< Back to the Main Site

Author Topic: Article in today's OWH  (Read 1945 times)

Offline Chris Z

  • NFOA Co-Founder
  • *****
  • Join Date: Dec 2007
  • Location: Lincoln NE
  • Posts: 2496
    • Nebraska Concealed Carry Training
Article in today's OWH
« on: March 03, 2013, 05:40:18 AM »
Great job to Thomas, Ardi, Toby and all for getting a reporter to put out a pretty positive article on shooting sports and the AR rifles...


http://www.omaha.com/article/20130303/NEWS/703039886/1685#ar-15-owners-aim-for-gun-to-be-seen-as-hobby-not-horror

Offline gsd

  • 2013 NFOA Firearm Rights Champion award winner
  • NFOA Full Member
  • **
  • Join Date: Oct 2010
  • Location: Lincoln, NE
  • Posts: 1831
Re: Article in today's OWH
« Reply #1 on: March 03, 2013, 07:48:34 AM »
Nice.
It is highly likely the above post may offend you. I'm fine with that.

Offline Wesley D

  • NFOA Full Member
  • **
  • Join Date: Jun 2009
  • Location: Nebraska
  • Posts: 1096
  • Rifleman
Re: Article in today's OWH
« Reply #2 on: March 03, 2013, 08:58:13 AM »
David's a responsible journalist who took a lot of time to research and get educated for this article.  This is the second article he's had published in the OWH that didn't tow the general anti-gun agenda of other media outlets and many politicians.  This is an excellent example of how we can work to change the opinion of the general public.  Nice job Thomas, Ardi, and Toby!
« Last Edit: March 03, 2013, 09:24:00 AM by Wesley D »
"I will accept the rules that you feel necessary to your freedom. I am free, no matter what rules surround me. If I find them tolerable, I tolerate them; if I find them too obnoxious, I break them. I am free because I know that I alone am morally responsible for everything I do." -Robert Heinlein

Offline RobertH

  • Gun Show Volunteer
  • Powder Benefactor
  • *
  • Join Date: Apr 2009
  • Location: Norfolk
  • Posts: 2489
Re: Article in today's OWH
« Reply #3 on: March 03, 2013, 10:14:21 AM »
it was quite the article.  good job everyone!
Follow the NFOA on Twitter: @NFOA_Official

Offline Mudinyeri

  • God, save us!
  • NFOA Full Member
  • **
  • Join Date: May 2010
  • Location: Omaha
  • Posts: 3965
  • Run for the Hills
Re: Article in today's OWH
« Reply #4 on: March 03, 2013, 12:37:45 PM »
David's a responsible journalist who took a lot of time to research and get educated for this article.  This is the second article he's had published in the OWH that didn't tow the general anti-gun agenda of other media outlets and many politicians.  This is an excellent example of how we can work to change the opinion of the general public.  Nice job Thomas, Ardi, and Toby!

David is a hunter himself.  Unfortunately, he still ended up utilizing some of the inflammatory words and characterization that are often used in much worse articles.

Offline MMeyer214

  • NFOA Full Member
  • **
  • Join Date: Dec 2012
  • Location: Lincoln
  • Posts: 22
Re: Article in today's OWH
« Reply #5 on: March 03, 2013, 02:10:39 PM »
It's nice to see something about guns not full of false facts.

Offline Bucket

  • NFOA Full Member
  • **
  • Join Date: Mar 2013
  • Location: Bellevue
  • Posts: 172
Re: Article in today's OWH
« Reply #6 on: March 03, 2013, 03:20:50 PM »
I have to take issue with some of the kudos being offered about the article today.  While there wasn't any clearly false information in the article, it took until several paragraphs from the end before the author made the point that the things that define an "assault weapon" have absolutely no bearing on the lethality of the weapon.  None the less, the author takes pains to point out in the opening paragraphs that "Military-syle rifles have been used to commit horrific acts of violence," thus helping to perpetuate the myth that the appearance of the weapons somehow contributes to the horror of the crimes they are used to commit.

