Media Bias!

[Chief Joseph]

I had posted this at a conceal carry forum I go to because, to me, this is clear media bias. The story goes to great lengths to push it was "training" that stopped the attack, when from the writing it's obvious that it was the presenting of a GUN that did the job. At the other forum, a guy who specializes in training insisted that it was training, but was unable to tell me in words why. He just kept falling back on "I'm an expert, you know nothing". Now being an American who's read about many an instance of regular joes who have concealed weapons successfully using them to save themselves and others, even without this supposed expert training, I become quite irritated at the "trust me, I'm an expert" without backing it up. That's how we're in this supposed AGW mess with these corrupt "scientists". So please if you have info that I'm not seeing, please enlighten me without being a condescending know it all that I experienced at the other forum.

Teacher credits training after he halts stabbing - PennLive.com (http://www.pennlive.com/news/patriotnews/index.ssf?/base/news/1260498309184930.xml&coll=1)

[Dietrich]

I don`t know about the guy on the other forum,but what I got from the story was that when the gun was pulled the assailant fled.What do you think was the know-it-all`s problem other than he liked to tell people what an expert he was? Sounds like the incident was over when the firearm was introduced,not by any special training unless the training consisted of "If you see a guy stabbing someone,pull a gun on him." :confused:

[RiskPro]

I agree...the gun is why the guy took off.

However, I don't see any media bias. I read it a few times and infer the overall premise to be that his military training kicked in and he acted accordingly. So, with gun in hand as his training dictated, he interviened and took control of the situation.

Was there a particular quote that really jumps out at you?

[mx5fan]

I'm with you, I read the article and re-read the article and there was nothing that led me to believe that the CCW's training came into play. It appears that the CCW holder pulled his gun and ordered the assailant to drop his knife and the assailant fled. End of story. Now in terms of media bias, I don't really see that in this story either. The reporter was just reporting what the CCW holder told him and I quote: "I responded in accordance with my training in an attempt to prevent serious bodily harm or possible death to a human life".

[Chief Joseph]

After my little dust up with him, I took the time to read his responses to other threads and he quite often includes a "I have trained officers for years" and other things.I think 98 percent of us just need to use our god given natural common sense. While I understand that training would be beneficial to a lot of us. Training us like LEO's I don't think is in our best interest since they MUST confront badguys and we're better off avoiding them. And I'll give credit where credit is due, but it MUST be proven to me first. I think that guy could have had the best training in the world and if he was unarmed wouldn't have stopped that attack in the least. I posted that his response smacked of elitism, that his attitude sounded like he felt the rest of us had no business being armed unless we were trained like cops.

[Chief Joseph]

The media bias I'm referring to is this. It's well known the media has waged a war against private gun ownership, by not reporting or under reporting. Similar to the shooter at the law school several years ago. There were a couple hundred of reports, but only a very few reported that the 2 other students who stopped him, did so with their conceal guns that they had to run to retrieve from their cars since the school didn't allow carrying. In this instance it was the GUN that did the job, and the fact that he had a concealed gun at all did it. Instead of them focusing on that, someone with a concealed hand gun saved the day, they focused on his TRAINING. Notice the subtle way they justified him having a gun at all by really pushing his back ground and training. What would they have said if he had not had professional training? Probably nothing at all. Training or not, if this was a school that denied him the right to carry, this may have been very different.

[jfrey]

I think Chief Joseph may actually have a good handle on this situation. The media doesn't sell news, they sell sensationalism. They write stories to suit themselves, and if occassionally the truth gets in there - so be it. Training is a good thing, if you can use it. Case in point: my oldest son has had a lot of military training with firearms but can he out shoot me - not yet, and I'm 30 years older than him.
This guy presented a gun and the criminal ran - end of story. Was he trained to do that? I think not.

As to the X spirt - He has his opinion and I have mine. Care to guess which one I rely on?

[Longitude Zero]

The media bias againts firearms, in my area is crystal clear. They will always report on the illegal use of a weapon but will almost never report when a weapon is lawfully used to defend ones life.

When they do report the lawful discharge of a wepon they always couch it in terms that if the citizen had not been there, or they had just fled etc the use of the weapon would not have been necessary.

Several year ago one news channel quesioned the use of a firearem whent he assailant was 10' away from the citizen and "only had a screwdriver."

If it bleeds it leads is their mantra.

[wyntrout]

Longitude Zero, you just reminded me of one of my "heroes", Bernhard Goetz! Remember him?
Bernhard Goetz - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernhard_Goetz)
He gave thugs something to think about... bringing screwdrivers to a gun fight!
Wynn :33: