LA Gun Buy Back Program yields "rocket launchers" - what a lie it was

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Howard

Lifer
Oct 14, 1999
47,982
11
81
The thing is though, a properly demilled firearm is not a "gun" in the eyes of the law. You can mail it, background check not required, felons can own it, legal to possess in Chicago and DC.

So no, not a rocket launcher.
If they were talking in the legal sense you might think that the journalists were now lawyers.
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,268
126
If they were talking in the legal sense you might think that the journalists were now lawyers.

Lawyers are not needed to misrepresent or participate in a farce. Appeal to legaliism isn't a valid excuse. The LA police had no reason to show things more dangerous than an umbrella stand, and the press did not have to create a headline which left that in doubt.
 

StrangerGuy

Diamond Member
May 9, 2004
8,443
124
106
The problem is if the writer wrote 7.62x39 common people wouldn't know what to make of it.. So he writes AK47.. Is it definitely from an AK47? I can't say, but it's fairly likely. Regardless, what the author wanted to convey is that the crime was committed with an assault type rifle. Sure it's possible it was something else chambered in the caliber, but very likely it was an" assault rifle. " Is it poor journalism? Sure, to a degree. But it's a bit pedantic to get up in arms about.

Dumbing down things to people to make them understand creates the opposite effect of misunderstanding, which is even worse than not understanding it at all. Such an approach has already done enough damage to science education.
 

TheVrolok

Lifer
Dec 11, 2000
24,254
4,092
136
Dumbing down things to people to make them understand creates the opposite effect of misunderstanding, which is even worse than not understanding it at all. Such an approach has already done enough damage to science education.

While I totally agree, it's common practice to write down to your audience in journalism. To make a huge deal out of this specific example is a bit excessive.
 

monovillage

Diamond Member
Jul 3, 2008
8,444
1
0
While I totally agree, it's common practice to write down to your audience in journalism. To make a huge deal out of this specific example is a bit excessive.

This wasn't a singular instance of journalists and Democratic politicians lying to their audience, it happens in the vast majority of firearm stories.
 

JEDIYoda

Lifer
Jul 13, 2005
33,986
3,321
126
Watch this video on CNN:

http://edition.cnn.com/video/#/video/us/2012/12/28/tsr-dnt-l-a-gun-buyback-gets-rocket-launchers.cnn

Now I want to point something out...

For those who don't know, the smaller green tube is a M72 LAW (light anti-tank weapon). If you catch it, you will see that there are holes drilled into the tube. Translation; it is useless. It can't even be reloaded as the LAW was a use once and discard weapon. The larger green tube is a AT-4. Also useless as it is marked with a yellow band denoting it is a "field handling trainer". The AT-4 is also a use once and toss weapon . They come with the round already inside and when shot, they are done. This "field handling trainer" never had a round in it to begin with. What probably happened in both of these cases is that a GI of some sort got hold of these things and had them around. It isn't that uncommon. My buddy's dad was a major in the reserves and he had a used LAW in his basement we used to play with in the 80's. Sometimes, the expended tubes are used for training purposes. Translation; you get to play with them so that you can remember how to use the real thing.

What really freaking irks me here is that the police in LA know this, the expert they interviewed should indeed know this and the "journalist" should have the integrity to do a bit more research on them before they try to sensationalize it and try to scare people. It is shit like that that spreads so much BS about weapons and I think they use it to sway opinion.

Journalism is dead to me. What say you?
your thread title is wrong and useless....
 

corwin

Diamond Member
Jan 13, 2006
8,644
9
81
your thread title is wrong and useless....
Care to elaborate on exactly how you came to this shockingly bad and wrong conclusion? Thread title is exactly correct and quite useful in showing the ignorance of the media
 

monovillage

Diamond Member
Jul 3, 2008
8,444
1
0
Care to elaborate on exactly how you came to this shockingly bad and wrong conclusion? Thread title is exactly correct and quite useful in showing the ignorance and bias of the media

Did an important add for you.
 

TheVrolok

Lifer
Dec 11, 2000
24,254
4,092
136
This wasn't a singular instance of journalists and Democratic politicians lying to their audience, it happens in the vast majority of firearm stories.

It happens happens in many, many, many, many other areas. This isn't unique to firearms. As I said earlier, it also really doesn't impact the story either way. Let's be honest, it very likely was a casing fired from an AK-47, if not, it was a similar rifle and in this story the exact rifle really doesn't matter. Is it poor journalism? Of course it is, but I still think, in this instance, too much is being made out of a small point.
 
Last edited:

monovillage

Diamond Member
Jul 3, 2008
8,444
1
0
It happens happens in many, many, many, many other areas. This isn't unique to firearms. As I said earlier, it also really doesn't impact the story either way. Let's be honest, it very likely was a casing fired from an AK-47, if not, it was a similar rifle and in this story the exact rifle really doesn't matter. Is it poor journalism? Of course it is, but I still think, in this instance, too much is being made out of a small point.

Thank you for the excellent reply. We can agree to disagree on the point.
 

CPA

Elite Member
Nov 19, 2001
30,322
4
0
media-guide-firearms.jpg

lol
 

Fern

Elite Member
Sep 30, 2003
26,907
174
106
Anybody else catch that this was a "buy back" program?

Meaning that the dumbazz government paid good $ for crap that weren't even weapons. How much did they spend on "scary looking" squirt guns etc?

Fern