FIRE MISSION - "Was this article worthwhile"

[W.E.G.]

FIRE MISSION - "Was this article worthwhile"

Click the thumbs-down icon at the bottom of the article.

We are losing so far.

http://www.sltrib.com/news/ci_9662672

"Time to grow up and put your guns away
By Rebecca Walsh
Tribune Columnist
Article Last Updated: 06/22/2008 12:34:35 AM MDT

extras.mnginteractive.com/live/media/site297/2008/0622/20080622__ut_walsh_0622~1_Gallery.jpg

My 20-month-old nephew loves Elmo and Dora. He also has started making explosion and gunfire noises.

I get the inevitability of little boys' fascination with guns.
What I can't figure out are the men and sometimes women who don't grow out of the gun-crazy stage of childhood, who need to have a handgun on their hips at all times, who need their neighbors to notice.

Ten of them stormed the West Valley City Council meeting last week..."

[Zombie Steve]

Done.

[Warp]

132 votes, -58 so far.

[PhoneCop]

Was this article worthwhile?
This article is worthwhile

This article is not worthwhile
-130
204 VOTES

Seems the opinions are racking up... if I read it right.

[deadday]

-182 now, glad to help.

[PhoneCop]

wonder what that does to her self-perception...

[PhoneCop]

Done.

Zombie Steve, I liked the other avatar better. :wavey:

[rvrctyrngr]

-626/738.

[Lone Wolf8634]

-636/752

[deadday]

wonder what that does to her self-perception...

Probably nothing....People like that rarely ever change their views...





drew

[zackwatt]

-667
793 Votes

[deadday]

Yaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay...Mission accomplished :whistling:





drew

[Renny]

Done.

-719 out of 853 votes.

R

[Razoreye]

-888/1k or so

pwnt!

[lance22]

In addition to voting a few times, I sent her an email asking her to speak from a more informed, open minded perspective.

[Yellowfin]

Hopefully this marks the end of her career.

[Thx-1138]

Hopefully this marks the end of her career.

I don't. Her article was well-researched, and presented a well-reasoned position. Whether I agree with her position or not is much less important than the fact that she actually presented facts instead of hyperbole.

She's against open carry. So what? There are a number of firearms enthusiasts - concealed carry enthusiasts - who are against open carry, for largely the same reasons she cites.

She pointed out the disingenuous stance of OC proponents who claim that they only want to go about their business, when in reality many of them - and all of the most vocal ones - are absolutely interested in "in-your-face" firearms carrying.

[Yellowfin]

Do I actually have to get into recapping the attack on any of our 2A related rights is an attack on all of them and look where it's gotten us bit or are you just playing devil's advocate?

[Thx-1138]

Do I actually have to get into recapping the attack on any of our 2A related rights is an attack on all of them and look where it's gotten us bit or are you just playing devil's advocate?

Do I actually have to get into recapping the attack on any of our 1A related rights is an attack on all of them, or are you just playing devil's advocate?

[Yellowfin]

There's no shortage of 1A rights. Even porno moguls will defend them...sort of...to extents 2A rights have no such friend, possible excepting Ted Nugent. 1A domains are constantly expanding, allowing more freedom by more territory. Internet, satellite radio, shortwave, bumper stickers, ad infinitum. Every single person is aware of 1A rights and almost certainly has considerable less tolerance for any encroachment on them. We're a lot more confined in the sphere of exercise of 2A--we cannot tolerate loss anywhere, and must expand at every possible opportunity everywhere.

[deadday]

I don't. Her article was well-researched, and presented a well-reasoned position. Whether I agree with her position or not is much less important than the fact that she actually presented facts instead of hyperbole.

She's against open carry. So what? There are a number of firearms enthusiasts - concealed carry enthusiasts - who are against open carry, for largely the same reasons she cites.

She pointed out the disingenuous stance of OC proponents who claim that they only want to go about their business, when in reality many of them - and all of the most vocal ones - are absolutely interested in "in-your-face" firearms carrying.


Well researched? Well reasoned? Are you serious?





drew

[Zombie Steve]

Zombie Steve, I liked the other avatar better. :wavey:

...considering changing it back, but hey... this one is the Tor Johnson in "Plan 9 from Outer Space"!!!!





I also hope this bursts the writer's bubble.

[VTFatBastard]

My vote made it -1000.

Was this article worthwhile?
-1000
1160 VOTES

[lance22]

I had sent her a polite email asking her a few questions. She readily admits bias so the 'well researched / putting the facts out there" comment is way off base.

I wrote:

> Ten of them stormed the West Valley City Council meeting last week

Is arriving early in business casual attire and sharing pleasantries with others before and after "storming"? Could it be possible that this displays bias?

She replied:

I chose "stormed" specifically, for the military and mob references it entails. Do you really believe intimidation wasn't part of the motivation for "peacefully assembling" at the WVC Council? If not intimidation, then, "We're here, we're armed, get used to it?"

Therein she readily admits choosing her words in such a way as to evoke fearful imagery.

I wrote:

BTW, the source that you quote is bought and paid for by a special interest lobby. The Gun Violence Prevention Center of Utah is on the payroll of the Joyce Foundation so it's hardly an unbiased reference. If I quoted an organization bought and paid for by the NRA would you not accuse me of being parroting shill?

She replied:

Steve Gunn is an activist on the opposite side. So is the Legal Community Against Violence. I recognize that.

My point was, "studies" bought and paid for by a special interest, or talking-heads on the payroll of a special interest do not constitute an objective source. She basically says "I know".

So - It's very "high road" of you to give her the benefit of a doubt but only where merited. She did everything in her power to write a biased, one-sided piece and we should take it as exactly that. I asked her specifically about why she chose certain words and certain interviewees and she was candid as to her reasons. Like I said I we agree to disagree and we leave it at that. All discussion was both civil and polite.

[bcvojak]

--2087 91.3%

of 2287 VOTES

Wonder how the author feels when she checks her on-line feedback :supergrin: