Rabid, anti-NRA OP-ED by alleged journalism professor

[MLeake]

The comments section is scathing, and many of the comments are better written than is the piece by the professor.

Enjoy (and simultaneously mourn if this man truly teaches journalism):

http://www.wvgazette.com/Opinion/OpE...s/201305300071

[Paul B.]

I personally would love to have a face to face discussion with that IDIOT! He doesn't even have history right on the "war of northern aggression."
I believe it was Nikita Kruschev who once said, "There are more communsts teaching in America's schools that in all of Mother Russia." Certainly seems to be in the schools of journalism. JMHO.
Paul B.

[JWT]

It is bad enough, but sadly these types are teaching our young people.

[Tom Servo]

I find it incomprehensible that this was written by a college graduate, much less a professor:

But, the gun safety debate is B.S. This foaming at the mouth, Obamar is coming for the guns, Nanny Bloomberg is a bad billionaire, and most despicable of all, those survivors and victims are pawns in the liberal agenda is knuckle-dragging Cretan talk.

Also, they kept telling us 90% of the country supposedly supported universal background checks. Now it's 85%? Hm.

Not that it really worries me much. This is a minor local newspaper, not a major national one.

[MLeake]

The paper is a small one, true - but if the commenters are correct, the writer is a professor at Marshall, not exactly a minor school.

[Buzzcook]

I don't have any problem with it.

[Evan Thomas]

Originally Posted by Tom Servo

I find it incomprehensible that this was written by a college graduate, much less a professor

I did like "knuckle-dragging Cretan" -- I think there's a bunch of Greeks who would find that a bit annoying.

But the most striking thing about his op-ed piece was that, despite the title ("Gun safety debate is B.S."), he spent very little time addressing the actual arguments in that debate: most of his piece was devoted to attacking and ridiculing those he disagrees with.

And it seems a bit excessive to say that the NRA is advocating treason; I wonder if it might not be libelous, as well.

[MLeake]

"... victory over the Cretins at Sparta!"

(after hearing whisper from other character, a correction)

"... the Spartans at Crete!"

- History of the World, Part I

I guess the journalism professor might have benefited from watching more Mel Brooks movies, prior to writing Op-Eds.

Re: Buzzcook, even if you agree with the guy, you should be appalled by his spelling and grammar.

I don't normally play "English-Nazi" on boards, because the members are not normally professors of English or Journalism. This guy, ostensibly, is, and his skills are lacking.

[thallub]

Deleted by thallub.

[Evan Thomas]

-

It seems his students either love or hate him:

http://www.ratemyprofessors.com/Show...jsp?tid=883043

I'm not so sure about that. Look at the dates of all the negative ratings: they were all submitted in the past couple of days -- after that op-ed piece was published. If you read them carefully, they're reactions to that, not evaluations of his teaching. From students of his? Maybe, but I'm skeptical.

Being a dirt digger; i discovered that Professor Christopher Swindell was canned from, or was forced to resign from, Eastern Kentucky University. It involved a female student.

Let's keep the commentary to the content of the article, instead of attacking the man. Otherwise we're no better than Dr. Swindell.

[Aguila Blanca]

But read the positive ratings, and they confirm that he is generally over-the-top, and teaches primarily his political views rather than the subject matter. This pre-article rater gave him all 4s and 5s, but read the comments:

Pretty full of himself and thinks his material is more demanding than what it is. He genuinely cares about his students though. Look for the lesson in between the bouts of political ranting.

[Evan Thomas]

AB, I did read those; but his political views are obvious from the op-ed piece, and it appears that his students, prior to May 30, all liked him, regardless.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

So, I recently talked to a progun professor at a Southern school who brings his NRA coffee cup to class.

Horrors. I think I mention when I go to a match. Horrors.

I think I stood up for campus carry on campus and in front of the TX House - made the papers and TV.

So this guy said whatever. That's life.

I agree with Vanya that we shouldn't go off on personalities. Not relevant to this forum.

[Aguila Blanca]

Originally Posted by Vanya

AB, I did read those; but his political views are obvious from the op-ed piece, and it appears that his students, prior to May 30, all liked him, regardless.

Yes, and this being the United States in the 21st century, obviously whether or not students like a professor is of far more importance than whether or not he can (like) ... teach.

[Evan Thomas]

Couldn't agree more. My only point was that the negative ratings were likely driven by politics, as response to the op-ed piece, and as such, may not have come from anyone who actually took a class of his. Note the one that just says "journalism" in the space for "class taken," for instance.

