Fuck CNN (AWB article) - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

MSD · 09-13-2004, 03:58 AM

Quote:

http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/09/12/gun.ban.ap/index.html

SAN FRANCISCO, California (AP) -- Ten years after it was born out of the carnage of three California mass shootings, the federal assault weapons ban is fading out of existence Monday.

While manufacturers look for a boom in business as people buy up previously banned weapons like AK-47s, Uzis and TEC-9s, police chiefs warn of an upsurge in crime.

The law's chief sponsor, Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein, is urging retailers not to sell the disputed weapons, while hoping for a change in the nation's political climate.

Feinstein was horrified by the 1984 shooting rampage at a McDonald's in San Diego County that killed 21 people and the massacre of five people five years later at a Stockton elementary school yard.

But it was the shooting at a law firm in San Francisco in 1993, in which eight were killed and six wounded, that persuaded her to push for the assault weapons ban.

"It was the ultimate shock," Feinstein said in an interview. "That building is one of the great economic citadels in the city, and you see this prestigious law firm. And then -- boom. Someone comes in, aggrieved, and goes right through the place."

Just over a year after the San Francisco shootings, President Bill Clinton signed Feinstein's bill into law. It banned the sale of 19 specific semiautomatic weapons and ammunition clips of 10 rounds or more.

Former Presidents Gerald Ford, Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan wrote to all members of the House to encourage them to pass the ban at the time.

But it was set to expire exactly 10 years later if it weren't renewed in Congress, and President George W. Bush never pushed Congressional leaders to move the renewal legislation.

Loopholes allowed manufacturers to keep many weapons on the market simply by changing their names or altering some of their features or accessories. And because existing weapons and large ammo clips were protected by a "grandfather" provision, many pre-ban guns remained in use.

"The bill's not perfect; we could have written a better bill," Feinstein says now. "I just didn't know how craven the gun manufacturers would be."

Studies done by pro- and antigun groups as well as the Justice Department show conflicting results on whether the ban helped reduce crime.

California and other more urban states, including Massachusetts and New York, have passed their own laws curbing the use of assault weapons. Some of those are more stringent than the federal ban.

Blatant falsehoods about what the ban covered, trying to get people afraid of what's happening, I'm starting to see why people accuse them of being "liberal media." I haven't seen evidence past this one issue, so I won't judge yet, but the talking heads who were covering this last week pissed me off.

ARTelevision · 09-13-2004, 04:12 AM

Yes. Partisanship aside, the Fourth Estate today is another problem in itself in terms of "educating and informing" us.
The situation as we have it does not provide anything resembling unbiased or objective info. This was not the way it was intended when the idea of "a free press" was promoted by the Founding Fathers. It's "bad news" all around.

smooth · 09-13-2004, 05:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrSelfDestruct

Blatant falsehoods about what the ban covered, trying to get people afraid of what's happening, I'm starting to see why people accuse them of being "liberal media." I haven't seen evidence past this one issue, so I won't judge yet, but the talking heads who were covering this last week pissed me off.

What are you referring to in the article that is blatantly false?

irateplatypus · 09-13-2004, 06:08 AM

hmm...

massacres at a McDonald's and an elementary school don't move her to action, but one at a high-powered law firm does. funny when it seems to "hit home" for her...

well done Senator.

hrdwareguy · 09-13-2004, 07:21 AM

Just because I happened to find this before MSD replied, allow me to pick this article apart.

Quote:

While manufacturers look for a boom in business as people buy up previously banned weapons like AK-47s, Uzis and TEC-9s, police chiefs warn of an upsurge in crime.

Wrong, these weapons were not banned. These weapons were and are still controlled by the National Firearms Act of 1934. The semi-automatic versions/knockoffs of these guns did fall under the ban, but only those manufactured after 9/13/94. Modifying the firearms many times still made it legal to sell even while the ban was in place. Cosmetic things were affected but not functionality.

Many liberal police chiefs bought into this idea, now they are saying crime will go up because in a year, when it doesn't, they will look stupid. If a person is going to commit a crime, they aren't going to go, "Well damn, the gun I was going to use is on the AWB list...guess I can't commit that crime now".

Quote:

Just over a year after the San Francisco shootings, President Bill Clinton signed Feinstein's bill into law. It banned the sale of 19 specific semiautomatic weapons and ammunition clips of 10 rounds or more.