I also didn't like to see a statement that "semi-automatic show up too often as the weapons of choice for gang members, drug dealers,  and the mentally ill......"  This statement came immediately after a piece describing a few characteristics of an "assault weapon", potentially conflating the idea that assault weapons and semi-automatic weapons are one in the same.  Of course semi-automatic weapons show up in crimes.  They are the most numerous type of weapon out there, and in fact few weapons used in crimes qualify as assault weapons.  Most are semi-auto pistols, often obtained through illegal channels. 

In my mind, the piece while not factually inaccurate, was certainly shaded in such a way that popular stereotypes are reinforced instead of dispelled.

Offline Mudinyeri

  • God, save us!
  • NFOA Full Member
  • **
  • Join Date: May 2010
  • Location: Omaha
  • Posts: 3965
  • Run for the Hills
Re: Article in today's OWH
« Reply #7 on: March 03, 2013, 04:52:51 PM »
Agreed, Bucket ... and I talked to him very specifically about that when he interviewed me.  Of course, neither he nor I nor any of the other individuals interviewed have control over what the editors want to do with his story.
« Last Edit: March 03, 2013, 05:32:17 PM by Mudinyeri »

Offline NB

  • NFOA Full Member
  • **
  • Join Date: Jan 2013
  • Posts: 38
Re: Article in today's OWH
« Reply #8 on: March 03, 2013, 04:56:41 PM »
Plus they shorted us by a thousand members.   ;-0
You can hope in one hand and crap in the other, then see which one fills up first.

Offline NB

  • NFOA Full Member
  • **
  • Join Date: Jan 2013
  • Posts: 38
Re: Article in today's OWH
« Reply #9 on: March 03, 2013, 04:58:04 PM »
I re-read the article and caught some of the negative sentiment as well, but all things considered, I think it was a win.
You can hope in one hand and crap in the other, then see which one fills up first.

Offline OnTheFly

  • Steel Benefactor
  • *
  • Join Date: Mar 2009
  • Location: Lincoln, NE
  • Posts: 2617
  • NFOA member #364
Re: Article in today's OWH
« Reply #10 on: March 03, 2013, 05:30:01 PM »
Quote
The chief of the Milwaukee Police Department told U.S. senators last week that military-style rifles are primarily designed for combat and to cause lethal wounds.

And other rifles are designed to blow bubbles and pop teddybears out of their barrels...WTF?!  And to think that people listen to these "experts" as if they know what they are talking about. 

Fly
Si vis pacem, para bellum

Offline abbafandr

  • Powder Benefactor
  • *
  • Join Date: Nov 2012
  • Location: Omaha
  • Posts: 891
Re: Article in today's OWH
« Reply #11 on: March 03, 2013, 06:44:38 PM »
And other rifles are designed to blow bubbles and pop teddybears out of their barrels...WTF?!  And to think that people listen to these "experts" as if they know what they are talking about. 

Fly

You will notice, as a generality, police chiefs and their ilk are more likely to tow the anti gun line than sheriffs.  I suspect this has much to do with the fact that sheriffs are elected and police chiefs are appointed.  I mean you Bloomberg would tolerate a chief who wasn't in favor gun control ???
 


Offline Bucket

  • NFOA Full Member
  • **
  • Join Date: Mar 2013
  • Location: Bellevue
  • Posts: 172
Re: Article in today's OWH
« Reply #12 on: March 03, 2013, 06:57:57 PM »
Agreed, Bucket ... and I talked to him very specifically about that when he interviewed me.  Of course, neither he nor I nor any of the other individuals interviewed have control over what the editors want to do with his story.
Valid point.  All things considered, it could have been much worse.

Offline RedDot

  • NFOA Full Member
  • **
  • Join Date: Dec 2010
  • Location: Omaha
  • Posts: 357
Re: Article in today's OWH
« Reply #13 on: March 04, 2013, 07:59:22 PM »
Valid point.  All things considered, it could have been much worse.
So if they don't call all gun owners baby-killers it's a win?  Where do "journalists" or editors get this authority to hand out thumbs up or thumbs down? Wanna bet Buffet's Praetorians carry semi-autos?

Offline Bucket

  • NFOA Full Member
  • **
  • Join Date: Mar 2013
  • Location: Bellevue
  • Posts: 172
Re: Article in today's OWH
« Reply #14 on: March 04, 2013, 08:49:22 PM »
So if they don't call all gun owners baby-killers it's a win?  Where do "journalists" or editors get this authority to hand out thumbs up or thumbs down? Wanna bet Buffet's Praetorians carry semi-autos?
Not at all.  If you read my earlier post, I was pointing out the fact that it wasn't a great article and reinforced several ill informed stereotypes.  I was merely agreeing with the point that there were some truths in the article that you don't expect to see in any newspaper these days.  As I said, it could have been worse. 

They get the authority from those who own the newspaper and from the same Bill of Rights we want to uphold.

Offline RedDot

  • NFOA Full Member
  • **
  • Join Date: Dec 2010
  • Location: Omaha
  • Posts: 357
Re: Article in today's OWH
« Reply #15 on: March 04, 2013, 09:36:02 PM »
Not at all.  If you read my earlier post, I was pointing out the fact that it wasn't a great article and reinforced several ill informed stereotypes.  I was merely agreeing with the point that there were some truths in the article that you don't expect to see in any newspaper these days.  As I said, it could have been worse. 

They get the authority from those who own the newspaper and from the same Bill of Rights we want to uphold.
Bill of Rights? It's an archaic document in bad need of an overhaul, don't you read the papers? j/k ;)

What I was getting at was Mud's statement about being specific as possible to avoid "editting".  They can take anything you say and put a slant on it to suit their purposes. You'll notice the layout in the Sunday paper surrounding the article showing the girl firing the AR, the man dropping a mag for a quick change, and the grieving father pictures.  Not one photo showing a paper or steel target or a range in an article about shooting sports.  Throw in the "Defining an Assault Rifle" clip and the selected poll in favor of more gun laws.
I don't think we're at odds Bucket, I'm probably overly sensitive from watching OWH "evolve" in last year or two.  I just want to know who gets to edit the Editors?

Offline Mudinyeri

  • God, save us!
  • NFOA Full Member
  • **
  • Join Date: May 2010
  • Location: Omaha
  • Posts: 3965
  • Run for the Hills
Re: Article in today's OWH
« Reply #16 on: March 05, 2013, 11:20:14 AM »
I just want to know who gets to edit the Editors?

You do!  Vote with your subscription money ... or lack thereof.  Speaking of which, I would suggest that we not bother purchasing reprints of the article.

Offline dcjulie

  • NFOA Full Member
  • **
  • Join Date: Nov 2008
  • Posts: 453
Re: Article in today's OWH
« Reply #17 on: March 05, 2013, 09:27:39 PM »
I thought the article was very well done.  I have had several people tell me that they thought it was fairly well written and portrayed a positive opinion of the shooting sports.  Freedom of the press is also a right in this country and I'll support it even if I don't always agree with what is written.  If you didn't like the article, or have your own opinion of how things should be written in the papers, write a letter to the editor.  Perhaps if many people wrote letters supporting the 2nd amendment, some might even get printed! :)

Offline Hank

  • Lead Benefactor
  • **
  • Join Date: Mar 2013
  • Posts: 186
Re: Article in today's OWH
« Reply #18 on: March 08, 2013, 04:17:51 PM »
And other rifles are designed to blow bubbles and pop teddybears out of their barrels...WTF?!  And to think that people listen to these "experts" as if they know what they are talking about. 

Fly
I agree..+ good laugh for today.
I felt (like many of you put into words better than I could) the article was better than what I would have expected, given the OWH.

Offline unfy

  • Lead Benefactor
  • **
  • Join Date: Jun 2010
  • Location: TN (was La Vista, NE)
  • Posts: 1830
  • !!! SCIENCE !!!
Re: Article in today's OWH
« Reply #19 on: March 08, 2013, 05:46:23 PM »
I was impressed with the article as well....

Well done by all parties.
hoppe's #9 is not the end all be all woman catching pheramone people make it out to be ... cause i smell of it 2 or 3 times a week but remain single  >:D