Acknowledging the media bias on guns from former CEO of National Public Radio

The former CEO of National Public Radio Ken Stern has a piece at the New York Post on the media's bias on guns.  This discussion could have been taken from my book The Bias Against Guns.  From the NY Post:

. . . Over the course of this past year, I have tried to consume media as they do and understand it as a partisan player. It is not so hard to do. Take guns. Gun control and gun rights is one of our most divisive issues, and there are legitimate points on both sides. But media is obsessed with the gun-control side and gives only scant, mostly negative, recognition to the gun-rights sides. 

Take for instance the issue of the legitimate defensive gun use (DGUs), which is often dismissed by the media as myth. But DGUs happen all the time — 200 times a day, according to the Department of Justice, or 5,000 times a day according to an overly exuberant Florida State University study. But whichever study you choose to believe, DGUs happen frequently and give credence to my hunting friends who see their guns as the last line of defense for themselves and their families. 

At one point during my research, I discovered a video of a would-be robber entering a Houston smoke shop, his purpose conveyed by the pistol that he leveled at the store clerk. But the robber was not the only armed person in the store. The security cameras show Raleigh, the store clerk, walking out from behind the counter, calmly raising his own gun and firing an accurate stream of bullets at the hapless robber. The wounded robber stumbles out, falls over the curb and eventually ends up under arrest. 

It is not just the defensive gun use that makes the video remarkable — it is Raleigh himself who evidences such a nonchalance that he never bothers to put down the cigarette that he is smoking. At the end, Raleigh, having protected his store, enthuses “Castle Doctrine, baby” — citing a law that allows a person to use force to defend a legally occupied place. 

It is an amazing story, though far from unique, but you simply won’t find many like it in mainstream media (I found it on Reddit). 

It’s not that media is suppressing stories intentionally. It’s that these stories don’t reflect their interests and beliefs. . . . 

Fox News: "Scrapped: Maryland ends bullet ID program after 15 years, $5M and zero cases solved"

I was quoted extensively in a Fox News article about Maryland's decision to scrap its ballistic fingerprinting system.  Ballistic fingerprinting was just another way of trying to register guns.

State authorities have conceded that the bullet ID program, enacted in 2000, cost $5 million, was plagued by technical problems and did not solve a single crime. Now, the 300,000 shell casings, one from every handgun sold in the state since the law took effect, will now be sold for scrap metal. . . . 

“It was clear 10 years ago that this program was not going to work,” John Lott, president of the Crime Prevention Research Center told FoxNews.com. "Millions were spent on funding this program, money that could have been better used for actual police and law-enforcement resources.” 

Lott even predicted that the program would fail over a decade ago in an op-ed piece in the National Review in February 2005. Even though the state spent approximately $60 per gun to catalog each firearm's unique ballistic signature, critics, including Lott, said legally purchased guns were typically not the ones wielded by criminals. They also said the program suffered from widespread erroneous entry of data and the inadequate software often resulted in hundreds of "matches" being found for each casing tested. . . .

The real problem with Maryland's system wasn't erroneous data entry or inadequate software, it was the science predicted that the system would fail.

1964 Johnny Seven OMA Toy Gun Commercial: I remember this ad from when I was a kid

Here is something that you won't see advertised these days.

CNN interviews me on "Why blacks should have more guns"

CNN's John Blake has a new article on how race and guns.  Bob Cottrol is also interviewed for the piece.  Here is part of the discussion where he discusses my work:

Some gun rights advocates say contemporary black communities could learn from that tradition of self-defense.

Restrictive gun control laws often victimize black people more than any other group because they suffer disproportionately from violent crime, says John R. Lott Jr., author of "More Guns, Less Crime: Understanding Crime and Gun Control Laws." 

A black person is 6.5 times more likely to become a murder victim than someone who is white; and 92% of black murder victims are killed by members of their own race, Lott says. 

"Given the anger about police in many black communities, it might make more sense to let the law-abiding citizens in those communities have a greater chance to defend themselves," says Lott, founder and president of the Crime Prevention Research Center, a group that examines the links between gun control and crime. 

There are some who say that gun laws actually discriminate against poor blacks by making it more difficult for them to buy guns for protection, he says. He says states do this by raising the costs of concealed gun permits, training and other fees that price out poor minorities. 

And gun restrictions don't help black people living in violent neighborhoods, he says. Every time guns have been banned, Lott says, murder rates have increased. When the state of Massachusetts increased the costs of gun ownership, the number of registered gun owners in the state plummeted -- and the state's murder rate rose. Other academics say Lott's research is faulty. 

"The big problem," Lott says, "is that law-abiding good citizens, not criminals, obey the gun control laws." 

But are gun proponents like Lott really promoting safety or, as one scholar says, are they selling fear? 

Gallagher, the sociologist, says gun producers and the NRA create a perpetual state of fear so that people can buy their products. An NRA spokesman, Andrew Arulanandam, was repeatedly contacted but declined to answer questions submitted for this article. . . .

ABC's "The Bachelor" goes to a date at a shooting range

This was apparently the woman's idea.  Sounds like a keeper to me.

From USA Today's discussion of the segment:

Andi's family in Atlanta was the next stop. Andi took him to a shooting range to calm their nerves before he met her family. They weren't overly impressed with him. Andi's dad basically said that he wouldn't give him his blessing until JP settled on dating just his daugther, as opposed to juggling four different relationships. . . .

H/T Emily Miller. 

Jim Carrey apologizes 3 1/2 months after calling gun owners names

Jim Carrey created some ruckus in March when he mocked the late Charlton Heston.  The real irony is that Carrey joined the ranks of gun control advocates who depends on guns for protection.  While always appreciated, the fact that it took him about 3.5 months to apologize for his personal attacks gives some pause about how sincere it is.  From Fox News:

The comedic actor sent out a series of tweets on Sunday apologizing for comments he's made in the past about gun owners.  

"[Assault] rifle fans, I do not agree [with] u, nor do I fear u but I do love u and I'm sorry [that] in my outrage I called you names.That was wrong," he wrote. "[By the way] I don't need a crisis [manager], just a conscience. Calling [people] names is inappropriate but my position on assault weapons hasn't changed."

Adam Carolla has this discussion about Carrey's apology.

If the Police understand that giving media attention to Celeb "Swatting" encourages more of it, why can't we do the same for multiple victim public shootings?

If publicity is encouraging these Celeb "Swattings" and if the police are going to stop releasing information to discourage those attacks, why can't this police be employed elsewhere?  The most obvious case involves multiple victim public shootings where it is now becoming clear that even the latest Newtown attack was just another case where the killer planned his attack for over two years to get media attention.  From CBS News in LA:

The Los Angeles Police Department said Thursday that they will no longer offer immediate information to the media on bogus 911 calls that target celebrity homes.
“We think that whoever is doing this is motivated by watching the police on TV and watching the helicopters come in, and we don’t want to allow that opportunity,” said Cmdr. Andrew Smith.
Smith said the department will also stop broadcasting the “swatting” calls so news organizations can’t hear the location of the star’s home. The media will now have to file a public records request, which can take 10 days.
When asked if residents have the right to know about a potential safety concern, Smith said, “Our officers will always talk to the families and the people who live in the neighborhoods about what’s going on and reassure them that it’s not an actual emergency there. What we won’t do is broadcast the street to the media, we won’t broadcast whose house it was.” . . .

"Greg Gutfeld on Jim Carrey: Most Pathetic Tool on Face of the Earth"

Greg Gutfeld shows no restraint in going after Jim Carrey.  Carrey's video obnoxiously attacks Charlton Heston and country music fans.  Just for fairness, I have included the video here, though realize that viewing this might only encourage the bigotry that Carrey thinks passes for humor.



UPDATE: Here is a response to Carrey's video.