Wrong again. The sale of these items was not banned, the continued production of these items was banned. You could still buy and sell items made before 9/13/94 that were grandfathered in. Furthermore, there was no shortage of many of these items, including 30 round magazines for the AR-15. Definition time. A magazine is what you put in the gun that has bullets in it. A clip is a strip of metal that holds bullets. You load magazines from clips.

Quote:

Loopholes allowed manufacturers to keep many weapons on the market simply by changing their names or altering some of their features or accessories. And because existing weapons and large ammo clips were protected by a "grandfather" provision, many pre-ban guns remained in use.

Proof positive that it was based on cosmetic features rather than functionality. They changed the way it looked and it was legal now, no function change.

Quote:

"The bill's not perfect; we could have written a better bill," Feinstein says now. "I just didn't know how craven the gun manufacturers would be."

Lets see, you make a law that will force me out of business if I don't change the way I do things. What the hell did you expect!!

Quote:

Studies done by pro- and antigun groups as well as the Justice Department show conflicting results on whether the ban helped reduce crime.

I'm sorry, I haven't seen one study that says this has worked. If anyone has this information, please direct it my way so I can take a look at it.

hrdwareguy · 09-13-2004, 07:42 AM

My email to CNN regarding this article:

Quote:

Wrong information and editorial slant.

You state, "While manufacturers look for a boom in business as people buy up previously banned weapons like AK-47s, Uzis and TEC-9s, police chiefs warn of an upsurge in crime."

However these items could still be purchased under the ban, they could just not be mahufactured.

You also state, "Just over a year after the San Francisco shootings, President Bill Clinton signed Feinstein's bill into law. It banned the sale of 19 specific semiautomatic weapons and ammunition clips of 10 rounds or more."

This is alos incorrect. The production of these items was banned, not the sale. Also, it should be ammunition magazines and not ammunition clips. Magazines go into guns, clips hold bullets and load magazines.

The article is slanted and leads people to believe the streets will be over-run with cirminals with Uzi's and AK-47's. Most people associate these with what they see in the movies and fear the worst. They also don't realize that these items could still have been purchased under the ban and fully automatic versions could have been purchased under the National Firearms Act of 1934 for civilian ownership.

Stop trying to scare the American people into thinking that by the end of the week these guns are going to be ruling the streets. Most people un the US are law abiding people and still have to go through a NICS check to purchase a firearm. The criminals that want these guns probably already have them.

Ustwo · 09-13-2004, 08:11 AM

There is no liberal media, nothing to see here, these arn't the liberals you are looking for, move along.

MSD · 09-13-2004, 08:43 AM

hrdwareguy, I'd like to see the "fuck you" letter you get back from CNN. You covered all of my points.

hrdwareguy · 09-13-2004, 10:40 AM

muahahahahahahaha.......I just went back tot he CNN site and pulled that article back up. They have removed AK-47 and UZI from the second paragraph.

filtherton · 09-13-2004, 10:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ustwo

There is no liberal media, nothing to see here, these arn't the liberals you are looking for, move along.

Yes, and the entire media consists of cnn. Invest in the tinfoil industry much?

Ustwo · 09-13-2004, 11:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by filtherton

Yes, and the entire media consists of cnn. Invest in the tinfoil industry much?

So you are implying that CNN is liberal biased?

KMA-628 · 09-13-2004, 11:31 AM

Sidebar, kinda scary for me.

I was supposed to be at that McDonald's in 1984 at roughly the same time as the shooting.

We used to have a house in Ensenada and on the way down we would stop at that McDonald's (I was 12) for lunch. That morning, however, our car broke down and delayed our trip down south by one day.

/sorry for the interruption, this post just reminded me of that event

Journeyman · 09-13-2004, 11:37 AM

Paraphrase: In 1984, 21 hungry customers were shot dead in a McDonalds. In 1989, 5 innocent civilians were brutally murdered at an elementary school. In 1993 8 lawyers get shot dead and action had to be taken!

In Feinstein's defense, I'm pretty sure she wasn't a senator untill '93. But yeah, she's an idiot, and I won't be voting for her anymore.

