Dallas Morning News Rejects all Gun & Gun Show Ads

[jimlongley]

Charles,

While I still have not received a reply from the DMN, I wonder if there is a quasi official route that you could follow, such as through TSRA or NRA, to determine the truth of this issue?

I obviously subscribe to DMN, I really enjoy the funnies plus it gives me a place to vent about various issues (and since they receive more than 1000 letters per week and I get published about once a month I must be doing pretty well) and I have been checking the classifieds daily since you made the announcement and they quite obviously still take gun ads. This makes me wonder just what the content of the communication actually said, and if you have seen an original copy or if this is merely hearsay.

Maybe a letter from Jim Dark to the publisher would confirm or deny this.

[AEA]

I emailed them. I received a response.

Their response was that they will accept gun ads from FFL Dealers only and their FFL must be on file at the DNM. They will no longer accept gun ads from non licensed individuals or events (Gun Shows).

[KD5NRH]

If it wasn't for the abundant coupons in the paper saving me $$$, I would drop my subscription.

Figure out where the end of the paperboy's route is; leftovers tend to be tossed in the nearest trashcan.

[Mike from Texas]

How about the Fort Worth Original 2nd Amendment show?

Anything to do with Dallas just stinks anyway.

[Shadowboxer]

Here is what I just sent them:

From: M
Sent: Sunday, October 05, 2008 4:51 PM
To: 'ldallen@dallasnews.com'; 'lkresl@dallasnews.com'; 'dhiott@dallasnews.com'; 'lleavell@dallasnews.com'; 'enelson@dallasnews.com'; 'enelson@dallasnews.com'; 'cbuckle@dallasnews.com'; 'religion@dallasnews.com'; 'tconnolly@dallasnews.com'; 'mdrago@dallasnews.com'; 'kwilley@dallasnews.com'; 'sgrigsby@dallasnews.com'; 'nstockdale@dallasnews.com'; 'mlandauer@dallasnews.com'; 'letterstoeditor@dallasnews.com'; 'rdreher@dallasnewsoc.com'; 'wmckenzie@dallasnews.com'

Subject: Disturbed to find the DMN has turned into the Boston Globe

Dear Dallas Morning News:

I just found out the DMN will no longer allow any ads in its paper for upcoming Gun Shows. Yet the paper still allows ads for Escort Services, Gay Marriage (which I am not suggesting I am for or against), and Sexual Dysfunction.

I find it ironic that the paper will fight to no-end to protect its right to exercise the First Amendment. However when it’s a topic the paper doesn’t agree with, it will take an active role in helping to squelch that speech. This hypocrisy is what we independent voters refer to as the “Left Wing Loons”.

Along with the cancellation of my subscription, my girlfriends, and my entire families, I am talking to every person I know to boycott both your paper and its online site.


A Former Subscriber,

xxxxxxx

[fizteach]

Here is my message and reply from the DMN, with my response to their reply:

Email Type = Complaint

Email Topic = Print, Advertising

Email Body:

FROM ME

No more gun show adds? What are you thinking?

Cancel my subscription.

THEIR RESPONSE

Thank you for your email and you concerns will be addressed. Currently we do accept weapons advertising according to the policy below.

It is the policy of The Dallas Morning News not to accept advertisements for gun shows or for any type of assault, semi-assault or fully automatic weapon, silencer, or any type of explosive material in The Dallas Morning News, dallasnews.com or any of its affiliate products.
Those wishing to sell handguns must have a federal license, be legally registered as an arms dealer with the Federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms and provide their license number to The Dallas Morning News before the ad is published. Advertisements for rifles, shotguns, and related accessories are accepted. As with all submitted advertising, these ads will be subject to photo and copy control standards.

Thanks,
Kat

Kat Ely
Executive Secretary Interactive/ Vertical Sales and to Andrew Hopkins- Senior Director, Advertiser Customer Services

Phone: 214-977-2784 Fax: 214-977-8681

MY RESPONSE TO THEIR NONSENSE:

If you don't mind, I hope you will allow me to address some of the points in your message.

First of all, gun sales and face-to-face sales of weapons of any sort are legal in the state of Texas without an FFL, as they are in many other states. For a newspaper, or any of its "products", to attempt to control such sales by not allowing ads to run that are paid for by a customer attempting to sell his / her goods in a legal manner in an attempt to regulate their Second Amendment rights is a travesty. Additionally, the no gun-show ad policy is a new one for the DMN, although to read your response one would think it is a longstanding policy.

Another major point I would like to make is concerning your definition of assault weapon or semi-assault weapon. As the following entry from Wikipedia suggests, the term assault weapon is incorrect and politically motivated.

From Wikipedia, "the term Assault weapon is derived from the term assault rifle, itself a translation of the German word Sturmgewehr, literally "storm-rifle". In its technical sense, the term Assault weapon refers to a military weapon used to aid in military assault operations, that is, attacking a fortified position (as referenced in multiple uses in military terminology below). Legislators and political lobbyists have adopted the term to refer to specific semi-automatic firearms and other firearms listed by specific characteristics for statutory purposes.
The legislative usage follows usage by political groups seeking to limit the individual's right to keep and bear arms, who have sought to extend the meaning to include a semi-automatic firearm that is similar in name or appearance to a fully automatic firearm or military weapon. Note that this term is not synonymous with assault rifle, which has an established technical definition. Advocates for the right to keep and bear arms, commonly referred to as gun rights supporters, generally consider these uses of the phrase assault weapon to be pejorative and politically-motivated when used to describe civilian firearms. This term is seldom used outside of the United States in this context."

As for automatic weapons and silencers (suppressors), both are legal in Texas if one has a Federal permit and undergoes a lengthy process to obtain the permit. Once the permit is approved, the weapon or silencer can be purchased from a Class III dealer.

In my opinion, the DMN is irritating a large portion of its reading audience by attempting to control sales that are legal. I respectfully ask that you stick to deleting ads for gentleman clubs with scantily clad "dancers" that have graced your pages in the past, much to the horror of DFW area parents.
Do you think you should stop ads for alcohol because of all of the misery caused to alcoholic families and to the families of those killed by drunk drivers?

Your new policy for gun ads is short sighted and liberal. Please change this policy as it is useless and an attempt to legislate and control the lives of thousands of Texans who legally enjoy shooting and hunting.

Regards,

Bob XXXXX

[stevie_d_64]

If it wasn't for the abundant coupons in the paper saving me $$$, I would drop my subscription.

Maybe I will stop buying Charmin and use the Dallas Morning News instead.

You might risk a paper cut...Charmin is much softer...

[stevie_d_64]

BTW, its been years since I bought a newspaper...The last one I bought was on 9/12/01

There was a story I wanted to make sure I had some sort of documentation covering it...

I have a lot of other sources to tell me about gunshows and other gun related events than newspapers...Just my take on this...

[USMC-COL]

Sent a letter to the advertising department. I hope to hear from them soon. Letter copied below:

"It is sad to learn that the DMN will no longer accept advertising for area gun shows. Many of us, area and regional citizens, attend the gun shows for a variety of reasons. We are enthusiasts, collectors, and competitors. We are from every background and income level - blue and white collar who just want an opportunity to continue to enjoy our sports and pick up parts or equipment to compete and enjoy. I sincerely hope you reconsider your decision - especially in our great state of Texas.

Respectfully Submitted,
Phil Torres
Colonel of Marines, Retired"

[txflyer]

After more than 20 years, they're cancelled. I say good riddance to bad rubbish.

[The Annoyed Man]

Well, I sent them a rather angry email, referring to the fact that they will run advertising for "personal escorts," which is a polite way of saying "women of the night," - an industry which we all know is illegal; but they won't run ads for gun shows, which are perfectly legal. I confess to using phrases like "What kind of moral pig would..."

They sent me a boilerplate reply which included the following statement:

It is the policy of The Dallas Morning News not to accept advertisements for gun shows or for any type of assault, semi-assault or fully automatic weapon, silencer, or any type of explosive material in The Dallas Morning News, dallasnews.com or any of its affiliate products. Those wishing to sell handguns must have a federal license, be legally registered as an arms dealer with the Federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms and provide their license number to The Dallas Morning News before the ad is published. Advertisements for rifles, shotguns, and related accessories are accepted. As with all submitted advertising, these ads will be subject to photo and copy control standards.

I've just sent them the following reply:

I have had a few days to calm down after first hearing of your ridiculous policy regarding gun show advertising, and I have some questions for you:

1. Do you realize that, in the state of Texas, an FFL is NOT required for any private party, face to face firearms transaction? Thus, any such transactions occurring at or in the vicinity of a gun show are entirely legal?

2. Do you realize that the gun show promoters are merely providing a venue for the show, but they are not actually selling the guns? Thus, the promoter is not required to have an FFL. By your logic, a promoter of a liquor industry trade show should be required to have a license to sell liquor - even though he/she is not selling liquor.

3. Do you realize that those vendors who purchase booths from which to sell guns at gun shows already have their FFL (or its equivalent if they are dealing in curios, collectibles, and relics) or they cannot buy or sell guns as a business at the shows?

4. Do you realize that, under current federal law, there is no "assault weapons" ban? So why do you not accept advertising for a completely legal activity, but you do accept advertising from an activity - personal escort - which is highly likely to be illegal?

5. Please define "assault" weapons. Teddy Roosevelt let the assault up San Juan Hill, of soldiers armed with single shot and primitive bolt action rifles. If I am today in possession of an accurized bolt action hunting rifle, is that an "assault weapon?" If I am to go hunting, you do want me to use an accurate rifle don't you, so that I may be better ensured a humane harvest?

6. Please define "semi-assault" weapons. I've been around guns most of my life, and nobody I know understands what that means. I suspect you don't either.

7. Since you have appointed yourselves as public watchdogs over whether or not gun commerce at gun shows is legal, have you also taken it upon yourselves to thoroughly vet your "Personal Escort" advertisers to make sure that they are providing ball-room dancing partners, and not prostitutes? (No? I didn't think so.) Similarly, are you vetting your restaurant advertisers to make sure that they are licensed to sell food and alcohol, or that they are in compliance with the board of health? (No? I didn't think so.) Similarly, when you accept advertising for Livestock, do you vet the seller to make sure that he/she did not rustle it or that it was raised in accordance with the state's agriculture laws? (No? I didn't think so.) Similarly, when you accept advertising for private party vehicle sales, do you vet the seller to make sure that he/she is lawfully in possession of the vehicle being sold, or that the vehicle in question is street legal? (No? I didn't think so.) In your classified section, under "Dining & Entertainment > Other," Casino gambling appears at the top of your list, ahead of concerts at the Dallas Arboretum, concerts by the Dallas Symphony Orchestra, and other, more culturally worthy occasions. As the self-appointed arbiters of what is good and acceptable in advertising, how do you justify that? ARE YOU BEGINNING TO GET MY DRIFT HERE???? Your advertising policies are contributing to the degradation of the culture - not its improvement.

I hope that you are beginning to understand that your advertising policy is without logic or merit. Years back, when I lived in California, I canceled my subscription to the Los Angeles Times - which used to be a good newspaper - for exactly the same kinds of reasons I've listed above. Although I am not currently a subscriber of yours, given the above, I likely never will be. The LA Times circulation has been tanking - as have the circulations of the New York Times, and other big city newspapers with overtly liberal slants in journalism - and it has not been all attributable to "The Internet", that big bugaboo that newspapers like to trot out to justify their falling circulations and stock share prices to their investors. That canard is largely debunked by the increasing traffic on news websites with more centrist or conservative editorial policies. In fact, if it weren't for the efforts of conservative leaning news aggregators like The Drudge Report and Brietbart.com which link to your websites, your Internet traffic would be even lower than it is. The fact is that the falling circulations of big city newspapers is largely due to the fact that you are out of step with the values of the communities you purport to serve. Your advertising policy is a mirror of that lack of synchronicity.

Fortunately, business commerce is very darwinian, and companies like yours will either have to adapt your policies, and your editorial biases, or die out.

Chris

[lawrnk]

The Houston Chronicle is barely any better. No classified for "assault weapons"