[Bluestarlizzard]

errr... Can I point out something?

A good rating combined with negitive comments could be an indication of a crappy but easy professor. I had a few back in the day who where loved because they sucked as teachers but all you had to do was not rock their little boat to get an A.
And an easy A is often unvirsally loved, even when they suck.

The article came off as a nasty bit of ranting by a spoiled brat who isn't getting his way. Not uncommen or unusual by those of certain political leanings in the Ivory Towers of learning.

[KyJim]

I'm not surprised at the professor's anti-gun stance, even though he claims not to be anti-gun. I am not surprised that the professor does not believe in free speech for those whose opinions differ from his. I am not really surprised he would resort to the use of force to impose his will on those who believe in the Constitution. After all, many in the media hold the same views as the professor. I AM VERY SURPRISED he is so honest about what he would do.

[Evan Thomas]

Originally Posted by Bluestarlizzard

The article came off as a nasty bit of ranting by a spoiled brat who isn't getting his way.

It certainly came across as a rant by someone who hasn't grasped the difference between arguing against a policy and trashing the people who support it. At least in public, academics are usually able to make that distinction.

On the other hand, when you look at the state of so-called journalism today, especially broadcast journalism (which is Dr. Swindell's field), it's not surprising that journalists are being trained by such people. The cliché is "If it bleeds, it leads" -- and an article like that is the written equivalent of going for blood instead of facts. It's all about hurting political opponents, not about showing why they're wrong.

Originally Posted by KyJim

I am not really surprised he would resort to the use of force to impose his will on those who believe in the Constitution.

Actually, he's making a rhetorical point there, not an actual proposal. He's saying, I think, that it's unrealistic to talk of opposing a "tyrannical" government with small arms, when that government would bring Abrams tanks, etc., to bear. Note that the following paragraph starts with "So, to return to reality, all of us."

His real agenda is this, and it's not new. "And when the next domestic terrorist with an assault rifle comes along, we can blame the leaders and fringe of the NRA for arming them."

[Drizzt]

I was more interested by the comments following the article and his vain attempts at rebutting the arguments that were absolutely destroying him. Cheers to the commenters who generally kept the replies classy and informative, making the 'professor' look like even more of a cry-baby.

[dakota.potts]

Wow. I have never seen so many people so clearly unanimous in their opinions. See 500 Facebook likes of the dissenters vs. 2 for the author. And not a single person in over 100 comments I read supporting the author.


Perhaps we can lean back and call this a small, sweet victory.

[Kreyzhorse]

What is the old saying.... Those who can't teach?

Hope he teaches better than he writes.

[jtmckinney]

Poorly written piece. I don't see it changing anybodys mind that may be on the fence.

Not a lot of difference from the way the President reacted to the background check bill going down. I am thinking a fly on the wall with a tape recorder when Obama, Biden and their inner circle got the news would have heard something very similar. I don't know about the rest of you but I thought that was SWEET!!

Have a great day!
James

[Glenn E. Meyer]

About F-22s against the population. Given the number of F-22s in service and the number of NRA members - each F-22 has to be responsible for about 27000 people.

Guy is a jerk.

[Evan Thomas]

Originally Posted by Glenn E. Meyer

Guy is a jerk.

Oh, poop, Glenn. Everyone's been so good about not calling Dr. Swindell names, and you just had to go and say what we're all thinking.

[Spats McGee]

Originally Posted by Bluestarlizzard

The article came off as a nasty bit of ranting by a spoiled brat who isn't getting his way.

Yes, it did.

I was also struck by how quickly he tried to establish the "rightness" of his claims, simply by stating the following:

I am not a New York gun control liberal, either. I support a shotgun for home defense, a handgun for limited conceal/carry, and an assortment of hunting rifles to balance West Virginia's exploding deer population (as evidenced by hourly collisions with cars). So, I am hardly out of the mainstream.

Perhaps I should know the name of this particular argument, but it escapes me at the moment. It amounts to "everyone agrees with me, so I must be right."

I was also struck by how quickly he resorted to ridiculing those who oppose his views:

But, the gun safety debate is B.S. This foaming at the mouth, Obamar is coming for the guns, Nanny Bloomberg is a bad billionaire, and most despicable of all, those survivors and victims are pawns in the liberal agenda is knuckle-dragging Cretan talk.