Locobot · 09-13-2004, 09:14 PM

hrdwareguy: most of your complaints about the article are simple quibbles over the word "ban" and what that entails. If the Assault Weapon ban was so ineffectual then why did you have a problem with it? The gun dealer interviewed on NPR today said that he sold more "assault weapons" and accessories in the two weeks before the ban took effect than in the previous ten years. Also his backstock of pre-1994-manufactured instantly increased in price two to three times what they were previously. I think you could argue that the AWB actually increased the business of weapons dealers by making people more aware of and spiking the price of "assault weapons." Before this turns into another outlet for bashing leftist politicians that the ban passed with Bi-partisan support and that GWBush supported it with words. His actions don't match his words however, he didn't ask congress to extend the ban. I guess W's fabled conviction doesn't extend to positions that might anger his base during an election year.

hrdwareguy · 09-14-2004, 07:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Locobot

hrdwareguy: most of your complaints about the article are simple quibbles over the word "ban" and what that entails. If the Assault Weapon ban was so ineffectual then why did you have a problem with it? The gun dealer interviewed on NPR today said that he sold more "assault weapons" and accessories in the two weeks before the ban took effect than in the previous ten years. Also his backstock of pre-1994-manufactured instantly increased in price two to three times what they were previously. I think you could argue that the AWB actually increased the business of weapons dealers by making people more aware of and spiking the price of "assault weapons." Before this turns into another outlet for bashing leftist politicians that the ban passed with Bi-partisan support and that GWBush supported it with words. His actions don't match his words however, he didn't ask congress to extend the ban. I guess W's fabled conviction doesn't extend to positions that might anger his base during an election year.

If we are going to be talking about a legal document, then yes I think it very important to determine what the words in the document mean. Most of the american people only know about guns what the see on TV and in the movies. Therefore I have a problem with news media writing stories that portray guns as all fully automatic and every Tom, Dick, and Harry being able to get them.

What is the first thing most people think of when they hear AK-47 and Uzi? They generally think of some terrorist with a fully automatic weapon. Now talk about AK-47's and Uzi's in conjunction with the AWB and most uneducated on the subject people think jull autos will become legal and they will "flood the streets". Guess what...full auto AK-47's have been legal for longer than the ban has been in place. The ban did nothing with fully automatic stuff, only semi-automatic stuff. It did not make these guns illegal, it simply prevented the semi-automatic versions from being manufactured. I have a problem with the media using words against the uneducated of a subject to make them fear something. I guess it is true, we only fear what we don't know. I spent a good portion of the day yesterday scouring news sites and emailing them correcting articles they had written about the AWB so don't think I'm just picking on CNN.

I have a problem with the AWB for several reasons. First, it made the anti-gun crowd look good because they did something - ineffectual as it was. Second, it made prices skyrocket for no good reason other than fear. Third, it did prohibit the manufactur of certain things(hi cap mags), therefore driving the price of these items up beyond control. Yeah yeah, supply and demand controls the price but gotta love fear helping it out. I believe part of the reason it passed with bi-partisan support is because it was innefectual and wht the repubs passing it, it took an issue away from the dems.

I do not think it was up to GWB to ask congress to pass legislation. They new it would expire just as well as he did and they (congress) did nothing about it. Mainly because they didn't have the votes to pass it. The reason they didn't have the votes is because they didn't want it to pass and get the gun crowd all pissed and show up in force and vote republican in November.

johnnymysto · 09-16-2004, 06:39 AM

The media just wants to play this to people's fears. Anyone who REALLY wants an AK or an Uzi can get one, just like anyone who REALLY wants drugs can find somewhere to buy them. And honestly, does anyone actually believe that a little government weapons ban will keep assault weapons out of terrorists' hands? There are lots of things that terrorists and criminals aren't supposed to be able to get, but they get them! This is just more material for the media to use to make Bush look bad before election time.

whocarz · 09-16-2004, 07:06 AM

Fuck the Daily Show while you're at it. The way Jon Stewart reported on the AWB sunset was even more hysterically fearful than the CNN article. Even though I did laugh.

