|
|
|
NOTE!
This is a real-time comments system. As such, it's also a
free speech zone within guidelines set forth on the Post
Comments page. Opinions expressed here may or may not
reflect those of KeepAndBearArms staff, members, or
any other living person besides the one who posted them.
Please keep that in mind. We ask that all who post
comments assure that they adhere to our Inclusion
Policy, but there's a bad apple in every
bunch, and we have no control over bigots and
other small-minded people. Thank you. --KeepAndBearArms.com
|
The
Below Comments Relate to this Newslink:
Entertainment TV’s Bias Against Guns
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
are 2 comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
The media’s pro-gun-control bias doesn’t just distort news coverage. TV networks have used their primetime entertainment shows to portray gun rights advocates as dishonest, extremist and unconcerned about the loss of innocent lives. At the same time, advocates of gun control are portrayed as caring, upstanding and responsible citizens. |
| Comment by:
mickey
(9/7/2018)
|
I'm proud to say that I didn't even recognize the titles of any of the shows mentioned in Lott's article.
I might have a lot of wasted time in my life, but none of it is as wasteful as watching TV network propaganda. |
| Comment by:
MarkHamTownsend
(9/7/2018)
|
The tv shows reviewed in this article show tv characters expressing some fantasmagorically IGNORANT and STUPID remarks about guns and especially gun free zones, usually by people whose real-life counterparts would know better.
The original MacGyver was gun phobic as well. This is not new.
I think I may have seen one episode of the new reboot. Lame. Lame. Lame. |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| For, in principle, there is no difference between a law prohibiting the wearing of concealed arms, and a law forbidding the wearing such as are exposed; and if the former be unconstitutional, the latter must be so likewise. But it should not be forgotten, that it is not only a part of the right that is secured by the constitution; it is the right entire and complete, as it existed at the adoption of the constitution; and if any portion of that right be impaired, immaterial how small the part may be, and immaterial the order of time at which it be done, it is equally forbidden by the constitution. [Bliss vs. Commonwealth, 12 Ky. (2 Litt.) 90, at 92, and 93, 13 Am. Dec. 251 (1822) |
|
|
