Why have we not heard of the San Antonio deputy sheriff who shot the knuckle-dragging idiot who had just shot and killed his ex-girlfriend? Because it does not meet with their view of guns and gun violence! Someone preventing crime by the use of a gun is a crime in the eyes of the biased media. It denies them the blood and gore they need for ratings. Also, It does not meet with their definition of guns which is they are all bad and should all be banned. So they leave out the good news and only focus on the bad.
Today there was another shooting in Aurora, Colorado, the same city as the theater shooting some six months ago. The San Jose Mercury news covered it as did most other news outlets. Their article: (http://www.mercurynews.com/nation-world/ci_22317237/four-dead-inside-aurora-colorado-home-including-gunman) can be read if you want. However, if you check, there is no mention of the San Antonio shooting at all. Why would a killing get top billing and someone who saves lives not get mentioned at all?
It goes back to the news media mantra, if it bleeds, it leads. However, after the Sandy Hook tragedy, all we heard about was how bad guns were. Yet, here and in innumerable other cases, someone with a gun has saved many lives. Why are we not hearing a balanced approach? Isn't that what the news is supposed to present?
This is just another nail in the coffin of the freedom of the press. They are no longer news organizations, they are political organs which report only the items that meet the approval of the Democratic party and its supporters. They are like Pravda in the old Soviet Union.
Yes, this country as we have known it is on its last legs. Soon the press will only be able to report on news that the White House approves. Oops--that already has happened. Maybe we are further down the road than we thought!
Your comments are welcome.
Be scared, be very scared.
Conservative Tom
P.S. Thanks to one of my high school friends mom who sent me the following article!
Today there was another shooting in Aurora, Colorado, the same city as the theater shooting some six months ago. The San Jose Mercury news covered it as did most other news outlets. Their article: (http://www.mercurynews.com/nation-world/ci_22317237/four-dead-inside-aurora-colorado-home-including-gunman) can be read if you want. However, if you check, there is no mention of the San Antonio shooting at all. Why would a killing get top billing and someone who saves lives not get mentioned at all?
It goes back to the news media mantra, if it bleeds, it leads. However, after the Sandy Hook tragedy, all we heard about was how bad guns were. Yet, here and in innumerable other cases, someone with a gun has saved many lives. Why are we not hearing a balanced approach? Isn't that what the news is supposed to present?
This is just another nail in the coffin of the freedom of the press. They are no longer news organizations, they are political organs which report only the items that meet the approval of the Democratic party and its supporters. They are like Pravda in the old Soviet Union.
Yes, this country as we have known it is on its last legs. Soon the press will only be able to report on news that the White House approves. Oops--that already has happened. Maybe we are further down the road than we thought!
Your comments are welcome.
Be scared, be very scared.
Conservative Tom
P.S. Thanks to one of my high school friends mom who sent me the following article!
On Sunday Dec. 16 2012, 2 days after the CT shooting, a man went to a restaurant in San Antonio to kill his X-girlfriend. After he shot her, most of the people in the restaurant fled next door to a theater. The gunman followed them and entered the theater so he could shoot more people. He started shooting and people in the theater started running and screaming. It's like the Aurora, CO theater story plus a restaurant! Now aren't you wondering why this isn't a lead story in the national media along with the school shooting? There was an off duty county deputy at the theater. SHE pulled out her gun and shot the man 4 times before he had a chance to kill anyone. So since this story makes the point that the best thing to stop a bad person with a gun is a good person with a gun, the media is treating it like it never happened. Only the local media covered it. The city is giving her a medal next week. Just thought you'd like to know.
Unfortunately the person that shot this shooter wasn't a average civilian or better yet a 65 year old retired veteran.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Thanks for commenting. Your comments are needed for helping to improve the discussion.