushing to pass a bill that will make gun permit information private. Other critics are organizing a boycott of The Journal News. What do you think about these responses to the online map?

 

 


Students 13 and older are invited to comment below. Please use only your first name. For privacy policy reasons, we will not publish student comments that include a last name.

 

 

 

  1. 14.January 8, 20139:03 amLink

    I think that by publishing names in a newspaper and the permit information for your gun should be kept private or should be asked if you want it in the newspaper. It is weird that the area is the same and it is not scattered out.

    — Cristina Engl2Period6

  2. 15.January 8, 20139:04 amLink

    Yes, I do not think because that it was okay to do that because other people wouldnt like for people to publish and it is not following the second amendment.

    — brayan per 6

  3. 16.January 8, 20139:04 amLink

    i think they shouldn’t post that map.

    — Edward S

  4. 17.January 8, 20139:06 amLink

    I think that posting gun permit information on a newspaper is really dumb. If you a reporter you want a good cover and putting peoples information on the cover it looks dumb.

    — Brittney H

  5. 18.January 8, 20139:06 amLink

    The journal News did act irresponsibly because the names that they mention probably wanted to keep it a secret or did not want their business on the news. I strongly believe that the people have a right to own a gun but they need to go through a process to get it. I strong believe that they improve the debate about gun holders. By announcing the names can hurt the people life. It can hurt them because their friends might stop talking to them and make them feel unsafe or even family don’t want to be near them.

    — Kassie P English2 per6

  6. 19.January 8, 20139:07 amLink

    I think the newspaper acted irresponsibly by publishing the address of gun owners. People like to have guns because it keeps them safe. People don’t want their address for everybody to see. He made a good point, knowing where the LEGAL guns are helps criminals. It would be much more helpful to know where the ILLEGAL guns are.

    — Kevin

  7. 20.January 8, 20139:07 amLink

    I think the newspaper was irresponsibly by publishing the names and addresses of the handgun owners online. Because know people would be scared to let their children out without thinking they could get kidnapped.

    — alex r

  8. 21.January 8, 20139:07 amLink

    i dont really care about if someone sais its wrong or right. im just tired of people arguing over stupid small stuff like this. i mean really, who cares if they own a gun or not juat as long as they have a license for it i ay its fine. just shows robbers and thuggs what house not to go to if they dont want lead in there chest.

    — noah

  9. 22.January 8, 20139:07 amLink

    I think it was wrong for the newspaper to post this. It violates people’s privacy, especially because they are giving these people’s address’s. That seems to me very irresponsible and rude. Just because the Newtown shooting happened, doesn’t mean we need to freak out about every one who owns a gun. Just because someone owns a gun does not mean they are going to shoot people. I agree that the Newtown shooting was horrible, but it bothers me that people keep saying we need to crack down on gun laws. People who have a desire to kill people will find a way to get a gun if they are really serious, no matter if they own one or not. Adam Lanza did not own a gun, it was his mother’s guns that he used in the Newtown school. Although I disagree with trying to stop people from buying guns, I do think that cracking down on gun laws in other ways is reasonable, for example the amount of ammunition you can buy at a time.

    — Hayley B

  10. 23.January 8, 20139:08 amLink

    yes, i believe that the journal news acted irresponsible by posting those addresses. i believe this because if they have a permit they are obviously trusted with a gun and don’t need to be announced to every one it should be kept quite

