When reporting on negligent discharges of a gun, why do they often leave out the part where the shooter pulled the trigger? I don't find the media biased against gun owners in this regard. It seems like they're trying to spin it in order to make the them less responsible.He said he was playing "shoot me" or "I bet you won't" with Cabrera and placed his right hand around the butt of the gun. He then pointed the gun at Cabrera's head and cocked the hammer with his left hand, according to his statements to deputies. He said the gun was about six inches from Cabrera's head when the hammer suddenly released and caused the gun to discharge.
What do you think? Please leave a comment.
It's because the reporters and editors don't want to be sued. This is a case of plain stupidity, and there's no law that will stop that.
ReplyDeleteTrue, but proper gun control laws will prevent some of the really stupid people from getting guns so easily.
Delete"It's because the reporters and editors don't want to be sued. This is a case of plain stupidity, and there's no law that will stop that."
ReplyDeleteYou've got a citation to support that idiotic assertion?
Have you considered a job in politics? You can spin silk outta shit like the best of 'em. Maybe you can hook up with the NRA, they always have room for another lying sack-o-crap like you.
My support is logic. Or do you think that it's an intelligent idea to point a gun at the head of someone that you don't intend to shoot? Perhaps you think that cocking the hammer of said gun is a wise action.
DeleteOr are you challenging my statement that newspapers don't want to be sued? They have to be careful not to report something that they have no evidence for. Now logic and mechanics would inform us that a gun in good working order cannot shoot itself, but logic is iffy in the courts.
But if you're suggesting that I play in politics, can I rely on you for a vote? The problem is that I don't enjoy lying and sucking up to people.