Why we don’t trust you…. (fact checkers and bias)

 15 years – 17 years = -2 years  (why is a study that predates NICS background check system by 2 years being touted for background checks today)

“40% of guns sold are sold without a background check”

That is based on this…

“We conclude that approximately 60 percent of gun acquisitions involved an FFL”

From a report/study published in 1996, which itself was based on a phone survey of a mere 250 people. Note that the study wasn’t even addressing background checks. It simply asked the gun owners if the seller was a licensed FFL. (Versus family member, gun trade, unknown, etc).

https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles/165476.pdf

http://www.policefoundation.org/sites/pftest1.drupalgardens.com/files/Cook%20et%20al.%20%281996%29%20-%20Guns%20in%20America.pdf

Per wikipedia, the NICS background check system was implemented on November 30, 1998.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Instant_Criminal_Background_Check_System

And where is pulitzer winning PolitFact.com on the matter? Do we see listings of President Obama, Vice-President Biden, Chicago Mayor Rahm Emmanuel  and more….all with their flaming PANTS ON FIRE logo?  Nope…

How does FactCheck.org (yes, that bastion of unbiased political fact checking) sound off on the issue?

“…the number is quite often stated as fact when no one can say for certain.”
No one can say for certain? Yes, a 3rd grader researching this issue could say for certain sir.

And while they do actually state that it’s fairly misleading. They handle it with gloves when
ACTUALLY, it’s a flat out lie. NICS background checks weren’t even implemented at the time of the survey. So that makes it false. Second, the conclusion was mis-applied. Third, the total was closer to 35%. And lastly, with only 250 acquisitians surveyed, the study is questionable from a scientific standpoint. Furthermore, it’s from 1996.  That’s a bit long in the tooth.

http://factcheck.org/2013/03/guns-acquired-without-background-checks/

In truth, it was the gun issue that made me lose faith in these “non-biased” fact checking sites. As there is a continual strong bias against guns.

***

But every now and then they get it right. But then again, this is Rangel. It’s hard to wrangel any truth out of that guy.
http://factcheck.org/2013/03/rangels-assault-weapons-whopper/

Published in: on March 26, 2013 at 6:27 pm  Leave a Comment  
Tags: , , ,

How the media spins

One of the number one complaints that conservatives have with regards to the mainstream media is math. For years, conservative events can number in thousands of attendees, and yet will be described as a few hundred.  Meanwhile, an activity supported by leftist media could have a few dozen folk and be touted as hundreds. A few hundred become thousands.

And this isn’t a one time event, or even an occasional occurence. It’s darn near policy.  Sure the media would deny it. But we know how it works. Reporter on seen says there were a hundred, the editor tells them to bump it up.  And most Americans blindly trust their journalistic institutions.

But every now and then we catch them with egg on their face. Here is the Connecticut Post caught halfway between it’s own lie.

mediafalsify

Published in: on February 15, 2013 at 8:04 am  Leave a Comment  
Tags: ,

Why we neeed PACs

I don’t like them. But when people criticize them as affecting the political stage, my retort is what the !@#$% do you think the media is besides on big HUMUNGOUS PAC for the Democrats.

This CNN.com article is essentially proof.

Opinion: Proud day for bipartisanship

That’s the title of the link. So when DC vs Heller was a 5/4 split it was somehow not a sign of bipartisanship. But this is…???

Yes media…we believe NOTHING you have to say.

 

Published in: on June 28, 2012 at 10:25 pm  Leave a Comment  
Tags: , ,

“a couple of traffic tickets and no criminal history”

I’m a little late on this one, it slipped by me until today.

Jose Guerena, former marine, gunned down in a SWAT raid. Served two tours in Iraq. The SWAT team claims they did not do a no knock warrant, and came in with sirens. (I’d really like to hear from neighbors if that was true.)

How often are we going to tolerate these style SWAT raids? Granted, it’s possible Jose Guerena was involved in some illicit activity. Wouldn’t be the first soldier to do so. But the officers involved have released no details as to any evidence collected.

But even if they did, can we believe them? SWAT teams are becoming quite famed for fabricating lies and planting evidence. (See Kathryn Johnston)

Well it didn’t take long for them to being fabricating. Apparently, they initially claimed Jose Guerena shot first. “They now acknowledge that not only did he not fire, the safety on his gun was still activated when he was killed”

“We spoke with several of the neighbors,” Epps says. “And none of them — none of them — heard any sirens that morning. Every one of them told us they didn’t hear anything, no knocking, no shouting, until the shooting started. They didn’t hear anything until the shooting started.”

Now mind you…it is possible that Guerena was in fact involved in some illicit behavior. Let’s say that all the known evidence to the contrary doesn’t exist and he was. We are seeing a practice of bad habits arising. No knock SWAT raids. Shoot first, question later. And poor intelligence (ie: woman and children in location at time of raid). None of these occurences should be happening in America.

But based on the fact so far, it’s looking pretty damning to police. For those wondering why Guerena would respond with a rifle. Could it be because his wife lost two relatives to a home invasion the year before?

In conclusion, we already know how this will end. It will be sent to an independent police board of made up of knowledgeful examiners. They will review the case in detail and conclude that no wrong-doing was done on the part of the law enforcement officers.

While the rest of us will exlaim, there is a dead “daddy”, a dead “marine”, a dead “American”. Only a liar or a thug can conclude there was no wrong-doing.

If we can sentence Ramos and Compean to prison for 10 yrs for shooting a drug dealer in the butt. How many years should a police officer get for shooting an innocent American who risked his life serving his country in Iraq?

For those who want to have their stomach sickened further, here are some additional links.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/05/25/jose-guerena-arizona-_n_867020.html

http://azstarnet.com/news/local/crime/article_a978c23a-a40f-5d0a-a203-76b88ac67e86.html

http://azstarnet.com/news/local/crime/article_d7d979d4-f4fb-5603-af76-0bef206f8301.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5BJ_Jn9rlVs

http://pimasheriff.org/files/1013/0463/5381/OIS050511.pdf

UPDATE: Camera video is posted over at

http://cursesfoiledagain2.wordpress.com/2011/05/27/more-on-the-killing-of-jose-guerena/

Well, it does seem they did have the sirens on for a few seconds. Though that siren sounded a lot more like a car alarm going off than a normal police siren. Wasn’t much of a knock. And far from the original comment that they knocked loudly for

I could almost hear something in the background there. Not sure if it was an officer or Guerena.

Here is what I believe happened. I believe the SWAT team figured they’d roll in like a piece of cake. They’d briefly turn on the siren, knock softly a few taps in order to claim they’d done what they should. Then just knock the door in and tell everyone to go prone.

Instead, they knock open the door and see their suspect armed. They simply opened fire without any hesitation. I understand that the SWAT team wants to go home at night. But police have to take the high road.

Their tactics seem pretty dumb as well. 5 team members at the door. What if there were other aggressors, they’d simply exit the back. Or even come around and flank the officers. Even if Guerena was everything the SWAT team says. This was pretty much a botched raid.

20/20 Does It Again…

ABC’s 20/20 recently published an article entitled “Before Arranging Playdates, Ask About Guns”.

Story here…

Now see videos of Jan, father of the child mentioned, explain what really happened. How 20/20 was deceptive, deceitful and plotting from the get go to make their trash story.

http://www.buckeyefirearms.org/node/6647

Before Watching 20/20, Ask if the story was Arranged

Published in: on April 20, 2009 at 5:42 pm  Leave a Comment  
Tags: , , ,