Now as we all know it never takes all that much to drive those in our state-controlled media who favor much stricter gun control, to go into hyper-drive whenever word comes about a shooting that’s occurred somewhere in the country. And for most of these faux ‘journalists", the higher the body count the better because it all adds to the narrative that they are so desperate to create. Because with such media hype, regarding those rare mass shootings here in America, helps to create and to perpetuate the myth that these sort of killings are actually on the rise and that an assault weapon ban, expanded background checks and greater attention to the mentally ill will curb what is claimed to be a rampaging epidemic. And it’s always according to some very authoritative, and quite exhaustive, study by some noted criminologist. And we’re always expected to take such reports at face value.
But, as is usually the case whenever dealing with those in our state-controlled media complex, who do so because of some ulterior motive, more often than not there’s very little truth to their claims. A point made all the more obvious by James Alan Fox, author and criminology professor at Northeastern University, who says that mass shootings have remained stagnant for over 34 years, averaging roughly 20 a year, with few being committed by the type of berserk psychos often portrayed by the media. "Public discourse is grounded in myth and misunderstanding about the nature of the offense and those who perpetrate it," he writes in the journal "Homicide Studies." He added: "Without minimizing the pain and suffering of the hundreds of those who have been victimized in recent attacks, the facts clearly say that there has been no increase in mass shootings and certainly no epidemic."
The study debunks just about all, if not all, of the proposals that were aired by Barry "Almighty", "Slow Joe" Biden and just about any Senate Democrat you care to name after the December 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting, all of which were supposedly aimed at stopping the rising number of mass killings taking place in this country. While Prof. Fox said that any plan is worth trying, he concluded that short of abolishing the Second Amendment, there is very little that can be done. "Mass murder just may be a price we pay for living in a society where personal freedom is so highly valued," he wrote in the study coauthored Northeastern criminology student Monica DeLateur. They reviewed years of mass shootings and found that most shooters are not the crazed killers pictured on TV. Most are seeking revenge and practice their crime, like the two Columbine, Colo., killers.
Prof. Fox addressed 10 myths fostered by the press. Key among them:
— Mass shootings are on the rise. He used FBI statistics and found they have long averaged in the 20s per year, rarely going over 25.
— Video games play a role. The study found no link between video games and expanded violence, and blamed the media and lawmakers for using the entertainment industry as a "convenient scapegoat."
— Profiling will help catch killers before they act. The study found that most are white and about 30 years old, characteristics that "are fairly prevalent in the general society."
— Expanded background checks will stop killers from getting guns. The study cites a study from former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s Mayors Against Illegal Guns that in 93 recent mass shootings, the gun buyers didn’t have a criminal or mental health record. "People cannot be denied their Second Amendment rights just because they look strange or act in an odd manner," wrote Fox and DeLateur.
— An assault weapons ban would work. They found that the typical weapon used is a pistol, not an "assault weapon" like the semi-automatic AR-15 rifle. Assault weapons were used in 24.6 percent of mass shootings, handguns in 47.9 percent. And limiting the size of magazines weapons can carry wouldn’t help, they said, because any ban would impact new sales and "there is an ample supply of large capacity magazines already in circulation."
So there you have it. While many of those in the state-controlled media view themselves as being an expert on everything, it’s very rare indeed when they prove to be an expert on nearly anything. They seem to think that if they are able to confidently spout numbers, they’ll somehow be believed. In other words, they feel that they don’t really need to know what they’re talking about, they just need to sound like they do. Those in the media of today have very little credibility on just about any topic they choose to discuss, unless of course it’s gay marriage or drug legalization. In that case, then I suppose that they might actually know a little of what it is that they’re talking about. But when it comes to such things as our Constitution and the rights it guarantees, they’re all pretty ignorant. Facts don’t matter, they just get in the way of what is perceived as being a good story. Because it’s all about the story.
No comments:
Post a Comment