    — kristen

24.January 8, 20139:15 amLink

I believe that publishing a map with the names and addresses of gun permit owners in these to counties was extremely irresponsible. It was absolutely pointless to publish this interactive map which provided the general public with rather private information. It was unnecessary also to make the map interactive. If anything the dotes themselves without any other information would have sufficed without having to give specific details on the people in question. This map can cause to reactions among the people residing in these counties. Either they are provided with a false sense of security or now that cannot help but constantly look over there shoulder, act paranoid and afraid because they have just found out the specific location of a the couple thousand guns in there neighborhood. These citizens may begin to treat neighbors who they just found out owned a gun differently or another possibility is that the citizens who do not currently own a firearm will now take steps to acquire one to “protect” themselves from the neighbors. The houses marked on the map are possibly also more at risk of being robbed because criminals know were they can find a firearm. It is true that the information presented on this map is technically public knowledge because in can be found in public records but one thing is to be able to do something and another is to take the time to look up the couple thousand people that possess a firearm in these two counties. To conclude, It think that publishing this map was a naive and shortsighted decision that only will cause panic and unrest in these counties.

  • — Zachary 1er S “

Let ‘em Hate Us For Free Part2

U.S. Move to Give Egypt $450 Million in Aid Meets Resistance

  “The Obama administration notified Congress on Friday that it would provide Egypt’s new government an emergency cash infusion of $450 million, but the aid immediately encountered resistance from a prominent lawmaker wary of foreign aid and Egypt’s new course under the leadership of the Muslim Brotherhood.”

NO MORE MONEY TO THUGS !

” Millions of Obama’s Twitter Followers are Fake “

   “A little bird told me that millions of Obama’s Twitter followers are fake. As a USA Today article finds, around 70% of the president’s 18.8
million followers are drone accounts (if one excludes his real life Twitter followers).

  According to a report by the NY Times , a mediocre celebrity, unfunny comic, or failing president can purchase blocks of phony Twitter IDs. “

“Decision by 2 Officers to Open Fire in Busy Midtown Leaves Bystanders
Wounded”

   “As the two officers confronted a gunman in front of the Empire State Building on a busy Friday morning, they had to make a snap
decision: Do they open fire in the middle of Midtown?

  From a distance of less than 10 feet, the officers, Craig Matthews and Robert Sinishtaj, answered in unison; one shot nine times and the other seven.

  Investigators believe at least 7 of those 16 bullets struck the gunman, said Paul J. Browne, the Police Department’s chief spokesman. But the officers also struck some, if not all, of the nine bystanders who
were wounded.”

NY Sun on Paul Ryan’s worthiness to be an Ayn Rand disciple .

  ” Let us savor the irony of the New York Times complaining that Paul Ryan is an unworthy disciple of Ayn Rand. The irony was on display yesterday on the paper’s op-ed page, which ran out a column headlined “Atlas Spurned.” It’s by a history professor, Jennifer Burns, who reckons that Mr. Ryan has betrayed the ideas of the author of “Atlas Shrugged” by believing in God and a strong defense in the war against terror. “As a woman in a man’s world, a Jewish atheist in a country dominated by Christianity and a refugee from a totalitarian state, Rand knew it was not enough to promote individual freedom in the economic realm alone,” writes Professor Burns. “If Mr. Ryan becomes the next vice president, it wouldn’t be her dream come true, but her nightmare.”

This is almost touching. It’s probably the first time the Gray Lady has put the creator of John Galt up as a model to be emulated. When “Atlas Shrugged” was published in 1957, the Times ran out a review by Granville Hicks that complained the novel “howls in the reader’s ear” and asserted: “Loudly as Miss Rand proclaims her love of life, it seems clear that the book is written out of hate. … Perhaps most of us have moments when we feel that it might be a good idea if the whole human race, except for us and the few nice people we know, were wiped out; but one wonders about a person who sustains such a mood through the writing of 1,168 pages and some fourteen years of work.”*”

Originating in the Democratic mouthpiece  New York Times , Newsbusters points us to this Laugh Out Loud steaming pile . Don’t have anything in your mouth when you read it . We will not be responsible for ruined/damaged monitors .

  ” David Carr of The New York Times wrote an unintentional laugh line for Monday’s paper: “There is a growing worry that the falling value and failing business models of
many American newspapers could lead to a situation where moneyed interests buy papers and use them to prosecute a political and commercial agenda.” “

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 6,265 other followers