I don’t think “freak out” is the right term to describe the reaction to the video. Pointing out how what they were doing would be illegal (if they were real guns) is to draw attention to how oppressed gun rights are in New York City. Ironic, don’t you think, that Statists United to Prevent Gun Ownership felt they couldn’t accurately portrait what it would be like to sell and buy guns in NYC because maybe then it wouldn’t look easy, and certainly would look less dangerous- what with all those locks in place and permitting just to get to hold it. They can’t be showing cable locked guns when pushing the fear that your child will shoot their baby sister if you buy a gun, can they?
But if we really wanted to see a “freak out”, I bet Rachel Maddow’s reaction to a Christian Conservative organization setting up a fake Planned Parenthood where they shame women into adoption instead of abortion, would be a “freak out”.
I see. So they pretty much staged it from beginning to end to include who even gets to walk in, then edit it to convey the message they wish, and THEN detail the control measures they used after someone asks questions about the potential laws being broken and defines it as freaking out. Lets not forget that not so very long ago, that a PSA was put out showing a kid taking a gun to school. And it turned out that the person making the video played a little fast and loose by not even informing the school as to the content.
It even appears that now that depending on who you listen to, there might even been some laws broken on that video. Its hard to say on this one since there seems to be a lot of backpedaling and changing of stories when people ask questions. Sort of like what happens when a criminal cant remember a story that he's trying to sell to the police, so it tends to change every time its told. So, however Ms. Maddow wants to classify it, asking the questions is a good thing. Its works in both directions and keeps people honest.
Id buy any gun I wanted and was available for legal transfer regardless of what its previous owner did with it...just as I would buy a home where people had died if it was the home I wanted...guns do not carry the evil that a previous owner did with it over to the next owner..I own some military surplus rifles from different country's and wars and I am sure between them they were used to kill many people and I have never lost a night sleep about that and never will because it is an inanimate object.
I agree with you about the guns not carrying a curse. But I think the point of this staged, and fairly silly in my opinion, video, was to highlight the fact that guns do more harm than good. A point that, as you well know, I agree with.
They tried to criminalize free speech? What law did they propose that would have made this illegal? Or did they merely ask whether existing laws were complied with? Might you have used the wrong words in your accusation there, Jade?
I don’t think “freak out” is the right term to describe the reaction to the video. Pointing out how what they were doing would be illegal (if they were real guns) is to draw attention to how oppressed gun rights are in New York City. Ironic, don’t you think, that Statists United to Prevent Gun Ownership felt they couldn’t accurately portrait what it would be like to sell and buy guns in NYC because maybe then it wouldn’t look easy, and certainly would look less dangerous- what with all those locks in place and permitting just to get to hold it. They can’t be showing cable locked guns when pushing the fear that your child will shoot their baby sister if you buy a gun, can they?
ReplyDeleteBut if we really wanted to see a “freak out”, I bet Rachel Maddow’s reaction to a Christian Conservative organization setting up a fake Planned Parenthood where they shame women into adoption instead of abortion, would be a “freak out”.
I see. So they pretty much staged it from beginning to end to include who even gets to walk in, then edit it to convey the message they wish, and THEN detail the control measures they used after someone asks questions about the potential laws being broken and defines it as freaking out.
ReplyDeleteLets not forget that not so very long ago, that a PSA was put out showing a kid taking a gun to school. And it turned out that the person making the video played a little fast and loose by not even informing the school as to the content.
http://mikeb302000.blogspot.com/2014/12/gun-violence-ad-by-rejina-sincic.html
It even appears that now that depending on who you listen to, there might even been some laws broken on that video. Its hard to say on this one since there seems to be a lot of backpedaling and changing of stories when people ask questions. Sort of like what happens when a criminal cant remember a story that he's trying to sell to the police, so it tends to change every time its told.
So, however Ms. Maddow wants to classify it, asking the questions is a good thing. Its works in both directions and keeps people honest.
Id buy any gun I wanted and was available for legal transfer regardless of what its previous owner did with it...just as I would buy a home where people had died if it was the home I wanted...guns do not carry the evil that a previous owner did with it over to the next owner..I own some military surplus rifles from different country's and wars and I am sure between them they were used to kill many people and I have never lost a night sleep about that and never will because it is an inanimate object.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you about the guns not carrying a curse. But I think the point of this staged, and fairly silly in my opinion, video, was to highlight the fact that guns do more harm than good. A point that, as you well know, I agree with.
DeleteMikeB: "But I think the point of this staged, and fairly silly in my opinion, video, was to highlight the fact that guns do more harm than good."
DeleteNo, they only highlighted the bad. They didn't say anything about a good side for comparison.
If they were actually honest about the history behind these prop guns, they would probably command a premium.
Delete"This gun was used in 'Die Hard', 'Matrix, AND 'Matrix Reloaded'."
I think the point was to shame and attempt to scare people Mike
Delete"To shame and to scare?" Or, to educate and inform?
DeleteWell, there is nothing in their experiment that educates people on safe storage practices. This is preaching abstinence.
DeleteYes, the NRA did freak out.
ReplyDeleteAfter all, they had their NY affiliate try to criminalize what is merely an act of free speech.
They tried to criminalize free speech? What law did they propose that would have made this illegal? Or did they merely ask whether existing laws were complied with? Might you have used the wrong words in your accusation there, Jade?
DeleteActually if the producers of this skit broke the law they are criminals, and not the hidden ones that MikeB likes to spoutoff about.
ReplyDeleteBut unlike the NY legislature, they have no power to "criminalize" their actions, all the NRA can do is report the producers criminal acts.
Isn't that a good thing, reporting gun crimes to the state?
Broke the law? This ain't Cuba. Nice to hear from you.
DeleteDo you still carry your weapon to church?
Here is sort of a similar clip done by an ABC show, though it seems to turn out a bit differently,
ReplyDeletehttp://www.outdoorhub.com/news/2015/07/20/hidden-camera-experiment-asks-young-young-gun/