Category: The Media

Detective Joe Friday of “Dragnet” fame interviewed a nervous and anxious witness by saying to her, “All right, whoa, just the facts, ma’am—when did you start hearing the strange noise?” It’s something that should be taught in journalism school, but isn’t. Communications majors stand before cameras and twist words in ways that reflect the worldview common in the rarified atmosphere of their self-reinforcing blue silos, rarely limiting themselves to just the facts.

In that cocoon, for instance, few know much about guns and fewer own them. Their familiarity with the rest of the country outside the bubble is from 35,000 feet. And it really, really shows.

Watch CNN’s Alisyn Camerota and on-air sidekick Victor Blackwell report some of the facts on the recent Indiana mass shooting (see at (13) CNN’s Alisyn Camerota Reacts to Good Samaritan Who Killed Mall Shooter: ‘Are We All Supposed to Rely on an Armed 22-Year-Old?’ – Twitter Search / Twitter). The reportage was well and good until the end when Camerota ruined the just-the-facts about the shooting and the heroic actions of an armed citizen with a personal commentary: “I mean, but are we all supposed to rely on an armed 22-year-old in the food court?” Blackwell chimed in with, “Shouldn’t have to”. “Shouldn’t have to” suggests obvious preventions. Well, geniuses, what are they?

A just-the-facts to back up the “Shouldn’t have to” probably, in their minds, means getting onboard the gun control soul train, from Beto’s and The Squad’s mouths to your gun safe. Gun confiscation of those meanie guns used in Zero Dark Thirty – which by the way you can’t buy – the ones often dumped into the rhetorical category of “weapons of war” or “assault rifles”, has great appeal for the firearms illiterate. Of course, they can’t define the things in any meaningful way – never could – often confusing semi (legal) and automatic actions (illegal). Is it the looks, the pistol grip, the stock, the fact that most of the things are black? What? But take away the looks and what do you have? You have a plain looking gun with just as many bullets exiting the barrel. Are those exiting bullets any more lethal if emanating from a meanie-looking rifle as opposed to plain Jane? What’s the point of bans or takeaways if the weapons’ only transgression is looks?

Don’t expect Camerota, Blackwell, or Beto to be coherent in response. Their crowd hasn’t been up to now. That’s why they’ve hit upon the backstop of “high-capacity magazines”. Thus, a crazed killer will be stopped cold by a reduction from 15 to 7-cartridge magazines, or even 5. Right? You’ve got to be kidding. These lunatics practice dropping a spent clip to be replaced quickly by another. They all practice before they carry out their mayhem (news reports indicate that this murderer did). Seven rounds, seven people shot, and in a couple of seconds he’s reloaded to repeat the carnage. What’s the point, once again?

Universal background checks? Red flag laws? These sops require a competent government workforce from the ATF’s Instacheck workstations to DA’s not in a wokeness trance. Just because some of these maniacs would not qualify for a gun purchase or would be clearly eligible for temporary seizure of weapons from the home doesn’t mean they won’t get a gun. Just because the miscreants left a trail of bile all over the internet doesn’t mean people are awake and watching. A gun can travel down the grapevine like gossip with or without a civil service protected government employee standing as gatekeeper.

More laws mean more for these people to do. The new law could be award-winning poetry and be an exemplar of pure legal reasoning. Still, it has to be implemented by the descendants of Adam. All-too-often, though, the “Shouldn’t have to” is a reference to more laws, more laws to ignore or impinge on an enforcing employee’s collective bargaining rights. Camerota and company don’t think beyond getting more pages added to the criminal code. For them, it’s simply a matter of ink on paper and then off they go in pursuit of systemic racism.

For them, it’s nearly always an intense focus on the gun, the inanimate object. Not much airtime is devoted to the shooter. Who was he, for it is almost always a he? They overwhelmingly are young men in their early twenties. They, with few exceptions, show the classic signs of young male alienation. “Alienation” is a twenty-dollar word for isolated, forgotten, ignored, relegated to a place of self-absorption in front of a screen. Nobody seems to care that his anxieties are mounting and his views begin to percolate out of deranged self-delusion. Everyone from the union-protected school employee to his parents to a society obsessed with the “marginalized” is happy to have him out of their hair. It’s playing with fire.

Leveling the ship’s deck after years of severe listing to the benefit of everyone but him is extremely difficult, even if everyone agreed, which is as likely as pigs spouting wings. If that is true, what are we to do when these malcontents show up at any one of the numerous soft targets around us? More money and programs for mental health services might be a partial answer, but I’m skeptical given the failure of our current, vast, and expanding gun control regime.

A real answer may be staring at us, and the folks at CNN, in the face. The fact that an armed citizen ended the killing spree before the murderer emptied the magazine might have done more for public safety than all the bullet points (no pun intended) in the Democrats’ gun control agenda. That 22-year-old in the Indiana shopping mall with a gun and a state constitutional right to carry it probably did more to deter the homicidal from choosing a shopping mall than the ATF. Soft targets becoming hard targets might limit the miscreants’ acting out to Snapchat or TikTok.

At least by that time, somebody might notice, badger the police, who might then threaten a do-nothing DA to do something – like taking the suspect into custody and reminding the parents of their legal responsibility. Maybe the whole brouhaha might result in a groundswell to change our impotent commitment laws, giving something for our lawmakers to do other than make our lives miserable as they chase grandiose crusades like climate change or systemic . . . whatever.

If reporters want to act out the part of editor-in-chief, maybe their commentary ought to have a closer relationship to “Just the facts, ma’am”. Camerota and Blackwell, try being something more than a Democratic Party shill.

RogerG