Misleading/Biased Associated Press Article about Recent Mass

[Douva]

This Associated Press article is the epitome of shoddy, lopsided journalism:

http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2009Apr07/ ... en,00.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

To say the article is misleading is a massive understatement. It blurs the line between the permits required in some states to OWN a gun and the permits required in other states to CARRY a gun. The article never states which gunmen actually had permits or what types of permits they had. The only specific example cited is Jiverly Wong, the gunman from the civic center shooting in New York State, who had a permit to OWN the two handguns used. If anything, that shooting demonstrates that the stricter gun control laws in states like New York do not, as gun control advocates suggest, prevent this type of tragedy.

My favorite line in the article reads, “Nearly every gunman in this monthlong series of mass killings was legally entitled to fire his weapons.” Legally entitled to fire his weapons AT WHAT?

Here is the full text of the article:

----------------------------

Licensed to kill? Gunmen in killings had permits

By DEBORAH HASTINGS – 1 hour ago

They had more in common than unleashing carnage — nearly every gunman in this monthlong series of mass killings was legally entitled to fire his weapons.

So what does that say about the state of gun control laws in this country? One thing appears certain: the regulations aren't getting stricter. Many recent efforts to change weapons laws have been about easing them.

Despite eight rampages that have claimed 57 lives since March 10, "it hasn't sparked any national goal to deal with this epidemic. In fact, it's going the other way," said Scott Vogel of the Freedom States Alliance, a gun control activist group.

Even President Barack Obama has felt that sway. Last month, 65 House Democrats said they would block any attempt to resurrect an expired federal ban against assault weapons.

The pro-gun Democrats, led by Rep. Mike Ross of Arkansas, wrote Attorney General Eric Holder saying they opposed not only a ban on military-style guns, but also efforts "to pass any similar law."

Gun control issues would only produce "a long and divisive fight," they said, at a time when Congress should be focused on the roiling economy.

A few states are trying to loosen gun restrictions. In the Texas Capitol — where legislators can carry guns — bills easily passed the Senate in recent weeks that would allow employees to bring weapons to work as long as they leave them locked in their cars, and let those packing heat off the legal hook if they walked into a bar that didn't have signs saying guns weren't allowed inside.

The state also is considering allowing students licensed to carry a concealed weapon — there are about 300,000 such adults in Texas — to bring guns on campus.

Kansas plans to put a measure on its 2010 ballot that would rewrite the state constitution to make gun ownership a personal, rather than collective, right. In Tennessee, lawmakers made progress this month toward allowing guns to be carried in state and local parks.

"I think you're seeing a continuing change of culture," Vogel said. "I think the gun lobby wants to take away any stigma to gun ownership. I think they feel emboldened, like who's going to stop them?"

The National Rifle Association, the country's most powerful gun lobbying group, declined to comment this week on gun control laws. "Now is not the time to debate politics or discuss policy. It is time for families and communities to grieve and to heal," it said in a prepared statement.

Groups such as Vogel's, and the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, say existing laws are already too weak — just look at the men who received gun permits, legally bought high-powered weapons, and then mowed down family, friends and total strangers in these past few weeks, they say.

Joining their outrage was the U.S. Conference of Mayors. "How many more gun-related acts of violence must we experience before the nation's leaders will decide that it is time to act?" asked president Manuel Diaz, mayor of Miami.

Gun enthusiasts say there is no way to prevent human beings from committing insane acts. Whether they have a gun permit or not.

On Friday, a depressed and angry Jiverly Wong used a 9 mm and .45-caliber handgun to kill 13 immigrants and service center employees in Binghamton, N.Y., police said. Earlier that day, the ethnic Chinese immigrant from Vietnam mailed an envelope to a Syracuse television station. In it were his gun permit, photos of him smiling while hoisting shiny, big handguns, and his driver's license.

Questions have been raised over the upstate New York gun permit issued to Wong in 1997. Two years later, he was reported to state police by an informer who claimed Wong was planning a bank heist to feed a crack-cocaine habit. Unlike other areas of the state, including New York City, Wong's Broome County permit did not have to be renewed.

Local authorities, however, have broad discretion in reviewing and revoking such permits, according to legal experts. Especially when it comes to drug use, criminal behavior and violence.

"In retrospect, this is probably not a guy who should have had a gun," said attorney Jeffrey Chamberlain, a former Rochester prosecutor and chief counsel to the New York State Police. "No one likes to see things fall through the cracks and it looks like this guy fell through the cracks."

Binghamton police chief Joseph Zikuski said Tuesday that no robbery occurred and there was no merit to review Wong's gun permit.

In New York City, gun permits are reissued every three years.

Yet, regulations differ only slightly between states, Chamberlain said. "They're fairly typical — don't be a felon, don't be a drunk, don't beat your kids or your wife. Don't be so mentally unbalanced that you need be in an institution."

To Chamberlain, the answer to gun violence lies not in stricter regulations, but in answering the question, "Why are we so tolerant of having guns in this country? The answer to that is historical. We've had guns for a very long time.

"I can't think of any sweeping law change that would address that."

To Vogel, the answer to why atrocities happen in places such as Binghamton, and before that Washington state and Santa Clara, Calif., lies in sheer numbers.

The number 280 million, to be precise, the estimated total of every gun in this country.

"When you have that many guns, those guns are going to be used in horrific ways," Vogel said. "There's just too many. Inevitably, somehow, some way, those weapons are going to be used in an egregious way."

Copyright © 2009 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.

----------------------------

Anyone who wants to know the difference between people who are licensed in other states to OWN guns and people who are licensed in Texas to CARRY guns should check out this op-ed I had published in the Fort Worth Star-Telegram last week: http://www.star-telegram.com/242/story/1293901.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[TxRVer]

In Tennessee, lawmakers made progress this month toward allowing guns to be carried in state and local parks.

I agree it was all misleading, except the sentence I quoted.

[NuBer92]

well there is your first mistake. Fox news in incredibly biased and is polishing off their fear mongering skills. Remember how to win a war?? HEARTS AND MINDS!! Although i no longer believe other mainstream media. The key is international news that tells the actual stories as opposed to the fabrications both sides of the machine feed us day in and day out. Why do they waste our time with trivial NONSENSE when we have issues that are really pressing America, like where are our jobs and careers that dont involve the phrase, the customer is always right, because THEY ARE NOT!!!

[Douva]

I'm actually surprised this came from foxnews. They... you know... tend to be the only news station that's more conservative leaning.

It's an Associated Press article. Several dozen news outlets, including Fox News, have already picked it up.

[kalipsocs]

All I know is....where do I buy low-powered weapons....anyone? Anyone? Bueler?

[NuBer92]

buy a .38 spcl!!!

[Fangs]

All I know is....where do I buy low-powered weapons....anyone? Anyone? Bueler?

Sling shot, ask Goliath.

I would like for them to point out how many people have died in car wrecks every time they quote gun-related deaths.

[Douva]

There has been some confusion about whether Jiverly Wong, the gunman in the civic center shooting in Binghamton, NY, had a permit to carry a gun or simply a permit to possess a gun.

The confusion is based largely on this photo from News 10 in Syracuse, NY. It appears at first glance that the permit is a concealed carry permit; however, if you look at the vertical text on the right side of the face of the permit, you’ll see that it says “TARGET SHOOTING – HUNTING.”



According to the New York State Police website, “ONLY A QUALIFIED RETIRED LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER or SELF-PROTECTION LICENSE ARE FULL CARRY LICENSES.”

This is how a “TARGET SHOOTING – HUNTING” license is described by the NY State Police website:

(1) SPORTSMAN – (Target and Hunting) – For the underlined purposes, firearms may only be transported between your residence and an authorized target shooting range, a legal hunting area in New York State and while actually afield hunting.

Of course, even if Mr. Wong’s permit had been a fully carry license, that wouldn’t change the fact that he carried his guns without also having his license in his possession (a violation of NY state law), that he carried his guns into a “gun free zone” (NY state law prohibits the possession of firearms “upon a building or grounds, used for educational purposes”), and that he violated numerous state and federal laws by murdering thirteen people. A carry permit does not ENABLE a person to commit premeditated murder.

[Lodge2004]

According to the New York State Police website, “ONLY A QUALIFIED RETIRED LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER or SELF-PROTECTION LICENSE ARE FULL CARRY LICENSES.”

So if you live in NY State, and apply for a "Self Protection License", and are denied the license by the State, does that mean you must lay there and take whatever the BG dishes out? Just trying to wrap my mind around that concept.

[Purplehood]

My favorite line in the article reads, “Nearly every gunman in this monthlong series of mass killings was legally entitled to fire his weapons.” Legally entitled to fire his weapons AT WHAT?

None of them were legally entitled to fire their weapons. There are laws against homicide. News-dorks.

/does that pass the 10-year old rule?

[jimlongley]

According to the New York State Police website, “ONLY A QUALIFIED RETIRED LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER or SELF-PROTECTION LICENSE ARE FULL CARRY LICENSES.”

So if you live in NY State, and apply for a "Self Protection License", and are denied the license by the State, does that mean you must lay there and take whatever the BG dishes out? Just trying to wrap my mind around that concept.

Yes, in NY State, which is why I escaped from their years ago.

NY used to issue unrestricted carry licenses to anyone who "qualified" including various civilians, then some activist anti-gun judges started writing restrictions on the faces of the licenses, such as "Target Shooting", "Hunting", and even "Fishing."

In the pantheon of unintended consequences what happened next is a classic.

We, a coalition of gun clubs, sportsmans clubs, and fish and game cliubs, sued a couple of the judges over their modification of the document, which it was illegal to deface, etc. and we lost the suit, essentially codifying the judges' perfidy. Where there used to be only two classes of NY state pistol permit, there are now an almost unlimited number.

There used to be only "premises" permits and "carry" permits. A premises permit allowed the holder to purchase a pistol, which is a convoluted process in itself, and have that pistol on property they own or control as well as limited privileges to transport and possibly shoot at a range. A carry permit was good just about anywhere, even in bars and courtrooms, until the judges started writing on the faces of the permits.

Now a "Licensing Officer" (not always a judge) can limit carry to anything they can conceive of.

There used to be a different set of standards for a carry permit that a premises permit, which is why it is a surprise to me that Chow had a carry permit, even limited, much less a premises permit.

I spent several years attempting to obtain a NY State pistol permit, to no avail, but I also lived in a jurisdiction saddled with one of the worst of the activist anti-gun judges in the entire state, a judge we sued over and over again.

Interestingly enough, when I moved to IL, I was able to finally own a handgun without anything more than a FOID.

To purchase a pistol in NY, it is necessary to pay for the gun, and essentially have it stored at the dealer, and then apply for your permit, because you need to have the serial number of the gun to apply, and then you wait.

And if you get your permit, then you can go get your gun, but only that one, and if you want to buy another, you pay for it, and then apply for an amendment to your original permit, which is not a foregone conclusion, and wait.

Again, that Chow had a permit at all is a surprise, considering his background, NY State Police's Pistol Permit Bureau, where a friend of mine used to work, keeps a very close eye on permit holders and any minor infraction can result in revocation and confiscation of your guns.