The AR-15 and the Navy Yard shooting

[Lobohan]

@doorhinge

Why would your definitive monograph of the SDMB require that any one thread within the SDMB come to an end?

It will be a nice capstone for my chapter on the Conservative Persecution Complex™.

[Bricker]

@elucidator

Can’t happen, and its not their fault, its ours. We, the public, want to know, and want to know it right now. If you stand there and tell us about how your principles simply will not permit you to pass along partial and sketchy reports, we might very well admire that stance as we change the channel.

We demand it now, and they serve it up. That’s not the Chicago way, that’s the American way!

They said he was from Texas, yes? As a recovering Texan, it annoys me that it wasn’t really true, he had been more or less “stationed” in Texas, but of late didn’t live there. Later reporting did not even once offer me a blubbering apology for deliberately sowing the perception of Texans as belligerent and dangerous whackos.

(The truth of that stereotype is not the issue, here! So just don’t!)

Am I justified in rolling around on the floor, screaming and tearing my hair because of the liberal non-conspiracy to slander Texans? After all, everybody knows reporters are prejudiced against Texans!

What’s the difference between being stationed in Texas and living in Texas?

I grant you his residence may have been elsewhere, but “living,” is not an indirect word to use.

“AR-15,” is simply incorrect. “Virginia law prevents…” is completely wrong.

“Lived in Texas,” seems to me to be a true statement.

[doorhinge]

@Lobohan

It will be a nice capstone for my chapter on the Conservative Persecution Complex™.

Is there any chance I can get an autographed 1st edition?

[doorhinge]

@elucidator

Can’t happen, and its not their fault, its ours. We, the public, want to know, and want to know it right now. If you stand there and tell us about how your principles simply will not permit you to pass along partial and sketchy reports, we might very well admire that stance as we change the channel.

We demand it now, and they serve it up. That’s not the Chicago way, that’s the American way!

(shortened for clarity)

Hahahaha. Are you saying that the public is demanding unverified, misleading, or falsified stories from the media outlets? It can’t be the media outlets fault that they did not verify their story. It can’t be the media outlets fault that they ran with rumors. It can’t be the media outlets fault that they resort to cut-and-paste journalism. It’s the public’s fault. The public demands horseshit journalism. Really?

[elucidator]

@Bricker

What’s the difference between being stationed in Texas and living in Texas?..“Lived in Texas,” seems to me to be a true statement.

You quite evade the point. One mourns that the world lost such a talented matador when you chose to read the law. Pity.

The question isn’t so much the accuracy but the significance. Should the Times have run a blubbering confession of inaccuracy and retraction? Most sensible people would say “No, that would be silly.” The fact of whether or not the deceased was actually a Texan or from New York City is too minor a point to be concerned about.

You, and others like you, think that the question of whether or not the suspect had an AR-15 is a Big Hairy Ass Deal. Since the retraction and apology does not match your opinion of its importance, you issue a Affidavit of Butthurt. Now, this might be explained by conjecturing a non-conspiracy conspiracy, buttressed by the widely known truth that reporters are solidly in the gun-grabber camp, a fact supported by your own vast authority.

Or it could just as easily be that the editorial staff of the Times didn’t think the issue deserved such attention. They might well have thought that the vast majority of their readers didn’t care if they identified the weapon as an AR-15 or “a gun”. I don’t actually know if that is true or not, nor do I imagine that the question can be authoritatively answered.

I submit, however, that such an explanation is as likely as your own, and based upon the same rock-solid cites as you offered for the opinions and prejudices of reporters, which is to say, zip, zilch, and nada damn thing.