PDA

View Full Version : ABC's 20/20: "If I only had a gun."


Sobriquet
04-04-2009, 1:50 AM
Next Friday on April 10th on ABC's 20/20 will feature a huge segment titled "If I only had a gun." The premise with all the gun violence across the country with homicidal maniacs going on a rampage with no one to reciprocate and neutralize the threat.

Many have stated, "If I only had a gun," the same line that many uttered in the Mumbai, India attacks. Should be a very good segment as it will discuss how concealed carry laws could've changed the tables. It will be hosted by both Diane Sawyer and John Stossel (who has done a lot of segments stating gun laws don't protect people since 1997). Set your DVR's. If you don't have it, ABC's 20/20 website will let you watch the whole thing online the day after it airs.

http://abcnews.go.com/2020

Try to get everyone you know who is anti-gun or anti-CCW to watch.

rkoace
04-04-2009, 2:17 AM
i'll be watching 20/20 next friday!! thanks for the post.

grahlaika
04-04-2009, 9:20 AM
I think the problem with this show will be that they'll take inexperienced non-shooters, give them handguns, and film them trying to react (poorly) to a shooting situation. That means they'll end up 'proving' that citizens having guns couldn't help in the situation anyway, and may end up shooting the wrong people by mistake. I'll watch the show, but I'm weary at the conclusions they'll draw wrongly.

Vtec44
04-04-2009, 9:33 AM
I think the problem with this show will be that they'll take inexperienced non-shooters, give them handguns, and film them trying to react (poorly) to a shooting situation. That means they'll end up 'proving' that citizens having guns couldn't help in the situation anyway, and may end up shooting the wrong people by mistake. I'll watch the show, but I'm weary at the conclusions they'll draw wrongly.

Have you watched John Stossel 's Myths, Lies, and Down Right Stupidity?

grahlaika
04-04-2009, 9:35 AM
Have you watched John Stossel 's Myths, Lies, and Down Right Stupidity?

I have. I like Stossel - I think he's a Libertarian of sorts. It didn't seem like he was going to be the one reporting the story, and I don't trust the others. We'll see. I hope I'm wrong.

Greg-Dawg
04-04-2009, 9:36 AM
Thanks for the reminder.

socal2310
04-04-2009, 9:59 AM
I have. I like Stossel - I think he's a Libertarian of sorts. It didn't seem like he was going to be the one reporting the story, and I don't trust the others. We'll see. I hope I'm wrong.

What part of "...will be hosted by both Diane Sawyer and John Stossel," was unclear?

grahlaika
04-04-2009, 10:41 AM
What part of "...will be hosted by both Diane Sawyer and John Stossel," was unclear?

...the part where I don't trust the media to NOT spin this issue into something that will lead to more gun ban laws... I don't know Diane Sawyer's views on this, and at least from the previews I saw they're showing some numbnuts rushing to pull his pistol out of his belt while standing up with the gunman already in the room, but getting all tangled up in his T-shirt. To me that's not a good sign of what the show will set out to prove.

Let me say it again - I hope I'm wrong, and I hope my mis-trust proves to be simply paranoid.

Vtec44
04-04-2009, 10:44 AM
John Stossel's Gun Control Myths was pretty good and mainly common sense.

KylaGWolf
04-04-2009, 3:14 PM
I will have to watch the show and then make my judgment if the show will be right or wrong. Although when it comes to the media I am leary of them being supportive to anyone having a gun.

Palindari
04-04-2009, 3:20 PM
Got it Tivo'd now - thanks for the heads up :thumbsup:

soopafly
04-04-2009, 3:27 PM
I will have to watch the show and then make my judgment if the show will be right or wrong. Although when it comes to the media I am leary of them being supportive to anyone having a gun.
If John Stossel is involved, expect it to be pro-2A:thumbsup:

CA_Libertarian
04-05-2009, 2:49 PM
The link in the OP doesn't lead to anything about the upcoming episode. Maybe Using the 20/20 website's search function netted nothing about this topic.

If anybody has a good link, I'd like to read a bit more about it.

In any case, I'll set the DVR to record the 4/10 episode. Looking forward to this... it seems we may be seeing the beginning of the turning of the tide in the media... emphasis on "may be"...

Alan Block
04-05-2009, 3:58 PM
I could while away the hours,
P-linkin at the flowers,
In snowstorms rain or sun

Though I think I'd be in heaven
With an AK47
If I only had a gun

Shotgun Man
04-05-2009, 4:27 PM
I could while away the hours,
P-linkin at the flowers,
In snowstorms rain or sun

Though I think I'd be in heaven
With an AK47
If I only had a gun

Hilarious. You should finish it.

dfletcher
04-05-2009, 6:25 PM
I could while away the hours,
P-linkin at the flowers,
In snowstorms rain or sun

Though I think I'd be in heaven
With an AK47
If I only had a gun

I like it - Ray Bolger though. ;)

Anyway, CBS just ran a little piece about the shootings, featuring Carolyn McCarthy and Ray Kelly. Aside from the usual slant, the reporter (Randall Pinkston) said Lavelle Mixon was simply suffering from "job stress" and the 30 year ban on handguns in DC was described as a limitation. And of course in discussing law abiding gun owners the only guns seen were full auto.

Kelly said AWs are basically the same thing as regular semi auto rifles, which you could take as an admission that an AW ban wouldn't work. I take it to mean that once an AW ban is in place - which will of course change nothing and they know it - they will next come after all semi auto rifles in one way or another.

7x57
04-05-2009, 8:13 PM
Kelly said AWs are basically the same thing as regular semi auto rifles, which you could take as an admission that an AW ban wouldn't work. I take it to mean that once an AW ban is in place - which will of course change nothing and they know it - they will next come after all semi auto rifles in one way or another.

Actually, you're behind the curve. An "AW" ban will *not* ban any assault rifles--it *is* a semi-auto ban they're talking about. They don't come after semi-auto *after* the AW ban, the AW ban *is* coming after semi-autos.

They don't seem to worry about legal full-auto; the reason is, I think, that no new ones are registerable and so they think they'll be rid of them over the course of generations, and in the mean time they're valuable enough to stay with rich (and therefore more trustworthy) people. Therefore, not nearly so high a priority as going after the guns that citizens actually have and use in large numbers.

7x57

Ravenslair
04-05-2009, 11:49 PM
Recording. BTW, if you do not have the Directv app for your iPhone, get it. No need to turn on the TV to set a show to record. Do it from your iPhone.

evollep3
04-05-2009, 11:56 PM
damnit i dont have tivo or dvr ;/ please keep me updated

retired
04-05-2009, 11:58 PM
DVR'd. Thanks for the info. I don't usually watch the show like my wife does, but this one I will.

JayRuff
04-06-2009, 12:36 AM
I just set the dvr, I love you man :thumbsup:(no homo)

otteray
04-06-2009, 7:53 AM
After watching the preview this morning on ABC and seeing all the children pointing handguns at each other, then given the fact that Diane Sawyer segued into that subject right after a story about gunshow loopholes and mass murders; I think I already know which direction the show will take.

H2H
04-06-2009, 7:59 AM
I think the problem with this show will be that they'll take inexperienced non-shooters, give them handguns, and film them trying to react (poorly) to a shooting situation. That means they'll end up 'proving' that citizens having guns couldn't help in the situation anyway, and may end up shooting the wrong people by mistake. I'll watch the show, but I'm weary at the conclusions they'll draw wrongly.

a majority of gun owners are far from being proficient with their handguns or have the mindset to take out a bad guy. Their guns just sit in their drawers.

Here at calguns we are a bunch of responsible gun nuts (in a good way) that go practice often at the range or take "tactical" classes. We don't fit the "usual" gun owner profile they will portray on tv I believe.

my 0.02.

bigcalidave
04-06-2009, 1:40 PM
I think the problem with this show will be that they'll take inexperienced non-shooters, give them handguns, and film them trying to react (poorly) to a shooting situation. That means they'll end up 'proving' that citizens having guns couldn't help in the situation anyway, and may end up shooting the wrong people by mistake. I'll watch the show, but I'm weary at the conclusions they'll draw wrongly.

While I hope they don't go at it this way, it is likely. We can only hope that they acknowledge that for someone to have a concealed weapon in the situation they portray, that person would have received some form of training before carrying.

Piper
04-06-2009, 3:39 PM
After watching the preview this morning on ABC and seeing all the children pointing handguns at each other, then given the fact that Diane Sawyer segued into that subject right after a story about gunshow loopholes and mass murders; I think I already know which direction the show will take.

Or maybe this is a tantalizing teaser for the antigunners to get them to watch. The actual facts and stats will be given in the report.

shooter4ever
04-09-2009, 9:13 AM
It looks like another Gun Control Propaganda Piece:
http://www.wsoctv.com/station/19118110/detail.html
Friday's "20/20": A Special Report On Gun Violence

Posted: 2:11 pm EDT April 7, 2009Updated: 4:43 pm EDT April 7, 2009
"IF I ONLY HAD A GUN," A REPORT BY DIANE SAWYER AND DAVID MUIR, ON ABC NEWS' "20/20," FRIDAY, APRIL 10
When it comes to protecting yourself, you may think "if I only had a gun." But if you had a gun, could you protect yourself in a crisis? How easy is it to obtain a gun? And what explains the nearly irresistible attraction of young people to firearms? Diane Sawyer investigates, with reporting by David Muir, on "If I Only Had a Gun," airing on "20/20," FRIDAY, APRIL 10 at 10 p.m on Channel 9. The hour also features hidden camera experiments and expert analysis.
There are an estimated 250-300 million guns in civilian hands in this country - almost enough to arm every man, woman and child in America. In fact, Americans are believed to own a third of all the existing firearms in the world. And that number is quickly growing: Last year there were 12 million background checks of people buying guns or getting or renewing a permit. America also has the highest rate of gun violence in the industrial world. Reports include:
Why shouldn't we all have guns? Almost half of all handgun owners say self defense is their primary reason for owning a gun. But can they get to their gun in time when in a crisis situation? Can they aim accurately? And what is the chance they will hit someone innocent instead of their target? "20/20" set up a hidden camera experiment to see what would happen if everyone, including those with gun training, had a gun when an armed intruder bursts through the door. Diane Sawyer reports.
How easy is it to buy a gun? In 33 states across the country, anyone can walk into one of the hundreds of gun shows held each year and buy a gun without a background check run and no questions asked. In the two years since Omar Samaha's sister, Reema, was murdered at Virginia Tech, he has been fighting to close the gun show loophole, a step the Virginia governor and other authorities urged lawmakers to take. Has anything changed? David Muir follows Omar as he buys guns in Virginia at a gun show. How many can he procure in an hour and how many questions will he be asked?
The effect of gun violence on one neighborhood, as seen through the eyes of a child: Ten-year-old Damon Weaver is a pint-size reporter with a supersized dream: to interview President Obama about what he plans to do about the gun violence that has torn apart his town of Pahokee, Florida. In the last year, 14 people were murdered in his neighborhood. To see the devastating effects of gun violence in one community through the eyes of a child, Damon reports first-hand for "20/20," interviewing friends who've lost family members, townspeople, as well as the sheriff's office about problems and solutions. Diane Sawyer first met Weaver during the network's Presidential Inauguration coverage in January.
What is the irresistible attraction of young people to guns? It is not uncommon to hear news reports about young people playing with their parent's guns and accidentally shooting their friends, sometimes killing them. Statistics show that more 18-22 year olds die from accidental shootings than any other age group. Shouldn't college aged kids know better than to play with a gun? "20/20" puts some of these kids to the test in a provocative experiment during which they find hidden guns while cleaning out a garage. Who will tell the adult about their find, who will pack it away without a word and who will play with the gun? And does peer pressure factor into unsafe behavior? Muir reports.

Sobriquet
04-09-2009, 9:23 AM
Oh, boy... another hatchet job. What the heck happened to John Stossel?

jacques
04-09-2009, 9:26 AM
Or maybe this is a tantalizing teaser for the antigunners to get them to watch. The actual facts and stats will be given in the report.

I would hope so. But I do not trust 20-20. They are as biased and opinionated as most other news sources and taint their episodes to push their agenda.

JayRuff
04-09-2009, 3:27 PM
''Statistics show that more 18-22 year olds die from accidental shootings than any other age group'' where's the proof to back up those stats?

dreamerof1
04-09-2009, 4:21 PM
where's the proof to back up those stats?

I don't know if I doubt it. He looks to be 18-22. The real question is: Is that such a bad thing? :eek:

http://media.urbandictionary.com/image/large/wigger-15513.jpg

NiteQwill
04-09-2009, 4:25 PM
I saw the preview on TV last night while watching Lost... doesn't look good for gun owners at all.

KylaGWolf
04-09-2009, 5:09 PM
Ok that guy in the picture looks like a wannabe poser. And a dumb one at that.

Cru Jones
04-09-2009, 9:27 PM
I read the description and saw the preview for it. Looks like it will be 10% guns may save lives and 90% guns are bad.

Kid Stanislaus
04-09-2009, 10:35 PM
where's the proof to back up those stats?

If the stats are true then they more or less are their own proof. However, does it not go without saying that SOME age group is going to be the one with the highest death rate from firearms accidents? The statement is essentially meaningless.

rips31
04-10-2009, 7:55 AM
just saw a preview on gma. they had a simulation of a gunman bursting into a classroom. they had one guy with a ccw that had "hours" of airsoft training. when the gunman came in, the guy w/the ccw tried grabbing his gun through his shirt and ended up not being able to deploy his ccw. gunman shot him in the head and chest b/c it was obvious he had a gun. the ccw guy said all his airsoft didn't prepare him for this kind of situation. :rolleyes:

while not horribly biased (at least from this preview), they did say that lots of training is needed. very true, as most mall ninja types will be just like the ccw guy.

however, diane sawyer is horribly biased regarding kids and injuries due to guns. she had a bit about kids and guns and a bunch of pretty anti parents that weighed in on their kids being exposed to guns. she also tried a simulator and proclaimed that it was hard and that specialized training is needed.

Californio
04-10-2009, 8:23 AM
It's a hit piece.

If someone burst into a room, the first move would be cover and then draw from a position of cover while the gunman is focused on the next easy target. Trying to draw out in the open when a gun is already trained on you is plain stupid. Not all would be saved but more than if everyone was a sitting duck.

Lancear15
04-10-2009, 8:23 AM
+1 :thumbsup: bumpity bump

Lancear15
04-10-2009, 8:35 AM
just saw a preview on gma. they had a simulation of a gunman bursting into a classroom. they had one guy with a ccw that had "hours" of airsoft training. when the gunman came in, the guy w/the ccw tried grabbing his gun through his shirt and ended up not being able to deploy his ccw. gunman shot him in the head and chest b/c it was obvious he had a gun. the ccw guy said all his airsoft didn't prepare him for this kind of situation. :rolleyes:

while not horribly biased (at least from this preview), they did say that lots of training is needed. very true, as most mall ninja types will be just like the ccw guy.

however, diane sawyer is horribly biased regarding kids and injuries due to guns. she had a bit about kids and guns and a bunch of pretty anti parents that weighed in on their kids being exposed to guns. she also tried a simulator and proclaimed that it was hard and that specialized training is needed.

Who was the attacker, a tactically trained officer or just another student? Did they know who had the CCW? I'm definitely going to watch.

remington
04-10-2009, 11:06 AM
I cant wait to be on the forum while the show is going and after, should be a busy night!

vrylak
04-10-2009, 11:09 AM
I just might watch it for the entertainment and how the liberal, irresponsible, biased, socialist-controlled media once again emphasize and spread ignorance among the sheeple.

rips31
04-10-2009, 4:22 PM
not sure. the people in the 'class' were police or abc staffers. i think the guy who was the 'attacker' was a trained officer, as he was able to pick people off pretty well, even as they were moving. too bad they chose the airsoft mall ninja that showed he could shoot, but didn't give him any instruction about drawing a ccw. very poor showing on his part, but a big set-up from abc.

Who was the attacker, a tactically trained officer or just another student? Did they know who had the CCW? I'm definitely going to watch.

1BigPea
04-10-2009, 7:04 PM
not sure. the people in the 'class' were police or abc staffers. i think the guy who was the 'attacker' was a trained officer, as he was able to pick people off pretty well, even as they were moving. too bad they chose the airsoft mall ninja that showed he could shoot, but didn't give him any instruction about drawing a ccw. very poor showing on his part, but a big set-up from abc.


I just watched the preview segment on the nightly news, It seems to be a college class, and they do the "basic" training that is required for CCW in most States. Then someone comes in who looks like he knows what he's doing and starts shooting.

For the preview segment the kid they pick to have the gun in the classroom has experience with air pistols :confused: and he gets the gun caught in his shirt when he's drawing, plus he just stands right up. It's really bad looking...I hope the rest of the show is a better outlook on CCW than what they just showed.

marklbucla
04-10-2009, 8:05 PM
I just saw it, but I won't ruin for you guys. Surely you could check out THR or TFL if you want the spoilers.

cousinkix1953
04-10-2009, 8:25 PM
I have. I like Stossel - I think he's a Libertarian of sorts. It didn't seem like he was going to be the one reporting the story, and I don't trust the others. We'll see. I hope I'm wrong.
John Stossel is a proud Libertarian! This feature might actually be balanced if it isn't hosted by just another left wing reporter...

RomanDad
04-10-2009, 9:01 PM
I just watched the preview segment on the nightly news, It seems to be a college class, and they do the "basic" training that is required for CCW in most States. Then someone comes in who looks like he knows what he's doing and starts shooting.

I saw that as well.... And was a bit annoyed by it... GENERALLY I will reserve judgment til I watch the show (which wont be til Saturday) but that little exercise, and its APPARENT point (a CCW wont REALLY help you in a violent encounter) really struck a nerve...

What folks on the other side DONT understand and what WE ON THIS SIDE SHOULD is:

THERE IS NO PANACEA.
THERE ARE NO GUARANTEES IN LIFE.
OWNING A GUN DOES NOT GUARANTEE THAT I WILL NEVER BE THE VICTIM OF A VIOLENT CRIME.
IT DOES NOT MEAN I WILL BE ABLE TO PREVENT OR STOP AN ACTIVE SHOOTER OR OTHER VIOLENT INDIVIDUAL...

All it means is, I'VE GOT A FIGHTING CHANCE. And given the reality of the above, that's the best anybody can hope for... And its better than no chance at all.

KylaGWolf
04-10-2009, 10:13 PM
Well so far 12 minutes in to the show and all I can say is it is a hatchet job. the clip for the next part shows preschoolers holding guns and look real and basically pulling triggers over and over and pointing at each other.

oldrifle
04-10-2009, 10:15 PM
I'm watching it right now and so far I find it to be the same drivel the gun grabbers have been pushing for years. The point of the program seems to be that if you have a gun, you're in much more danger than if you didn't. BS.

lioneaglegriffin
04-10-2009, 10:16 PM
the should have gotten inexperienced shooter to do the rampage in the class room to make it fair. Cops don't go postal. (presumably)

legalbroker
04-10-2009, 10:20 PM
One of the cops puts a holster on one of the students wrong....they have the students wearing long white shirts that constrict a concealed draw......

tophatjones
04-10-2009, 10:24 PM
I just saw the first ten minutes, and I just couldn't take it anymore. This is an utter piece of propaganda crap. (This is coming from me, a very open minded person). You can tell right from the beginning that the show has an agenda. Their main purpose is to show how armed civilians cannot defend themselves.

During this segment, ABC tries to prove that even an armed civilian cannot do much good. They get 5 students of handgun experience ranging from none to "over 100 hours at the range". The police, working with ABC, give them an hour's worth of training, at which point the narrator tells us that this is more training than half the state's CCW training requirements. Then they give each student a gun and put each one (one at a time) in a classroom full of students (volunteers). The police trainer randomly barges in and begins shooting plastic bullets, and the student with the gun is supposed to react and shoot the trainer. ABC goes on to show how each student with gun fails to put the perp out with their gun. This would've been a great experiment, but of course, ABC messes up. The trainer who barges in shoots the lecturer (in the middle of the room), then always aims for the student with the gun. The police trainer knows exactly where this student is (front middle seat in the classroom), and he always shoots this student first. IN REALITY, the perp would be shooting en masse and wouldn't be able to seek out the only student in the room with a gun the first time, every time.

They then state that firearms proficiency is a skill which must be maintained diligently, which is good advice, and would be enough to state, however, they keep showing clips of SWAT and police training. ABC is saying subliminally that only police are qualified to carry guns. At this point, I had to shut of the TV. I have no problems against the police, but ABC is claiming that only the police have the right to carry and defend. There is only one thing I hate in the world, and that is propaganda to fuel a hidden agenda, disguised as truth.

Rant off. I need a beer.

battleship
04-10-2009, 10:29 PM
Its total crap, there are plenty of reasons and storys of people who have lived another day because they had a gun to protect them selfs, why are those storys not on this program. All one sided, and total bias.

remington
04-10-2009, 10:29 PM
No rant your right. They knew who had the gun, who to target. If they did not then it may have different. The kid segment just goes to demostrate that after or before we teach them how to put on condoms in sex ed, teach gun safety. Should be taught in every grade from K1 up, annually.

oldrifle
04-10-2009, 10:31 PM
Well not only that but this is just ONE scenario. So perhaps the kid with the gun didn't have much of a chance in this one particular scenario. It was very close quarters and he had a lot of obstacles in the way and very little room and time to overcome them. Plus, as you said the cop went for him immediately. Does that mean that EVERY scenario in which you would defend yourself with a concealed firearm would be this way? NO. In fact, in most situations in your daily life you would have much more room, more time and more opportunities to attack the assailant (such as in a shopping mall, grocery store, public park, etc.). The classroom scenario was a friggin AMBUSH and was not typical at all.

This show so far is propaganda and utter tripe. I shudder to think how many weak minds will be swayed by this crap.

I just saw the first ten minutes, and I just couldn't take it anymore. This is an utter piece of propaganda crap. (This is coming from me, a very open minded person). You can tell right from the beginning that the show has an agenda. Their main purpose is to show how armed civilians cannot defend themselves.

During this segment, ABC tries to prove that even an armed civilian cannot do much good. They get 5 students of handgun experience ranging from none to "over 100 hours at the range". The police, working with ABC, give them an hour's worth of training, at which point the narrator tells us that this is more training than half the state's CCW training requirements. Then they give each student a gun and put each one (one at a time) in a classroom full of students (volunteers). The police trainer randomly barges in and begins shooting plastic bullets, and the student with the gun is supposed to react and shoot the trainer. ABC goes on to show how each student with gun fails to put the perp out with their gun. This would've been a great experiment, but of course, ABC messes up. The trainer who barges in shoots the lecturer (in the middle of the room), then always aims for the student with the gun. The police trainer knows exactly where this student is (front middle seat in the classroom), and he always shoots this student first. IN REALITY, the perp would be shooting en masse and wouldn't be able to seek out the only student in the room with a gun the first time, every time.

They then state that firearms proficiency is a skill which must be maintained diligently, which is good advice, and would be enough to state, however, they keep showing clips of SWAT and police training. ABC is saying subliminally that only police are qualified to carry guns. At this point, I had to shut of the TV. I have no problems against the police, but ABC is claiming that only the police have the right to carry and defend. There is only one thing I hate in the world, and that is propaganda to fuel a hidden agenda, disguised as truth.

Rant off. I need a beer.

kermit315
04-10-2009, 10:31 PM
yeah, its a crap hit piece.

now I am hearing kids say "lock up all the guns, its your fault I killed someone with a gun". paraphrased.

Canute
04-10-2009, 10:31 PM
Yup, extremely negative. I didn't see Stossel anywhere.

illuminate10
04-10-2009, 10:33 PM
Watching this right now and the title it seems is supposed to make people say "yea right, i don't want a gun". ( especially after this nice little piece of "programming" )

Citizen Snips
04-10-2009, 10:33 PM
Bias was so thick it seemed like propaganda. I couldn't take more than the first ten minutes. Stossel should've been laying the smackdown but this is something the Brady bunch would throw together with a bit of Feinslime slipped in for good measure.

The Nomadd
04-10-2009, 10:34 PM
Oh dear gods, I've lost any respect for 20/20. Hatchet job doesn't EVEN begin to cover it.

The Nomadd
04-10-2009, 10:37 PM
Oh nice.. After the commercial- "How many guns can this young man buy..." I think I just threw up in my mouth.

remington
04-10-2009, 10:37 PM
The picture of the kid with obama in the background was enough for me. I wont give them the ratings anymore. Later

M.A.B
04-10-2009, 10:39 PM
PURE ANTI GUN PROPAGANDA!! had to change the channel after 6 min. ABC is feeding on the current events, headlines and fear of the masses.

i need a shot!!

racer_X_123
04-10-2009, 10:40 PM
yeah this is really a sad showing of an unbiased journalism

CenterX
04-10-2009, 10:40 PM
The agenda is picking up speed - one world order, and it aint ours.

glockwise2000
04-10-2009, 10:47 PM
TOTALLY ANTI-GUN PROPAGANDA. S**T

CaptMike
04-10-2009, 10:48 PM
This is such garbage.

H2H
04-10-2009, 10:50 PM
an "M16 like"...duh ! there is a big difference between ar16 and m16...jeez...but hey m16 sounds better for anti gun propaganda..

oldrifle
04-10-2009, 10:50 PM
This show is freaking bullsh*t. I hope something is done to present the other side of the argument. I doubt it though. :mad:

762cavalier
04-10-2009, 10:51 PM
I couldn't take it anymore I had to turn it off before I kicked my TV:mad:

remington
04-10-2009, 10:53 PM
Post your comments. Thre are some real good ones for the 2A

http://abcnews.go.com/2020/comments?type=story&id=7298996

ojisan
04-10-2009, 10:55 PM
:puke:

Unbelievably twisted "after-action analysis".

lioneaglegriffin
04-10-2009, 10:57 PM
booo i want my money back!

Bruce3
04-10-2009, 10:58 PM
i want to puke..

lioneaglegriffin
04-10-2009, 10:58 PM
Oh dear gods, I've lost any respect for 20/20. Hatchet job doesn't EVEN begin to cover it.

perhaps Texas Chainsaw Job?

Sig357
04-10-2009, 11:00 PM
What garbage!

ghostrider4evr
04-10-2009, 11:01 PM
Yep, pure BS.

kermit315
04-10-2009, 11:02 PM
have to register to leave a comment. I would rather not. They will just delete the reasonable arguments anyway, and chant on to "close the gun show loophole".

jacques
04-10-2009, 11:02 PM
Typical 20-20 programing. Always biased for some agenda of theirs. I can't stand to watch that show.

So she says there are no "studies" that show people have defended themselves with guns succesfully.

sholling
04-10-2009, 11:02 PM
I'm totally shocked. For years 20/20 has been the one news show to treat us fairly and now they do this hatchet job.

The name that needs to lead the boycott list is the moron "instructor" that they got to show the futility of self defense.

drjake
04-10-2009, 11:03 PM
I'm so pissed, I'm sick to my stomach. That was a pathetic attempt at trying to show what would happen. The guy knew who was going to be one with the gun, and zoned right in on them every time. What was that bull**** at the end, talking about no such study about guns used in self-defense?

illuminate10
04-10-2009, 11:04 PM
"Remember folks, you shouldn't try to defend yourself ever with a firearm because you simply can't. Your're just going to hurt yourself or innocent bystanders so try and run away somehow. Good night........"
Wow, that's all I heard watching 20/20 tonight.:icon_bs:

ldivinag
04-10-2009, 11:04 PM
Looks like it will be 10% guns may save lives and 90% guns are bad.

nope... ratio was 0% to 100%...

diane sawyer is an ignorant *#&@^

nrakid88
04-10-2009, 11:04 PM
That was just what I would expect from the anti's, distortion through small case examples that dont convey with statistical averages, and lots of appeals to emotions. SAVE OUR BABIES! Looks like ABC is losing a viewer, just like National Geographic did. Maybe someday they will both ask them selves "IF I ONLY HAD MORE VIEWERS" I wouldnt be going out of business for being communist slime.

KylaGWolf
04-10-2009, 11:05 PM
Many years ago 20/20 was good at reporting fair and ballanced reporting. Now though all I can say is I have lost what little respect I had for the show. I doubt I will ever tune in to it again after tonights misinformation and bs. Although I will say the part with the preschoolers made me cringe badly.

Dane916
04-10-2009, 11:06 PM
This was the worse bias show ive ever seen. Im about to have a heart attack from my blood pressure rising. I bet most of those people are paid actors. They only point out all the bad things about owning a gun. And then bring the show to a neigheborhood full thugs that have no clue of owning a legally purchase gun.

cassius
04-10-2009, 11:07 PM
Just mor eproof of why public trust in the media is so terribly low. This sort of grossly biased propaganda posing as "journalism" does no one any good. Well except the liberals that is.

mrhappy
04-10-2009, 11:10 PM
What really ticked me off is tying into Obama with all that drivel, the kids, the inaguaration, blah,blah,blah--the media is so in the tank to promote not only the man but the agenda.

soopafly
04-10-2009, 11:10 PM
I feel much safer now, knowing that the secret to surviving any gun attack is to "play dead" and "have a cel phone":puke: Yeah, that's why we send police out with "play dead" and "have a cel phone" as their primary tools for self defense.:rolleyes:

truthseeker
04-10-2009, 11:12 PM
Post your comments. Thre are some real good ones for the 2A

http://abcnews.go.com/2020/comments?type=story&id=7298996

I just posted there under the name Ultraliberal1.

The media is ridiculous now, full of nothing but liberals!

kermit315
04-10-2009, 11:12 PM
Typical 20-20 programing. Always biased for some agenda of theirs. I can't stand to watch that show.

So she says there are no "studies" that show people have defended themselves with guns succesfully.

well, they left out a key part: the part where none of those studies helped their side of the argument.

that is why they said the contradicted each other.

At least NRA wasnt dumb enough to actually talk to these losers when they came knocking about the gun show "loophole".

oldrifle
04-10-2009, 11:13 PM
This show makes me just want to buy more guns and conceal carry illegally. Thanks 20/20, you dumb bastards.

From Wikipedia:

A 1997 Department of Justice survey of 3,959 prison inmates found that only 2% stated that they had bought a gun used in a crime from a gun show. The remaining 98% were obtained from other sources, in which the criminal had no direct connection with a gun show. The most common sources (35%) were family or friends.

lioneaglegriffin
04-10-2009, 11:14 PM
I just posted there under the name Ultraliberal1.

The media is ridiculous now, full of nothing but liberals!

nice name chioce you think your chances are better of not getting deleted with that name? :D

remington
04-10-2009, 11:14 PM
Yup, Im going to the sale section, I wanna .40.

sreiter
04-10-2009, 11:17 PM
In addition to all other comments about the "set up" of the lambs led to slaughter. All the students had strap retention holsters, THE most difficult holster to draw from, Cops have a very hard time drawing from those holsters, and the are OPENLY CARRIED.I dont know of ANY concealed carry that uses that type holster.

The deck wasnt stacked enough in their favor, so they had the students wear a t-shirt over their weapon. This is NOT the preferred method of CCW. One wears a open (unbuttoned) shirt over a t-shirt. the open shirt is "over" shirt conceals the weapon and allows for easy access to the weapon.

kermit315
04-10-2009, 11:18 PM
I knew it was going to be a set up from the beginning, but it was even worse than I thought. Not even one opposing view point, not one.

on the other hand, I didnt see anybody from the brady bunch or vpc either, but I did duck in and out for a little bit.

KylaGWolf
04-10-2009, 11:20 PM
I went to the 20/20 website left a nice rant and well wouldnt let me leave the comment said there was a problem....GEE more like they are afraid of criticism I bet.

ldivinag
04-10-2009, 11:20 PM
on the other hand, I didnt see anybody from the brady bunch or vpc either, but I did duck in and out for a little bit.

someone from the brady bunch was in the first 15 minutes or so...

they said they contacted the NRA but they refused...

riiiiiight....

racer_X_123
04-10-2009, 11:22 PM
me too... i now am going to go to the local gun store and buy a new handgun and a .22 with my tax return. i was on the fence about paying off some debt with it, but after this, it sealed the deal for more guns!!! none of them howevr will EVER be used in a crime aslong as i am owning them!

lioneaglegriffin
04-10-2009, 11:23 PM
lots of negative comments i haven't seen one that praises the show

oldrifle
04-10-2009, 11:25 PM
lots of negative comments i haven't seen one that praises the show

I guess when we want to be heard, we know how to make ourselves heard. Maybe we should take that approach offline too.

kermit315
04-10-2009, 11:29 PM
check back tomorrow.....I bet over half the comments are gone, or replaced.

jimh
04-10-2009, 11:31 PM
I will never watch another abc show, complete crap. Anyone catch the instructors names? I would love to have his email address to send him a nice note. The classroom was completely set up. How hard is it to walk in with the gun drawn and shoot the guy that you know has the gun...

Idiots...

JTecalo
04-10-2009, 11:32 PM
You cannot reason with these people.

It's the definition of insanity to keep thinking you can.

The only way to stop them is to remove them from office.

lioneaglegriffin
04-10-2009, 11:35 PM
hey i found one

Kudos to 20/20. This was an enlightening and empowering piece. Thank you!
Posted by:
mbergman329

lioneaglegriffin
04-10-2009, 11:35 PM
I will never watch another abc show, complete crap. Anyone catch the instructors names? I would love to have his email address to send him a nice note. The classroom was completely set up. How hard is it to walk in with the gun drawn and shoot the guy that you know has the gun...

Idiots...

yea im not giving up my Grey's Anatomy sorry. :p

gravedigger
04-10-2009, 11:36 PM
That disgusting anti-gun propaganda crap is exactly what I thought Diane Sawyer and ABC would produce. SHAME ON ABC for producing a shamelessly obvious FACT-FREE agenda driven worthless piece of you know what.

eric90503
04-10-2009, 11:41 PM
This is just a perfect example of power of media, as with the Israeli/Palestinian media coverage. But not to throw this off topic.

Going head to head with pro-gunners is a tough battle. But with the power of media and propaganda, it is the smartest and best way they can win. I applaud them for their choice of tactics. But really hated the show for it is outright one-sided point of view. If the NRA needs a cameraman, PM me, I'll work Pro-Bono..

gravedigger
04-10-2009, 11:43 PM
Frankly, I am disappointed in ABC. They forgot to show the segment where the child finds the box of bullets and puts them into the microwave to see what happens, and the scene where grandma puts a pie into the oven where Bubba Beerguzzler stores his gunpowder. What about the scene where the child is sitting at his desk studying intensely when a bullet comes crashing through his bedroom wall from the neighboring apartment because a loaded rifle fell over when the housekeeper tried to pull a mop out of the broom closet? ABC missed out on all sorts of "facts" they could have included, but then I guess they couldn't pack it all into a one-hour LIE FEST.

peepshowal
04-10-2009, 11:49 PM
That show was just what I expected from ABC. Pure stool.
Another hour I won't get back.

M. D. Van Norman
04-10-2009, 11:50 PM
Bias was so thick it seemed like propaganda.Ö

It didnít seem like propaganda. It was propaganda. Diane Sawyer and ABC should be ashamed of themselves.

Casey
04-10-2009, 11:52 PM
Hey ABC is owned by Disney and make-believe is just part of the deal. I can't believe any of you thought this would be anything other than it was. The biggest problem with this BS reporting is that it only contributes to the guns, ammo and component shortage.:mad:

gcvt
04-10-2009, 11:53 PM
I'm convinced. They convinced me that I don't need anything more than a cell phone and a desk to crawl under to protect my life. I'm selling all my guns right away! :willy_nilly: I will no longer be a danger to myself or others. Thank God for 20/20!

CnCFunFactory
04-10-2009, 11:54 PM
If the counter-culture was rebelling against the ultra repressive, spoon-feed- me fears about father knows best and fears to beware your commie neighbor, then call Diane Sawyer June Cleaver.

For the last hour, my husband and I have sat with an almost aghast expression, stemming from the manufactured sensationalist attack on the senses of aware American public in the recent report, "If I Only Had a Gun." I'll admit that as second amendment patriots, our household cringes a bit when a "special" is on to air on an anything but fair and balanced network. The coaxed answers and slight-of-hand reporting used by those who believe their audience to have gaping mouths, hungry for their poured knowledge are admittedly a turn off for us. However, as one who defends the constitution, so must the other side be heard in a free society. What surprises is that after the feelings of disbelief over exaggeration subside and frustrated tension from the improbable and doctored "experiments" calm, another thought is in the forefront. The realization to the fact that for those who would have you believe they belong to the group of the progressive and free thinking are actually treating the educated and enlightened as sheltered children...I guess it's now 20/20 that knows best.

What has always infuriated me about liberal arguments in general is that they mask their opposition or lack of experience on a subject with humour and deflection to peripheral and - often - manufactured issues. Take the little boy who allegedly petitioned newly elected President Obama while being interviewed by Sawyer on 20/20. The child whispered his cry for help to the new president. A ten year old reporter from a gang-ridden town in Florida, the child was finally able to say allowed his petition: please help our town. Nevermind the rabid gang violence that is the source and symptom of the issues propelling this child through his early journalism career. No, simply, the manufactured emphasis is on the evil firearm... never mind that many shown in the hands of these alleged gang members are already illegal. The child's voice will fall on deaf ears once the agenda of a renewed assault weapons ban is in place, never mind the still raging gang problem.

Liberals and those too weak to pick a side that isn't "safe" in a pop culture centered around "me" are not the strong spitfires that was the cause of revolution initially. To think that there are people who would watch this story, digest it as fact and actually tout that they've done their research when casting an anti American vote against the second amendment make me mourn for a culture and age I was about 12 years to late to know. Regardless of the morphing that the counter-culture movement intended, the liberal legacy left is one of those informed by talking heads - they wouldn't know free speech if it rose up and bit them. Since the brand of blame the right still works, the trust of the left bestowed upon the Sawyers of the world results in nothing but a lazily and falsely informed mass, fueled and controlled by whichever power that hold the broadcast.

CnCFunFactory
04-10-2009, 11:56 PM
The wife was so fired up she kicked me outta my seat see above rant. Itold her she needs her own account there is safety in numbers :thumbsup:

DocSkinner
04-10-2009, 11:56 PM
a majority of gun owners are far from being proficient with their handguns or have the mindset to take out a bad guy. Their guns just sit in their drawers.

Here at calguns we are a bunch of responsible gun nuts (in a good way) that go practice often at the range or take "tactical" classes. We don't fit the "usual" gun owner profile they will portray on tv I believe.

my 0.02.

agree - mostly because the antis have made ranges inaccessible, or hundreds of miles away, and stigmatized anyone using a gun for self defense as a vigilante that should be shunned. That slow wearing away of gun owners, and allowing then to get prficient - liek my other posts about all the good hunting being om private land, and having to pay for it.
makes a nice easy segue to just having registered firearms there to borrow as no one hunts public land anyway.

Vanguard
04-10-2009, 11:58 PM
Boycott ABC and Disney. This was a pathetic hatchet job. Pure insanity.

This show transcended stupid.

None of you should be giving ABC or Disney your business after watching this load of crap.

Get ready for it guys, these bastards are ramping up the attack on the 2nd amendment and the Constitution in general.

DocSkinner
04-11-2009, 12:01 AM
not sure. the people in the 'class' were police or abc staffers. i think the guy who was the 'attacker' was a trained officer, as he was able to pick people off pretty well, even as they were moving. too bad they chose the airsoft mall ninja that showed he could shoot, but didn't give him any instruction about drawing a ccw. very poor showing on his part, but a big set-up from abc.

cuz all these gangstahs and 2 bit wanna be punks are highly trained assasins, right?
what I expected...

CnCFunFactory
04-11-2009, 12:02 AM
The next piece ABC does should be called "If I only had a brain"

DocSkinner
04-11-2009, 12:03 AM
PURE ANTI GUN PROPAGANDA!! had to change the channel after 6 min. ABC is feeding on the current events, headlines and fear of the masses.

i need a shot!!

ABC?

all media... no news - just hype! Hype sells, facts bight...

bohoki
04-11-2009, 12:03 AM
all can say for the "classroom test" is that at least the person had a chance all the runners were shot too right?

of course it appeared that the testee was targeted from the start so it was just a trap

i would like to challenge the instructers to the same test with an inside man sitting right behind them

peekay331
04-11-2009, 12:05 AM
they should have given guns to 5-10 of those kids in that classroom. then see what happens when the "intruder" breaks in.

They also fail to point out that with a gun, the victim at least had a chance, albeit small. The alternative is to die with cell phone in hand.

alternatively, I'd like to what would happen if they bothered to do a controlled test, e.g. have their so called "expert" be the unwitting target. Anyone who bursts in with a gun will have an advantage on the victim. Doesn't matter who the victim is or how much training he/she has.

DocSkinner
04-11-2009, 12:06 AM
I guess when we want to be heard, we know how to make ourselves heard. Maybe we should take that approach offline too.




+1000. why have all of you waited so long? Belief that humans will be smart and think logically? Buy many bridges?


people think what they get told enough.

DocSkinner
04-11-2009, 12:09 AM
I'm convinced. They convinced me that I don't need anything more than a cell phone and a desk to crawl under to protect my life. I'm selling all my guns right away! :willy_nilly: I will no longer be a danger to myself or others. Thank God for 20/20!

Unless you live in San Jo and have your entire city's phone line disabled...

lioneaglegriffin
04-11-2009, 12:10 AM
oh yea heres a link where you can send them the facts that they could not find. :rolleyes:

Contribute | If you would like to tell us more facts about this story, please click here to send the editors of ABC News a separate email with the information you have.



http://abcnews.go.com/Site/page?id=3072379

DocSkinner
04-11-2009, 12:11 AM
If the counter-culture was rebelling against the ultra repressive, spoon-feed- me fears about father knows best and fears to beware your commie neighbor, then call Diane Sawyer June Cleaver.

For the last hour, my husband and I have sat with an almost aghast expression, stemming from the manufactured sensationalist attack on the senses of aware American public in the recent report, "If I Only Had a Gun." I'll admit that as second amendment patriots, our household cringes a bit when a "special" is on to air on an anything but fair and balanced network. The coaxed answers and slight-of-hand reporting used by those who believe their audience to have gaping mouths, hungry for their poured knowledge are admittedly a turn off for us. However, as one who defends the constitution, so must the other side be heard in a free society. What surprises is that after the feelings of disbelief over exaggeration subside and frustrated tension from the improbable and doctored "experiments" calm, another thought is in the forefront. The realization to the fact that for those who would have you believe they belong to the group of the progressive and free thinking are actually treating the educated and enlightened as sheltered children...I guess it's now 20/20 that knows best.

What has always infuriated me about liberal arguments in general is that they mask their opposition or lack of experience on a subject with humour and deflection to peripheral and - often - manufactured issues. Take the little boy who allegedly petitioned newly elected President Obama while being interviewed by Sawyer on 20/20. The child whispered his cry for help to the new president. A ten year old reporter from a gang-ridden town in Florida, the child was finally able to say allowed his petition: please help our town. Nevermind the rabid gang violence that is the source and symptom of the issues propelling this child through his early journalism career. No, simply, the manufactured emphasis is on the evil firearm... never mind that many shown in the hands of these alleged gang members are already illegal. The child's voice will fall on deaf ears once the agenda of a renewed assault weapons ban is in place, never mind the still raging gang problem.

Liberals and those too weak to pick a side that isn't "safe" in a pop culture centered around "me" are not the strong spitfires that was the cause of revolution initially. To think that there are people who would watch this story, digest it as fact and actually tout that they've done their research when casting an anti American vote against the second amendment make me mourn for a culture and age I was about 12 years to late to know. Regardless of the morphing that the counter-culture movement intended, the liberal legacy left is one of those informed by talking heads - they wouldn't know free speech if it rose up and bit them. Since the brand of blame the right still works, the trust of the left bestowed upon the Sawyers of the world results in nothing but a lazily and falsely informed mass, fueled and controlled by whichever power that hold the broadcast.


Still say it is cowards that KNOW they could never stand up, trying to make laws to make everyone a legally neutered coward so they (edit:) *DON'T* feel bad about themselves. Its all about self esteem, after all!

DocSkinner
04-11-2009, 12:12 AM
The wife was so fired up she kicked me outta my seat see above rant. Itold her she needs her own account there is safety in numbers :thumbsup:

+1000

why hasn't she done it yet?

Vanguard
04-11-2009, 12:12 AM
Here's the Diane Sawyer that I know and love.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GrLiBp4nxyg

And we're supposed to take this idiot seriously?

Drunken skank.

Citizen Snips
04-11-2009, 12:13 AM
It didnít seem like propaganda. It was propaganda. Diane Sawyer and ABC should be ashamed of themselves.
You're absolutely right, I hadn't peeked at the P word in the dictionary for a long time. This fits the word 100%. On public airwaves no less. Stossel should sue for advertising he had anything to do with this.

DocSkinner
04-11-2009, 12:14 AM
all can say for the "classroom test" is that at least the person had a chance all the runners were shot too right?

of course it appeared that the testee was targeted from the start so it was just a trap

i would like to challenge the instructers to the same test with an inside man sitting right behind them




I wonder what the out come would have been with a few us calgunners as students? Hell- I teach classes - what if the prof was armed (and skilled...)?

gcvt
04-11-2009, 12:17 AM
Unless you live in San Jo and have your entire city's phone line disabled...

Yeah, no kidding, huh? In that case, I'll hide under the desk, wait for someone to read about the shooting on sfgate.com and call 911 for me from another city. I'm sure I'll survive....better than having a gun that I could accidentally drop in a pre-school toy bin. :banghead:

lioneaglegriffin
04-11-2009, 12:21 AM
on i side note the gang members said the could get any semi-automatic gun, they just can't get grenades and rockets, gee i wonder where the drug cartels get them? :rolleyes:

1BigPea
04-11-2009, 12:24 AM
I wonder what the out come would have been with a few us calgunners as students? Hell- I teach classes - what if the prof was armed (and skilled...)?

^ Exactly.

It really pisses me off too when there's no mention of more CCW being a deterrent. How many incidents can be avoided by the criminal knowing that there will be armed citizens!!?

Watching that was painful, complete propaganda. I want to rip out all of the Armed Citizen pages and mail them to Diane.

vrylak
04-11-2009, 12:24 AM
heh, I'm glad I didn't waste a single second of my time watching it, come to think of it I did waste a few seconds looking for it, but fortunately it wasn't on yet when I was looking.

We all knew it's another vomit show from the anti-freedom, anti-personal-responsibility crowd anyway, what do you expect?
The irresponsible media that are peddling their business across the United States is not really a good and reliable source of unbiased truth in information, they're only there for entertainment purposes, hiding under the 1st Amendment. Their primary purpose is to make a profit for their socialist owners and to take advantage of the ignorance of the sheeple.

And so, the brainwashing of the sheeple continues.............

DocSkinner
04-11-2009, 12:31 AM
^ Exactly.

It really pisses me off too when there's no mention of more CCW being a deterrent. How many incidents can be avoided by the criminal knowing that there will be armed citizens!!?

Watching that was painful, complete propaganda. I want to rip out all of the Armed Citizen pages and mail them to Diane.

OR -


if we cross post and get tons of them - everyone of us send gift copies of "more guns, less crime" to her at her office. Was thinking about organizing it for an Obama protest, but....

Especially if we all set one day that we all place the orders and select the same shipping! Can you imagine 10 of thousands of copies in individual packaging from B&N, Amazon, Borders, Etc, all showing up at teh same time???



it would pop that book to top sellers.
It woudl make a national news story over that many copies sent to her.
Both casesd makes for a "Hey, what DOES that book say?" (well, among people who read - those that don't don't vote, don't count)

icormba
04-11-2009, 12:34 AM
"even our well trained test subject who has actual gun experience could not get his gun out..."

well trained test subject = airsoft marksmen
:rolleyes:

DocSkinner
04-11-2009, 12:34 AM
OR -


if we cross post and get tons of them - everyone of us send gift copies of "more guns, less crime" to her at her office. Was thinking about organizing it for an Obama protest, but....

Especially if we all set one day that we all place the orders and select the same shipping! Can you imagine 10 of thousands of copies in individual packaging from B&N, Amazon, Borders, Etc, all showing up at teh same time???



it would pop that book to top sellers.
It woudl make a national news story over that many copies sent to her.
Both casesd makes for a "Hey, what DOES that book say?" (well, among people who read - those that don't don't vote, don't count)


I did this for Newsome, by the way - got a nice thank you letter stating it was complicated problem and will take great efforts to solve. Wonder what happen to the book?

CnCFunFactory
04-11-2009, 12:39 AM
"even our well trained test subject who has actual gun experience could not get his gun out..."

well trained test subject = airsoft marksmen
:rolleyes:

+1 on that.... Also how about giving the kid a fighting chance at least, what was with the shirt that was two sizes to big? Conveniently the gun got caught up in the fabric. I know when I go to take a handgun course or shoot IDPA I make sure there are 6 inches of fabric hanging down past the barrel of my gun and wearing a garment that doesn't open at the front certainly makes the most sense. :rolleyes:

N6ATF
04-11-2009, 12:41 AM
I did this for Newsome, by the way - got a nice thank you letter stating it was complicated problem and will take great efforts to solve. Wonder what happen to the book?

It got burned, just like anything that can help fight crime. Melt buyback guns, burn our books. It's the pro-criminal way!

doctor_vals
04-11-2009, 12:43 AM
I'm convinced. They convinced me that I don't need anything more than a cell phone and a desk to crawl under to protect my life. I'm selling all my guns right away! :willy_nilly: I will no longer be a danger to myself or others. Thank God for 20/20!

Could you sell it to me?
I am not so impressive of 20/20
and I am not so stupid as that guys, who wasn't able to check if gun is loaded.
And definitely Iwill not be danger to myself or others.

M. D. Van Norman
04-11-2009, 12:45 AM
Iím still surprised that none of the test subjects realized they were about to be in the mock shooting when they had to attend a lecture that involved donning the legally required headgear. I wonder if there is unseen video of subjects who performed differently.

HCz
04-11-2009, 12:53 AM
I'm pretty sure there would be and a lot of parts that would have contradicted their little assertion was left out.

JayRuff
04-11-2009, 1:04 AM
I was holding my breathe the entire time I was watching the show :TFH:, it was pure torture. what a bunch of BS, I was expecting something similar to the 20/20 Episode by John Stossel, this is messed up, I wish they would broadcast more of the truth instead of just brainwashing the un-educated folks who know nothing about guns, I told every anti-gun person I knew to watch the show and now they just think that they are even more right, I wish the outdoor channel or military channel did some reporting on the truth as they have the opportunity to do it. but who knows, those channels are probably also run by liberals

CCWUSA
04-11-2009, 1:48 AM
Okay, I should have known...Unbelievable! What can I say?

20/20 had an excellent opportunity to give an unbiased view from BOTH sides of the issue tonight but just gave in to standard media BS. I liked the beginning where they stated that TRAINING was the answer, there was some hope...but then they went off the deep end! Maybe Diane Sawyer should have talked with Professor John Lott?

Of course we all know the point of having a concealed firearm is that nobody knows you have it. The Active Shooter in the SIM test obviously had prior knowledge of who had a gun and what seat they were in. If the real BAD GUY entered and did not know which student was Carrying, and what seat he or she was in, I think they would have an entirely different outcome. And better yet, if it was in Israel or Utah, and a bunch of the students and teachers had pulled out their legally carried firearms...again a very different end to this media driven story.

So either have an opportunity to protect yourself and your loved ones, or don't. It's your choice? If you violate Rule #1 and don't bring a gun to a gun fight, I guarantee with absolute certainty that you will not have the opportunity to return fire!

ldivinag
04-11-2009, 2:09 AM
gee i wonder where the drug cartels get them? :rolleyes:

havent you been reading the news?

from the US... duh...

[/sarcasm]

gd-bh
04-11-2009, 5:22 AM
I'm glad I wasn't the only one sickened by the overt bias and omission in this production. I'm sure all those journalists had some sort of "ethics" and "integrity" classes when they went to school, but I suspect at thier first job, their first boss told them to "forget everything you learned in school because the real world doesn't work that way"...And they did just that.

The vast majority of our politicians are morally corrupt, the vast majority of the media is morally corrupt, seems like a majority of big business leaders are morally corrupt...is it any wonder our country is in such a mess???

RomanDad
04-11-2009, 6:30 AM
So... I havent watched it yet..... What did everybody think??? :tt2:

RomanDad
04-11-2009, 6:31 AM
Guys..... This is the day of YouTube....


Nothing prevents US from recreating the scenario FAIRLY (in other words, have REAL CCWers with REAL training, and a "bad guy" who doesn't know who to off in the first second) and showing the actual results.

Midian
04-11-2009, 6:41 AM
The masses are being conditioned once again to think guns are bad, lead to crime, and gun bans will be a good thing.

Stay asleep and drink your corn syrup. Diane Sawyer knows best, she's in NYC, where the smart people live.

lioneaglegriffin
04-11-2009, 7:21 AM
The masses are being conditioned once again to think guns are bad, lead to crime, and gun bans will be a good thing.

Stay asleep and drink your corn syrup. Diane Sawyer knows best, she's in NYC, where the smart people live.

hey dont you listen to corn syrup PR. "corn syrup is perfectly fine in moderation"

lioneaglegriffin
04-11-2009, 7:25 AM
Iím still surprised that none of the test subjects realized they were about to be in the mock shooting when they had to attend a lecture that involved donning the legally required headgear. I wonder if there is unseen video of subjects who performed differently.

there was also the airsoft guy who "couldn't stop touching is gun" as if he were masterbating in class. :eek:

GaffSD
04-11-2009, 7:58 AM
Man...

This reminds me of a security drill we did on my ship with the SEALs. We were told they were coming, and knew how.

They lost to a bunch of average sailors... Because it was RIGGED. We each shot 30 rounds a year back then... with the majority of our training being safety, tactical movement and rules of deadly force. We were amateurs by comparison. NO WAY we should have won.

We knew that the scenario leading up to the encounter had as much to do with winning as anything else.

Oh, and the dude who bursted in was a police firearms instructor... These kids were far more likely to be shot by a peer.

Child safety? Yeah. I lock up my guns. Next!

This was crap.

lioneaglegriffin
04-11-2009, 8:06 AM
Man...

This reminds me of a security drill we did on my ship with the SEALs. We were told they were coming, and knew how.

They lost to a bunch of average sailors... Because it was RIGGED. We each shot 30 rounds a year back then... with the majority of our training being safety, tactical movement and rules of deadly force. We were amateurs by comparison. NO WAY we should have won.

We knew that the scenario leading up to the encounter had as much to do with winning as anything else.

Oh, and the dude who bursted in was a police firearms instructor... These kids were far more likely to be shot by a peer.

Child safety? Yeah. I lock up my guns. Next!

This was crap.

i agree this should have been a double blind test, a kid like them with the same amout of training and doesn't know who the CCW is in the class. and they should have had more approriate clothing & better holsters.

Mulay El Raisuli
04-11-2009, 8:09 AM
So, it was a bad thing? :-)

The Raisuli

SVT_Fox
04-11-2009, 8:18 AM
fascists media at it again!

shocking? no

Greg-Dawg
04-11-2009, 8:41 AM
Classroom attack scenario:
1. Training is valuable.
2. Constant training is priceless.
3. Open loaded carry eliminates obstructive quick drawing.
4. Wear a vest while in a classroom.
5. A law must be passed to carry open loaded and wearing vests.
6. Never give a novice a weapon to apply close quarter combat.
7. Civilians should be able to attend a police academy firearms defensive class for FREE, or at a reasonable tuition.
8. When seconds count, cops are minutes away.

Moving furniture scenario:
1. Don't leave guns out in the open, lock them in a case.
2. Don't trust strangers to touch your stuff.

Children finding guns in the classroom:
1. Teach children what guns can do and tattoo the lesson into their hearts.

Gun Show Loophole:
1. RIP for the VT students.
2. We don't have to worry about it here, it's CA.
3. I'm at the crossroads regarding effective background checks.
4. Gun Show vendors EVERYWHERE must know there's a spy there.

I happily watched the whole episode, because a lot of pro-2nd A are closed minded on such programs. I like to know what our enemies are scheming up so I can have more ammo to discuss the faults of such programs. For example, the part where those students movers discovered the guns one of them dumped the guns into a box. My anti-pro 2nd wife says, "It could go off by a pencil!" I took a pen and pencil to show her how much pressure it takes for the trigger to be pulled, the pen became bent and the pencil broke when trying out on my Glock. It'll take a lot of pressure to pull the trigger.

We need to not ignore the bias and keep our minds open on such programs.

Just my thoughts.

.454
04-11-2009, 8:47 AM
What did you guys expected from these so-called "journalists", eh? To tell the truth?

THEY'RE FRIKKIN' LIBERALS!

mhho
04-11-2009, 9:10 AM
I'm convinced. They convinced me that I don't need anything more than a cell phone and a desk to crawl under to protect my life. I'm selling all my guns right away! :willy_nilly: I will no longer be a danger to myself or others. Thank God for 20/20!


GCVT wait! Don't sell your CCW guns yet! Think about it, the desk to too big and heavy to carry around on your hip. CCD (Concealed Carry Desk) is not advised. Stick with your CCW gun for now until someone invents an ultra-compact 3" CCD desks for you. ;)

ChuckBooty
04-11-2009, 9:21 AM
The "classroom" test was ridiculously rigged.

1) The student didn't know what was going to happen
2) The cop DID know what was going to happen, he knew the layout of the room, and he knew where the "student" was sitting.
3) The student ALSO knew that his gun was a paint ball gun. So it took time to register that the cop was ALSO shooting paint balls, that this was part of the test, and that he was expected to react.

To make it a little more even, they would have to have a police officer/shooter that did not know the layout of the room and did not know what the "student" looked like or where he was sitting.

This was the only part of the program that had a point....it's not enough to buy a gun and stick it in your pocket. Training is key. The rest was just standard anti-gun propaganda.

mhho
04-11-2009, 9:26 AM
on i side note the gang members said the could get any semi-automatic gun, they just can't get grenades and rockets, gee i wonder where the drug cartels get them? :rolleyes:

What the gang members really meant was the Mexican drug cartels beat them to buying all the grenades and rockets already so there is a shortage of them on the illegal arms market. All the illegal arms distributors are out of stock and the back-order list is 12-18 months out! ;)

dadoody
04-11-2009, 9:27 AM
I will agree that there needs to be more training programs made available.

Scenario is kinda rigged though and the argument assumes all police officers would thereby have superior firearms training/reaction when that's just not the case a lot of times.

Also, they way the situation is presented is that the only time you'll be defending yourself is in that kind of environment - which is ridiculous. Those events rarely happen, but when they do no one's armed. There is one account where armed students were able to prevent the shooter from taking more lives.

And self-defense situations happen EVERY day:

http://www.azstarnet.com/metro/262825


They also go over that weird Florida town, but don't really describe why it's so messed up out there. They also only present this town, and not towns where people have firearms but there is NO violence. Or gun shows. They way this is presented is, of course, biased by presentation.

battleship
04-11-2009, 9:29 AM
You have to give them credit for there carefully planned propaganda, i can imagine the behind the scenes discussions as to how to be the most effective when it comes to potential negatives of owning and carrying a gun. Even the police where in on it. Would of made Adolf proud and he was a master at this kind of thing.
Why don't they ask if you were hiding in a classroom closet while a shooter was on the rampage what would you want to have in your hand, a gun a bible or a carrot.
The fact they cannot, but try hard to deny is given any life threatening situation which involves someone trying to kill you deliberately or not so, you are going to be in a better position if you can match the odds which are stacked against you, and what about the deterrent factor, if a shooter realizes that you to have a gun, then i believe hes going to go along the path of least resistance. And not confront you either in a campus situation or if you were in your own home, or at work, or anywhere for that matter. This program and its hosts should be ashamed to try and get the public in a mind set that this is the best solution and disarm them selves. Classic liberal news reporting.

Casey
04-11-2009, 9:29 AM
Interesting that they had over 675 comments (99% blasting their bs) on the propaganda piece last night when I posted mine. There are only 225 comments today, still 99% blasting them. It must be a bummer to have to pay someone to delete comments as fast as they come in.

http://abcnews.go.com/2020/comments?type=story&id=7278669

vladbutsky
04-11-2009, 10:03 AM
I posted my comments yesterday and even checked it this morning, but now I don't see it anymore. So I posted again...
This morning there were more than 800 comments and most of them were critical about the show. But now I see only 227.
Great job ABC on controlling 1st ammendment! It is always easier to work when you can silence these who disagree with you.
I will not watch ABC again. As far as I am concerned you are now on the same level with Fox News and CNN with CNBC (and it is not a compliment!)

P.S. Go ahead and delete this comment from your list - I'll keep posting it as long as I see it deleted ;)

Manic Moran
04-11-2009, 10:34 AM
The student ALSO knew that his gun was a paint ball gun. So it took time to register that the cop was ALSO shooting paint balls, that this was part of the test, and that he was expected to react.

I think this is the critical piece.

NTM

Hemijustin
04-11-2009, 10:34 AM
They Should have armed the whole class! then the Cop probably would not have even wanted to walk into that class room!
Justin

gravedigger
04-11-2009, 10:38 AM
That classroom "test" was the biggest load of B.S.! AS IF a student, being shot at with a REAL gun by a REAL bad guy intent on REALLY killing him would stand there like the terminator bravely taking hits to his ecto-skeleton without even feeling it as he returned fire. The FACT is that whichever person was hit first would GO DOWN! They wouldn't stand there unaffected by the "hit" trying to fire more bullets at their opponent! I wish I was at that test. When the "bad guy" walked in, he would have promptly received my chair over his head several times. Why were the students brainwashed into RUNNING AWAY from the bad guy? In a classroom full of college students where I was a student, they could have jumped up, rushed him and piled about a TON of students on top of him before he got off his second shot. Then of course, they'd drag him off to the biology department for immediate LIVE dissection if I had anything to say about it.

I am so angry at ABC, Diane Sawyer and the whole 20/20 bunch! They are all disgusting sub-humans IMHO.

Young Version
04-11-2009, 10:58 AM
I feel much safer now, knowing that the secret to surviving any gun attack is to "play dead" and "have a cel phone":puke: Yeah, that's why we send police out with "play dead" and "have a cel phone" as their primary tools for self defense.:rolleyes:

I loved the cell phone suggestion.

In a real-life school shooting scenario, the untrained gunman would shoot indiscriminately. The likelihood of the guy with the cell phone getting shot would be just as high as the guy with the concealed weapon, the difference being that one has a means of self-defense.

Is proper training and practice a good thing? Absolutely. That doesn't change the fact that their classroom scenario was rigged in such a manner that no one could have taken out the gunman before being taken out. Additionally, giving an hour of training with a duty holster (being used for CCW work) is nonsense. Who uses a level 2 or 3 retention holster for concealed carry?

The show was an hour-long appeal to emotion. Every situation was skewed, things were taken out of context, and the 2nd Amendment was ignored entirely.

Casual_Shooter
04-11-2009, 11:02 AM
It was a ridiculous display of absurdity.

Set people up to fail and they will.

"I'm going to drop you in this tank of piranhas but don't worry, I know you're a really good swimmer":rolleyes:

NoNOS67
04-11-2009, 11:11 AM
That classroom "test" was the biggest load of B.S.! ..... Why were the students brainwashed into RUNNING AWAY from the bad guy?

IIRC, the other "students" were cops and 20/20 employees that were there to help "simulate" the panic that might ensue, had the situation been real. The whole thing was rigged for failure. What a DISGUSTING load of propaganda!!!

Maverick831
04-11-2009, 11:12 AM
It was funny how the shooter would go for the teacher first then for the student with the gun second. Like the shooter knew who had a gun. Also how the student with the gun was sitting in the same spot all the time. They should have moved the student around so the shooter wouldn't know where he/she was.

Vanguard
04-11-2009, 11:17 AM
It was funny how the shooter would go for the teacher first then for the student with the gun second. Like the shooter knew who had a gun. Also how the student with the gun was sitting in the same spot all the time. They should have moved the student around so the shooter wouldn't know where he/she was.


And the fact that the shooter KNEW he had to immediately switch targets to the student because he KNEW he had a gun. Schools are "gun free zones" (victim zones) so why would a real shooter assume a student would have a weapon?

shooten
04-11-2009, 11:23 AM
They're deleting the comments as fast as they come in. There's been 227 since 10 AM. Mine's not there...

Foulball
04-11-2009, 11:38 AM
I'm so glad my Dish Network decided to go down last night. My wife would've watched that drivel.

john-e-ringo
04-11-2009, 11:53 AM
i tried to keep in mind that this is an editorial-type show. i knew that they were going to throw the most absurd opinions and concepts with completely illogical support at me to try to convince me that guns are baaaad.

even knowing that, i still couldn't watch from beginning to end. completely sickening!

this morning i read the comments on the 20/20 website. couldn't find a single positive comment. coincidence? don't think so.

didn't watch ABC much before...don't plan on doing so in the future - especially after seeing this propaganda

jkchan83
04-11-2009, 1:16 PM
This program made my blood boil. Like others have said, I truly and honestly expected a balanced program similar to stories that John Stossel has done in the past. This was a hatchet job. It also shows the differences between us and them.

We believe in fair play, honesty, and allowing the other side to be heard. We hold the Bill of Rights as principles which we should all follow. Freedom of speech, for one, means that you don't have to agree with other side, but he is allowed to speak, too. The people who run the networks, the people who oppose the right to keep and bear arms, the people who produce shows like last night's 20/20 have no qualms with playing dirty. They will lie to your face (and to the faces of millions of our fellow citizens). They will mute our voices as they are doing by deleting the comments.

lioneaglegriffin
04-11-2009, 1:58 PM
who had the best draw? i think the lady did but she was a piss poor shot. if she were better and stopped flinching she would have shot the shooter. But she said she aimed for his head so she was shooting right. she should went for body shots instead of headshot. no one taught the mozambique/failure drill gosh. :mad:

Maverick831
04-11-2009, 3:07 PM
And the fact that the shooter KNEW he had to immediately switch targets to the student because he KNEW he had a gun. Schools are "gun free zones" (victim zones) so why would a real shooter assume a student would have a weapon?

Yeah that to.. This was pure BS! I can't beleive people buy into this s***!

icormba
04-11-2009, 3:08 PM
Rigged big time, but still... two women shooters an one "expert airsoft" shooter still slowed the "mad gunman" down. The "mad gunman" got hit in the inner thigh and a small graze on the shoulder... while everyone else was able to run out the door. 4 people dead, mad gunman disabled... everyone else safe? That is sure better than 20+ dead. I'd say those 3 shooters may have saved everyone else?

outersquare
04-11-2009, 3:24 PM
http://musings.denninger.net/archives/199-Second-Amendment-Under-Fire.html

KylaGWolf
04-11-2009, 3:38 PM
Well my comment was deleted off of there last night almost as soon as I had posted it. As for Stossel he never had anything to do with the story at least as far as I could tell. Which if he originally was supposed to have I would say that he found out what the feel of the story was and backed out or his editors decided to go the anti route to boost ratings and look to be "tough" on guns.

Usually if its a Stossel report I figure there is at least a chance of fair play. But since Sawyer and her little buddy did it I knew from the opening scenes that this was going to be bad. I just didn't think it would have been that bad.

Outtersquare I read your blog and found it interesting. Another thing that 20/20 neglected to mention is they played that tape of the 911 call from the church but DIDN'T play the part where they informed them the bad guy was dead from a person that was CCW. I guess they figured that by admiting that it totally blew their credibility out of the water.

lioneaglegriffin
04-11-2009, 3:42 PM
Rigged big time, but still... two women shooters an one "expert airsoft" shooter still slowed the "mad gunman" down. The "mad gunman" got hit in the inner thigh and a small graze on the shoulder... while everyone else was able to run out the door. 4 people dead, mad gunman disabled... everyone else safe? That is sure better than 20+ dead. I'd say those 3 shooters may have saved everyone else?

i shot to the grion is nothin to sneeze at unless your on PCP or something.

outersquare
04-11-2009, 4:01 PM
it is not my blog, but imo he does good articles on financial stuff and he is very 2A friendly.

ZRX61
04-11-2009, 4:15 PM
They're getting hammered on the comments page..

http://abcnews.go.com/2020/comments?type=story&id=7278669

LiquidFlorian
04-11-2009, 4:18 PM
Rigged big time, but still... two women shooters an one "expert airsoft" shooter still slowed the "mad gunman" down. The "mad gunman" got hit in the inner thigh and a small graze on the shoulder... while everyone else was able to run out the door. 4 people dead, mad gunman disabled... everyone else safe? That is sure better than 20+ dead. I'd say those 3 shooters may have saved everyone else?

As a bit of a "airsoft expert" myself I call gigantic amounts of BS on the scenario. I don't know if its just the group that I operate with but those folks even the "trained" ones had no practical experience in that kind of scenario. It takes a **** tone of practice just to break leather and get your sites in on a target. Unless you've got the opportunity to do that frequently you're not going to do very well.

I'll fraking dare them to take any of the players that come out to our RHP games or our CQB Challenge in that same situation and see what happens.

...and to flex my "chairborne ranger" muscles I would've smoked that dude.

I can't believe how pissed I am, and I only watched one segment! :mad::mad::mad:

rips31
04-11-2009, 4:25 PM
Classic scenario. Did the ccw have to sit front-centre everytime? If that happened in any class i was in, most people would have used their occ (open carry chair) upside gunman's head when he focused on the speaker and ccw.

rips31
04-11-2009, 4:36 PM
Btw, i'm sure someone mentioned it before (but i'm too lazy to check all 19 pages) but is that 20/20 reporter and vt-brother guilty of straw purchases?

DocSkinner
04-11-2009, 5:19 PM
i shot to the grion is nothin to sneeze at unless your on PCP or something.

femoral artery - quick bleed out...

evan69
04-11-2009, 5:43 PM
I had to turn it off, too much crap to deal with.

Legasat
04-11-2009, 6:09 PM
What would have happened if 5 people in the classroom were armed? How about 10? How about just 1 that had some idea of what they were doing? I'm sorry, some experience with an airsoft pistol does not make an expert in close-quarter combat.

What an incredibly biased, unrealistic show. But then, what would you expect from a pig, but a grunt?

Gary G

Alphahookups
04-11-2009, 6:23 PM
I finally watched my recording and I must say that the gunshow think is a little shaky, but everything else was pure BS. The shooter knew exactly where the CCW person was, and went after him right after the lecturer. He didn't even try to go after the people fleeing the room like a real shooter would have done.

lioneaglegriffin
04-11-2009, 6:42 PM
femoral artery - quick bleed out...

for the that dont know you can use for refrence the scene in Black Hawk down where the Ranger bleeds out on the table.

LiquidFlorian
04-11-2009, 6:46 PM
What would have happened if 5 people in the classroom were armed? How about 10? How about just 1 that had some idea of what they were doing? I'm sorry, some experience with an airsoft pistol does not make an expert in close-quarter combat.

Gary G

Not only that but the active shooter was a LEO trainer, right? w/ the armed citizen in the same seat each time, right?! The LEO trainer shoots the prof and make a B-line for the armed citizen w/ a second active shooter as an "accomplice"?! Against shooters with ZERO experience with a fire arm let alone trianing?! WTF?!
http://i43.tinypic.com/2r3a4o2.jpg
Not to mention that a crowded room like that is considered a Kobiashi Maru for LEO training for active shooter scenarios...

racer_X_123
04-11-2009, 6:53 PM
I am in the process of contacting drudge report about the obvious bias that ABCs website has shown in the last 24 hours with respect to the comments section. I will let you guys know if anything happens, but it is important to continue to leave your comments on their website about how you did not like the show.

Also, please go to www.drudgereport.com and scroll down about 3/4 way or so and on the right side there is an anonymous tip submission.

Lets get the work out there.

Warhawk014
04-11-2009, 7:39 PM
eh its a good thing i didnt waste my time watching it. i knew it was going to be biased BS, i didnt even bother turning on the tv.

LiquidFlorian
04-11-2009, 8:28 PM
From the comments; my favorite so far...

This show was biased and absurd. As a Law Enforcement Firearms Instructor and long time competitive shooter you provided an unwinnable situation under unrealistic conditions. Your facts and figures are grossly incorrect and the fact that there are people out there that want the opportunity to provide security for themselves is obviosely something you yourself don't understand. Showing a child going to a full auto shoot makes people think that is normal at a shooting range, it is not. Your study with the kids was classic. Take kids that have never been brought up in a household with guns and absolutely they are going to play with them. They are new and cool and are a curiosity. It is sad about the state of the florida town and the little Weaver boy, but what are you doing about it. Exploiting them for your own agenda and politics. What have YOU done, Diane, to change the gang violence? Politics and rhetoric aren't going to change it. Was I the only one noticing the little boys adult friend playing in the front yard with him. Was I the only one to notice him showing his gang colors. The citizens and people of that area need to WANT to change. They need to WANT to make a difference and until THEY want it, the police and government are going to spin its wheels. Back to your unwinnable situation, My officers and students would rather have the choice to defend themselves rather then lie on the ground hoping the bad guy doesn't put one in the back of their head. The 2nd amendment protects your right to the 1st amendment. It is also my right to vehemently dispute your biased reporting without being labeled as a extremist as I have the right to believe in my rights just as strongly as you present your anti-gun beliefs. I challenge YOU Diane to come find me and spend a week with me, learning how the other half lives. I am a career Law Enforcement officer, competition shooter and a hunter. We are not extemists, we are Americans. Corporal R. Berg
Posted by:
Corporal Berg 1:02 PM
Mark As Violation

gotgunz
04-11-2009, 8:38 PM
I think the problem with this show will be that they'll take inexperienced non-shooters, give them handguns, and film them trying to react (poorly) to a shooting situation. That means they'll end up 'proving' that citizens having guns couldn't help in the situation anyway, and may end up shooting the wrong people by mistake. I'll watch the show, but I'm weary at the conclusions they'll draw wrongly.


Ding, ding!!!!!

We have a winner; he guessed correctly what would be shown!

N6ATF
04-11-2009, 11:29 PM
From the comments; my favorite so far...

Tick tock before that gets deleted.

bigcalidave
04-12-2009, 12:55 AM
Wow. That was horrible. That's all I can say. I'm shocked that they have no ethics. Freedom of the press has been changed to freedom of one side of the argument.

Palindari
04-12-2009, 12:28 PM
Man...

This reminds me of a security drill we did on my ship with the SEALs. We were told they were coming, and knew how.

They lost to a bunch of average sailors... Because it was RIGGED. We each shot 30 rounds a year back then... with the majority of our training being safety, tactical movement and rules of deadly force. We were amateurs by comparison. NO WAY we should have won.

We knew that the scenario leading up to the encounter had as much to do with winning as anything else.

Oh, and the dude who bursted in was a police firearms instructor... These kids were far more likely to be shot by a peer.

Child safety? Yeah. I lock up my guns. Next!

This was crap.

Yeah, I was thinking the same thing...

Highly trained LEO v. novice gun holder compared to crazed gun owner v. novice gun holder.

Considering that in the first scenerio the LEO knows who is carrying added with the tactical training and element of surprise. Opposed to the crazed gun owner only having the element of surprise.

Me thinks Diane Sawyer needs to stick with covering sextuplets not six-shooters... just saying... :rolleyes:

M. D. Van Norman
04-12-2009, 5:00 PM
For what itís worth, I wrote this (http://mdvannorman.blogspot.com/2009/04/if-i-only-had-gun.html) on my [cough] blog.

wellfedirishman
04-12-2009, 5:20 PM
MDVN, your blog post was excellent, very well said.

M. D. Van Norman
04-12-2009, 5:25 PM
Thank you. :)

gobears1997
04-12-2009, 8:09 PM
Thank you for contacting Sprint regarding the sponsorship of ABC NEWS 20/20. It is our policy at Sprint to make advertising decisions based on the demographics of the audience and not on the nature of the associated event or media broadcast, provided it does not promote racist, sexist orother offensive views. Our goal is to reach our current and prospective customers through this venue; our advertising is not an endorsement for or against any particular cause, candidate or political viewpoint. While we understand your disappointment in the advertising placement, wewould like to suggest you contact the ABC NEWS 20/20 directly to expressyour concerns. Your feedback is important and we appreciate you taking the time to contact us. Visit Sprint.com/mysprint if we can be of further assistance. Thank you for contacting Sprint. Have a great day!

Sincerely,

Annie K.Sprint

Here is my response from Sprint when I wrote them regarding my boycott of their services.:rolleyes:

DocSkinner
04-12-2009, 10:45 PM
For what itís worth, I wrote this (http://mdvannorman.blogspot.com/2009/04/if-i-only-had-gun.html) on my [cough] blog.

added to my facebook page!

Citizen Snips
04-12-2009, 11:12 PM
For what itís worth, I wrote this (http://mdvannorman.blogspot.com/2009/04/if-i-only-had-gun.html) on my [cough] blog.
This is great, sending around to my family :thumbsup: Good job on the 'GSL' issue as well.

My pro-2A mother used to like Sawyer :43:

SKSer
04-12-2009, 11:47 PM
This show was completely rediculous, it looked like all the ghetto children probobly purchased there guns legally as well. I posted this on the 20/20 website. At least the 60 minutes piece showed a little bit more of both sides, Di Fi reminds me of the mafia mom from the Goonies :chris:

I have yet to see anyone bring up this point about this rediculously bias episode of 20/20, they show one tiny lecture room, the concealed carrier has 1-2 seconds to respond, a Navy Seal probobly couldnt respond faster, but with most of these mass school shootings there isnt just one small room, some of these kids sat under there desks in other rooms, listining to gunshots helpless for 10-15 minutes while they were just waiting for the shooter to come to them. You mean to tell me if your in another room you couldnt unholster your weapon and prepare for an engagement? Maybe because the oakland police couldnt react fast enough with there sidearms, maybe we should just take there guns away and give them cell phones so they could call the National Guard.

andrewj
04-12-2009, 11:48 PM
I'd rather die fighting than just die

trinydex
04-13-2009, 10:54 AM
Guys..... This is the day of YouTube....


Nothing prevents US from recreating the scenario FAIRLY (in other words, have REAL CCWers with REAL training, and a "bad guy" who doesn't know who to off in the first second) and showing the actual results.

stossel needs to make a rebuttal episode. real world ccw with his own gun and his own holster wearing his own clothes in that classroom. they can even keep everyone else wearing white since they know who the ccwer is (in the same seat every time) already anyway.

valleyguy
04-13-2009, 1:19 PM
It's already been said here 1000 times over, but that 20/20 segment was the worst FUD piece of crap piece I have ever seen. We had some hopes they would be fair, based on other segments, but our hopes were shattered. It's very telling that universally here in the forum those on both sides of the political spectrum agree that this piece was nothing other than ABC using scaremongering "if it bleeds, it leads" tactics to sell more soap on a Friday night. Keep hammering them, and if you were unfortunate enough to let one of your loved ones watch this awful piece of anti-gun propaganda (as I was), keep up the information war to make sure they know what nonsense this piece was.

valleyguy
04-13-2009, 1:23 PM
For what itís worth, I wrote this (http://mdvannorman.blogspot.com/2009/04/if-i-only-had-gun.html) on my [cough] blog.

MDVN, your politics (from what I have seen on the site) are very similar to mine or at least seem to be very even-keeled, so I was very impressed not only with the way that you presented the criticism in your blog post (I expected nothing less than quality), but that you had a blog posting that pretty much everyone on this forum agreed with. It's telling of how bad the 20/20 piece was that it universally alienated gun owners across the political spectrum with the lie and deceit it used to "prove a point." Great work on your blog post, and I do hope it gets spidered by Google quickly. I encourage others here to link to that post with their own blogs so that Google will escalate it to the top of the search listings for the relevant terms.

M. D. Van Norman
04-13-2009, 1:27 PM
Yíall are gonna make me blush. :online2long:

yellowfin
04-13-2009, 2:51 PM
Would it be possible to Rather-ize her?

M. D. Van Norman
04-13-2009, 4:02 PM
You may have something. What can we do to turn the tide of misrepresentation and outright deception by the mainstream media?

Lancear15
04-13-2009, 4:04 PM
There's isn't much I can say that hasn't already been well stated. Almost all of which I completely agree with. Quickly coming up on 10,000 views in less then 10 days, this is one hot topic.

Vanguard
04-13-2009, 4:30 PM
Liars need to be called out and exposed as such, not peacefully debated with. Intentional deception doesn't deserve respectful discussion, it deserves ridicule and anger and as much disrespect as you can throw at it. How can someone sit down and discuss something with someone whom they already know is lying? Worse...they know you know they're lying but they do it anyway. The left lives on a culture of lies. Lying is S.O.P. and and acceptable tactic for them. The end justifies the means. ABC is disgusting.

arrowestimating.com
04-13-2009, 6:47 PM
That video is just propaganda!!!! What a load!!!

I will never watch another abc show, complete crap. Anyone catch the instructors names? I would love to have his email address to send him a nice note. The classroom was completely set up. How hard is it to walk in with the gun drawn and shoot the guy that you know has the gun...

Idiots...

otteray
04-14-2009, 5:51 AM
Would it be possible to Rather-ize her?

:iagree:

Zumbo her!
Along with her sidekick who continued to defend their propaganda on Sunday morning.

till44
04-14-2009, 8:30 AM
I think the problem with this show will be that they'll take inexperienced non-shooters, give them handguns, and film them trying to react (poorly) to a shooting situation. That means they'll end up 'proving' that citizens having guns couldn't help in the situation anyway, and may end up shooting the wrong people by mistake. I'll watch the show, but I'm weary at the conclusions they'll draw wrongly.

Just watched it after DVRing it and you nailed it. Stupid, may have been better had Stossel been on as well but Sawyer was so one sided, not once did the show any positive scenarios when citezens used a gun succesfully to defend themselves or others. I hate the liberal one sided media.

Adonlude
04-14-2009, 8:38 AM
Wow. DVR'd this and finally watched it last night. I was expecting to see a report that was slightly anti-gun biased but this didn't even have 1 iota of pro gun rhetoric.

Trained police officers that already know someone in the room has a gun vs some kid that doesn't really know what is going to happen. What a total joke. Michael Moore may as well have directed this!

GrizzAwoken
04-14-2009, 5:52 PM
Where's Stossel when you need him. I'm waiting for "If I only had a gun" part 2, the true story.

barrym66
04-15-2009, 3:36 PM
A bit late, but John Lott responds in his opinion on Fox News today...

http://foxforum.blogs.foxnews.com/2009/04/15/lott__gun_control_experiment_rigged/

April 15th, 2009 5:08 PM Eastern
JOHN LOTT: ABC’s Shameful ‘20/20′ Experiment
By John R. Lott, Jr.

Gun control advocates look desperate. Last Friday night, on April 10, ABC aired a heavily promoted, hour long “20/20″ special called “If I Only Had a Gun.” It is ABC’s equivalent of NBC’s infamous exploding gas tanks in General Motors pickups where NBC rigged the truck to explode. With legislation in Texas and Missouri advancing to eliminate gun-free zones at universities, perhaps this response isn’t surprising.

The show started and ended by claiming that allowing potential victims to carry guns would not help keep them safe –- not even with hundreds of hours of practice firing guns.

No mention was made of the actual multiple victim public shootings stopped by people with concealed handguns nor did they describe who actually carried out such shootings. Instead, ABC presented a rigged experiment where one student in a classroom had a gun. But sometimes even the best editors can’t hide everything the camera sees.


The experiment was set up to make the student fail. It did not resemble a real-world shooting. The same scenario is shown three times, but in each case the student with the gun is seated in the same seat –- the center seat in the front row. The attacker is not only a top-notch shooter –- a firearms expert who teaches firearms tactics and strategy to police -– but also obviously knows precisely where the student with the gun is sitting.

Each time the experiment is run, the attacker first fires two shots at the teacher in the front of the class and then turns his gun directly on the very student with the gun. The attacker wastes no time trying to gun down any of the unarmed students. Thus, very unrealistically, between the very first shot setting the armed student on notice and the shots at the armed student, there is at most 2 seconds. The armed student is allowed virtually no time to react and, unsurprisingly, fails under the same circumstances that would have led even experienced police officers to fare poorly.

But in the real world, a typical shooter is not a top-notch firearms expert and has no clue about whether or not anyone might be armed and, if so, where they are seated. If you have 50 people –- a pretty typical college classroom –- and he is unknown to the attacker, the armed student is given a tremendous advantage. Actually, if the experiment run by “20/20″ seriously demonstrated anything, it highlighted the problem of relying on uniformed police or security guards for safety: the killer instantly knows whom to shoot first.

Yet, in the ABC experiment, the purposefully disadvantaged students are not just identified and facing (within less than 2 seconds) an attacker whose gun is already drawn. They are also forced to wear unfamiliar gloves, a helmet, and a holster. This only adds to the difficulties the students face in handling their guns.

Given this set-up the second student, Danielle, performed admirably well. She shot the firearms expert in his left leg near the groin. If real bullets had been used, that might well have disabled the attacker and cut short his shooting spree.

Nevertheless, even terrible shooters can often be quite effective. Despite all of ABC’s references to the Columbine attack, the network never mention the armed guard at the school. He had an unusually poor target shooting record –- indeed it is reported that he couldn’t even hit a target. Yet, his bravery still saved many lives because his poorly aimed shots forced the two killers to engage in gunfire with him. This slowed down their killing spree and gave many students a chance to escape the building. The guard was only forced to retreat and leave the school himself because of the homemade grenades that the Columbine murderers had.

The Columbine murderers strongly and actively opposed passage of Colorado’s right-to-carry law, particularly the part that would have allowed concealed handguns being legally carried on school campuses. What goes unnoticed is that the Columbine attack took place the very day that the state legislature scheduled final passage of the concealed handgun law.

Time after time the attackers in these multiple victim public shootings consciously avoid areas where people might be able to defend themselves. In the attack on the Jewish community center in Los Angeles in which five people were wounded, the attacker had apparently “scouted three of the West Coast’s most prominent Jewish institutions—the Museum of Tolerance, the Skirball Cultural Center and the University of Judaism—but found security too tight.”

In the real world, even having a gun and pointing it at an attacker has often convinced the attacker to stop shooting and surrender. Examples include high schools in Pearl, Mississippi and Edinboro, Pennsylvania, as well as the Appalachian Law School in Virginia. Street attacks in Memphis to Detroit ended this way, too, without any more shots fired.

Even if the cases don’t get much attention, gun permit holders stop these multiple victim attacks on a regular basis. Ironically, just this past Saturday, the day after ABC’s broadcast, a permit holder in Columbia, Texas stopped a mass robbery by fatally shooting the criminal. Some Web sites have started collecting these and other defensive gun use cases (e.g., see here, here, and here).

ABC’S “20/20″ exaggerates “the danger of accidentally hitting a friend” when confronting an attacker. The show cites as an example is a man who mistook his wife for an intruder. Obviously that case is a tragedy, but those cases are exceedingly rare. But why didn’t they present a single multiple victim attack as an example? Simple, because it has not happened.

ABC pushes the notion that gun show regulations, rather than arming potential victims, can stop these attacks. But very few criminals get their guns from gun shows: a U.S. Justice Department survey of 18,000 state prison inmates showed that less than one percent (0.7%) of prisoners had obtained their gun from a gun show. Even adding flea markets and gun shows together raises the number to just 1.7 percent. There is not a single academic study showing that regulating private individuals selling their own guns — the so-called “gun show loophole” — reduces any type of violent crime. What the regulations have accomplished is cutting the number of gun shows by 25 percent.

The show ends with this claim:

“If you are wondering where are all the studies about the effectiveness of guns used by ordinary Americans for self-defense, well keep searching, we could not find one reliable study and the ones we found were contradictory.”

Yet, “contradictory” is an overstatement. There have been 26 peer-reviewed studies published by criminologists and economists in academic journals and university presses. Most of these studies find large drops in crime. Some find no change, but not a single one shows an increase in crime.

You would think that if gun control worked as well as ABC implies, there wouldn’t be these multiple victim public shootings in those European countries with gun laws much stricter than those being publicly discussed in the United States or by ABC. Yet, multiple victim public shootings are quite common in Europe. In just the last few days, there have been a shooting at a college in Greece and in a crowded cafť in Rotterdam. Of course, the worst K-12 public school shootings are in Europe.

Given the hundreds of millions of dollars that have been spent annually in the United States for police officers on campus and other programs, one would hope that this relatively inexpensive alternative, where people are willing to bear the costs themselves to protect others, would be taken more seriously.

ABC never mentions a simple fact: all multiple victim public shootings with more than 3 people killed have occurred where permitted concealed handguns are prohibited. Rather than studying what actually happens during these shootings, ABC conjured up rigged experiments aimed at convincing Americans that guns are ineffective. Unfortunately, ABC’s advice, rather than making victims safe, makes things safer for attackers.

John Lott is a senior research scientist at the University of Maryland and the author of More Guns, Less Crime (University of Chicago Press, second edition, 2009) and The Bias Against Guns (Regnery, 2003). Much of the discussion here is based on both books.

1BigPea
04-15-2009, 3:55 PM
^

That's a good response...

Thanks.

trinydex
04-15-2009, 4:03 PM
i'm glad at least one mainstream oulet has made a rebuttal

N6ATF
04-15-2009, 5:20 PM
Holy crap, Columbine happened the same day as the right-to-carry final passage. WOW.