09-13-2004, 04:12 AM	#2 (permalink)
ARTelevision I change Location: USA	Yes. Partisanship aside, the Fourth Estate today is another problem in itself in terms of "educating and informing" us. The situation as we have it does not provide anything resembling unbiased or objective info. This was not the way it was intended when the idea of "a free press" was promoted by the Founding Fathers. It's "bad news" all around. __________________ create evolution

09-13-2004, 06:08 AM	#4 (permalink)
irateplatypus can't help but laugh Location: dar al-harb	hmm... massacres at a McDonald's and an elementary school don't move her to action, but one at a high-powered law firm does. funny when it seems to "hit home" for her... well done Senator. __________________ If you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not too costly, you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance for survival. There may even be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves. ~ Winston Churchill

09-13-2004, 08:11 AM	#7 (permalink)
Ustwo Pissing in the cornflakes	There is no liberal media, nothing to see here, these arn't the liberals you are looking for, move along. __________________ Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

09-13-2004, 10:40 AM	#9 (permalink)
hrdwareguy "Officer, I was in fear for my life" Location: Oklahoma City	muahahahahahahaha.......I just went back tot he CNN site and pulled that article back up. They have removed AK-47 and UZI from the second paragraph. __________________ Gun Control is hitting what you aim at Aim for the TFP, Donate Today

09-16-2004, 06:39 AM	#16 (permalink)
johnnymysto Overreactor Location: South Ca'lina	The media just wants to play this to people's fears. Anyone who REALLY wants an AK or an Uzi can get one, just like anyone who REALLY wants drugs can find somewhere to buy them. And honestly, does anyone actually believe that a little government weapons ban will keep assault weapons out of terrorists' hands? There are lots of things that terrorists and criminals aren't supposed to be able to get, but they get them! This is just more material for the media to use to make Bush look bad before election time. __________________ "I'm disinclined to acquiesce to your request." - Capt. Barbossa

09-13-2004, 08:43 AM	#8 (permalink)
MSD The sky calls to us ... Super Moderator Location: CT	hrdwareguy, I'd like to see the "fuck you" letter you get back from CNN. You covered all of my points.

09-13-2004, 11:31 AM	#12 (permalink)
KMA-628 ....is off his meds...you were warned. Location: The Wild Wild West	Sidebar, kinda scary for me. I was supposed to be at that McDonald's in 1984 at roughly the same time as the shooting. We used to have a house in Ensenada and on the way down we would stop at that McDonald's (I was 12) for lunch. That morning, however, our car broke down and delayed our trip down south by one day. /sorry for the interruption, this post just reminded me of that event

09-13-2004, 11:37 AM	#13 (permalink)
Journeyman Like John Goodman, but not. Location: SFBA, California	Paraphrase: In 1984, 21 hungry customers were shot dead in a McDonalds. In 1989, 5 innocent civilians were brutally murdered at an elementary school. In 1993 8 lawyers get shot dead and action had to be taken! In Feinstein's defense, I'm pretty sure she wasn't a senator untill '93. But yeah, she's an idiot, and I won't be voting for her anymore.

09-13-2004, 09:14 PM	#14 (permalink)
Locobot is awesome!	hrdwareguy: most of your complaints about the article are simple quibbles over the word "ban" and what that entails. If the Assault Weapon ban was so ineffectual then why did you have a problem with it? The gun dealer interviewed on NPR today said that he sold more "assault weapons" and accessories in the two weeks before the ban took effect than in the previous ten years. Also his backstock of pre-1994-manufactured instantly increased in price two to three times what they were previously. I think you could argue that the AWB actually increased the business of weapons dealers by making people more aware of and spiking the price of "assault weapons." Before this turns into another outlet for bashing leftist politicians that the ban passed with Bi-partisan support and that GWBush supported it with words. His actions don't match his words however, he didn't ask congress to extend the ban. I guess W's fabled conviction doesn't extend to positions that might anger his base during an election year.

09-16-2004, 07:06 AM	#17 (permalink)
whocarz Jarhead Location: Colorado	Fuck the Daily Show while you're at it. The way Jon Stewart reported on the AWB sunset was even more hysterically fearful than the CNN article. Even though I did laugh. __________________ If there exists anything mightier than destiny, then it is the courage to face destiny unflinchingly. -Geibel Despise not death, but welcome it, for nature wills it like all else. -Marcus Aurelius Come on, you sons of bitches! Do you want to live forever? -GySgt. Daniel J. "Dan" Daly