- Messages
- 3,954
- Reactions
- 5,308
Here is a video clip from the ABC's World News Tonight with David Muir. In his preview of this news report about the recent bank shooting in Cincinnati , Muir tells his viewers that the "ARSENAL" used in this shooting has now been revealed. At that point, I thought to myself: WOW! This guy must have really been heavily armed!
Well, guess what ABC News now considers to be an "ARSENAL"? When you then listen to the report, it turns out that the guy was armed with a single 9mm handgun, and had four 50 round boxes of ammo for it. A total of 200 rounds.
So guys, if you own a single handgun, do you now own an Arsenal, in the view of the media? Or was it the fact that he had 200 rounds of ammo? Are the anti's now deeming that to constitute possessing an "Arsenal"?? And if so, what do they consider to be a normal amount of ammunition, for a person to have?
Is anyone here guilty of owning an "Arsenal" of 200 rounds of ammunition?
I wonder if ammunition control is on the minds of the anti's these days? What do you think?
The hyperbole that is being used in the media these days regardings guns just will not cease. It was also interesting to note that this gunman only shot 3 people dead. Yet, instead of saying that, Muir said in his preamble that there were "several" dead. Why would he exaggerate like that, in this report? It looks like the media is deliberately trying to blow the incident up, and make it appear to be bigger than it really was.
Whatever happened to accuracy in journalism? Is truth being thrown out the window?
Well, guess what ABC News now considers to be an "ARSENAL"? When you then listen to the report, it turns out that the guy was armed with a single 9mm handgun, and had four 50 round boxes of ammo for it. A total of 200 rounds.
So guys, if you own a single handgun, do you now own an Arsenal, in the view of the media? Or was it the fact that he had 200 rounds of ammo? Are the anti's now deeming that to constitute possessing an "Arsenal"?? And if so, what do they consider to be a normal amount of ammunition, for a person to have?
Is anyone here guilty of owning an "Arsenal" of 200 rounds of ammunition?
I wonder if ammunition control is on the minds of the anti's these days? What do you think?
The hyperbole that is being used in the media these days regardings guns just will not cease. It was also interesting to note that this gunman only shot 3 people dead. Yet, instead of saying that, Muir said in his preamble that there were "several" dead. Why would he exaggerate like that, in this report? It looks like the media is deliberately trying to blow the incident up, and make it appear to be bigger than it really was.
Whatever happened to accuracy in journalism? Is truth being thrown out the window?
Last edited by a moderator: