PDA

View Full Version : Fox is reporting another shooting.


Dust Monkey
April 7, 2009, 01:29 PM
Fox news is reporting another shooting. In Alabama. Idont have a way to post a link, iPhone. So if someone else can, please do b

chemgirlie
April 7, 2009, 01:34 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,513010,00.html

There's the link, but at the moment it's way to early to comment on it.

Double Naught Spy
April 7, 2009, 02:29 PM
http://www.timesdaily.com/article/20090407/NEWS/904079990?Title=Four-dead-in-Greenhill-shooting-search-on-for-Morgan-County-man

more news...

Kreyzhorse
April 7, 2009, 02:29 PM
***? I do think that the constant media coverage of these shooting is starting to propagate additional shootings.

Creature
April 7, 2009, 02:32 PM
I dont...my guess is that shootings involving more than one victim, which normally wouldn't get national coverage, are the popular story to report on right now.

Double Naught Spy
April 7, 2009, 02:33 PM
It's big news, so they report it.

Besides, it is a catch-22 deal if you want to complain about it. You can claim that reporting the shooting is causing more shooting. However, if the press didn't report the shooting, then the claim would be that it was some sort of cover-up or conspiracy and that the public wasn't being kept informed of the ongoing dangers.

ATW525
April 7, 2009, 02:42 PM
***? I do think that the constant media coverage of these shooting is starting to propagate additional shootings.

+1

Lets face it... blowing your own brains out gets you a footnote in the local paper. On the hand, taking as many people with you as you can grabs you national headlines. I expect things will only get worse as the economy continues to falter.

While I believe that the sick and twisted people are ultimately solely responsible for their actions, I can't to think that those actions are influenced by the sensationalism surrounding the way the media portrays the perpetrators of mass killings.

ATW525
April 7, 2009, 02:53 PM
It's big news, so they report it.

Besides, it is a catch-22 deal if you want to complain about it. You can claim that reporting the shooting is causing more shooting. However, if the press didn't report the shooting, then the claim would be that it was some sort of cover-up or conspiracy and that the public wasn't being kept informed of the ongoing dangers.

While it's probably wishful thinking, I think a policy of not naming the shooters in these incidents could go a long way in fixing the situation. They could report on the incident, talk about the victims and the stories of survivors, but just leave the shooter anonymous. That way mass murder would no longer be the easy road to instant fame.

Glenn E. Meyer
April 7, 2009, 02:55 PM
The various experts have been saying for quite a few years that media portrayals of mass shootings influence the next guy. However, trash outlets (like Fox, etc.) will go with Breaking News Alert.

Thank god is hard to be an Octo-mom. Or look at HLN and Nancy Grace - missing toddler or blonde teenager missing of the week. :barf:

Kreyzhorse
April 7, 2009, 03:17 PM
Thank god is hard to be an Octo-mom. Or look at HLN and Nancy Grace - missing toddler or blonde teenager missing of the week.

Dear god no! I cannot take any more Octo-Mom stories! :barf:

Clearly in this age of 24 hour, live any where news, mass shootings are big news and I understand reporting them. Of late, the cycle of shooting feeding shooting seems too obvious to dismiss as pure chance. I'm hoping that the cycle breaks soon.

JuanCarlos
April 7, 2009, 03:22 PM
Thank god is hard to be an Octo-mom. Or look at HLN and Nancy Grace - missing toddler or blonde teenager missing of the week.

I've always heard HLN referred to as "The Dead White Girl Channel." Because that's about all they report on anymore. And Octo-Mom sounds like the world's lamest Batman villain.

Also, shootings like this aren't, to my knowledge, particularly uncommon. Four victims, family of the shooter? Six months ago or six months from now it might not have gotten any national coverage (except perhaps on HLN).

Though the idea of shooting coverage creating a positive-feedback-loop is a little worrying.

Kreyzhorse
April 7, 2009, 06:27 PM
I've always heard HLN referred to as "The Dead White Girl Channel."

Nice....... I'm stealing that! :D

Yellowfin
April 8, 2009, 03:33 PM
It's fitting into their anti gun propaganda campaign. If they wanted to ban Bic ballpoint pens for some reason, we'd see at least one story a week containing ruined expensive clothes, babies choking, pencils being environmentally friendly, and bathroom graffiti, elementary school tattoos, and suicide notes all being written with Bic pens.

JDTech
April 8, 2009, 03:51 PM
Also, shootings like this aren't, to my knowledge, particularly uncommon. Four victims, family of the shooter? Six months ago or six months from now it might not have gotten any national coverage (except perhaps on HLN).

+1....Though tragic this type of ordeal is not new to society, you could replace shot with stabbed and it would never have made it passed local news. The libral media(though Fox is suppose to be unbiased) is just scanning the country for these stories now to make the situation all of a sudden look worse then ever.

hardhit
April 8, 2009, 04:17 PM
I feel for the two innocent children that have had their lives taken away now they can’t grow up and experience life like you and I can…………..because of this man with mental problem who wanted the ultimate control, what a coward.

Glenn E. Meyer
April 8, 2009, 05:24 PM
Fox talking head model during the Wong shooting said something like this:

"Most chilling it was reported that he engaged in target practice every weekend."

Also, once on the Morning Moron show, the blond male doofus went on about gun loonies and the next day had to apologize.

Media journalists adopt the political demeanor for the job, IMHO. I once was listening to a country music station where the DJs sound like the cast from Deliverance. One said to other - didn't you work for the classical station and that good 'ol boy said - Yes and then started to sound like a Shakespearean actor talking about Mozart and chamber music.

jammin1237
April 8, 2009, 05:59 PM
+1 Glenn on the anti media hype...a quote " Since 1995, the annual U.S. total traffic deaths has ranged between 41,000 and 43,000. Transportation Secretary Mary Peters said in December that traffic deaths through the first 10 months of 2008 were down nearly 10%." ..that still equates to over 100 deaths " PER DAY" from traffic accidents and people using their cars as "killing machines"...sorry, i just i made a point there...........

Al Norris
April 8, 2009, 10:30 PM
Sorry jammin1237, but there was no "point" there.

Regardless of the number of deaths due to automobiles, it is comparing apples to oranges. Cars were not designed to kill. Firearms were designed to do exactly that. Kill.

Now, if you had compared killings due to knifings with those compared to guns, you would have had a point. Both were designed to kill.

44capnball
April 9, 2009, 12:31 PM
Sorry jammin1237, but there was no "point" there.

Regardless of the number of deaths due to automobiles, it is comparing apples to oranges. Cars were not designed to kill. Firearms were designed to do exactly that. Kill.

He did have a point, if I may differ.

We lose roughly a 9/11 attack each month on our highways, in terms of the number of people dead. 3,000 people a month, and that's even after increased safety and a drop in automobile fatalities.

Just because the car wasn't "designed" to kill doesn't mean anything. The friends and loved ones lost are just as gone. The pain is just as bad. The fact that someone can get in a car and there's nothing to stop them from taking someone's life, is just as bad.

Furthermore, it's not really an apples to oranges comparison, because one of the angles played by the antis, maybe the biggest angle, is the public safety issue. Something that kills 3,000 people a month would be the bigger public safety issue, if public safety were really the reason. Now, if you want to argue that this isn't the actual reason, just the stated one, then that's a different story.

Glenn E. Meyer
April 9, 2009, 02:01 PM
There has been a great deal of research on moral and the causal nature of moral actions.

One big differentiator is between two systems - a moral system that is instinctive and works out a subconscious outrage heuristic.

The other is making moral decisions on overtly conscious cost/benefit analysis.

This dichotomy is active in gun debates.

One moral and automatic heuristic is not to deliberately cause a death. Firearms have as a major purpose the use as a weapon that may cause death. Cars do not have that as a major purpose.

Thus, the gun death rate (even if smaller in number than a car rate) is seen automatically as most henious. The gun and harm connection is deliberate. The car is not.

If you make a second system rational argument about firerarms - you need to understand that you have to talk to the first system mentation also and folks who are outraged by gun deaths won't buy a cost / benefit argument.

jammin1237
April 9, 2009, 06:03 PM
my point about car "killings" is just that... a major point... reckless behavior and injury to others with one metal object and another metal object should be treated the same... people call automobile tragedies "accidents"..... while gun tragedies are viewed as "premeditated evil murder with a dangerous weapon designed to kill" i have driven well over a million miles so far and i see people take extreme risks with their own lives and other peoples lives just by operating a basic mechanical device that is "accepted" by our society... we know how to operate a car safely yet it is still used in an unsafe manner every day by people who let their emotions take over and they think they can act out whatever they want as long as they are in their "metal eggshell"...
the end result is still the same..."more deaths"
i'm not talking apples and oranges here... i' talking about human beings.......



cheers!

a7mmnut
April 9, 2009, 06:08 PM
We've had three more this week, two involved attacks on responding police. The point is---WHY ARE THEY ALL NOW MAKING THE NEWS?????

:mad: -7- :mad:

44 AMP
April 9, 2009, 09:25 PM
Because they are all news. And We notice them more because they are "Front Page" or whetever the term is for TV and Internet.

The Economy is important, The Pres. is important, etc. But the shootings are new NEWS, not ongoing news.

"If it bleeds, it leads"....

Sure, we lose thousands every month to car accidents, inspite of all the improvements in safety. People are concerned, but bottom line is that they are considered accidents, not deliberate acts.

Besides, it is April, the traditional month for the crazies to come out of the woodwork.

stevelyn
April 9, 2009, 11:19 PM
Besides, it is April, the traditional month for the crazies to come out of the woodwork.

I've been saying that all along.

Glenn E. Meyer
April 10, 2009, 12:07 PM
my point about car "killings" is just that... a major point... reckless behavior and injury to others with one metal object and another metal object should be treated the same...

As I explained that it is a view that gun folks sometimes put forward. The gun is a tool. However, if you don't understand the role of functional intention of the metal object - you ain't gonna be able to convince someone who is on the fence on the gun issue. Nor will a lack of punctuation aid the cause. :D

Choir arguments don't sing outside the choir and we have to understand why.

jammin1237
April 10, 2009, 03:23 PM
it may seem like my comments are trying to mislead or get of topic, but that is not my intention and i do respect everyones input...from what i have read, some of the first cannons/hand guns were mentioned around 1300 AD...im sure there were plenty of technological devices developed before that, for example,blow darts have been around for "quite a while":)...
from my point of view, all of these were invented for survival purposes...if it is hunting with a gun so you can feed your family, great...if it is a gun for self defense, great...if it is knife to cut bread, great...if it is a car to get you there, great..if it is a plane to fly you to Cancun, great...if one certain technology gets in the hands of the ones who want to misuse it, then you will see it propagated by FOX and or the rest of them, maybe, unless driven by bias...

a "firearm is designed for one purpose, to kill" huh?what?...i have many firearms and the last thing i think about is "killing"...if thats all you see then you have blinders on...

if we lose the right to bear arms in this country, then all the rest of the so called freedoms/rights will be lost soon there after, welcome to the Socialist Republic of America...

as a culture we have to start thinking how we can start changing peoples attitudes for the "common good" and personally applying ourselves to start helping others all we can, no more hiding behind our suits and ties, skirts, or otherwise... rather than trying to force people to change( because trying to force them wont work, remember prohibition, anybody have kids? )...

the constitution is there for a reason, uphold it, dont mess with it, and i will continue to have words with any who feel other wise...


cheers!