Major media outlets have ignored notifications that their reports earlier this month that Richmond police confiscated a submachine gun were false and misleading, a check of those stories made Thursday reveals. That’s despite being told of a report that Police Chief Chris Magnus admitted “I never stated that the gun was fully automatic” and “Confis Uzis was semi-auto.”
Some of the early media accounts appeared to contradict the chief’s assertion, citing another police source.
“Officers were in the 900 block of Ninth Street around 4 p.m. when they saw the teen take off running and pull a machine gun from his waistband, Sgt. Nicole Abetkov said Tuesday,” KTUV.com claimed. The Abetkov sourcing was repeated in one NBC Bay Area report, although another report from that station did not provide a source for the assumption, and neither account presented a direct quote.
Viewers and readers were told the weapon was a “submachinegun” by Contra Costa Times, The Los Angeles Times, CBS SF Bay Area, UPI, and the Associated Press via San Jose Mercury News, among the outlets identified by this column. Of those, several were contacted, told of the admission by Chief Magnus, and asked if they would now issue retractions with a correction. None even responded, let alone informed their readers of the misinformation they spread, despite how easy it would be to contact the Richmond PD for clarification.
Informed advocates for the right to keep and bear arms know scaring the public is a key tactic devised by an extreme citizen disarmament group, which has been relying on media cooperation to help spread confusion for decades. They’ve admitted as much.
“The weapons’ menacing looks, coupled with the public’s confusion over fully automatic machine guns versus semi-automatic assault weapons — anything that looks like a machine gun is assumed to be a machine gun — can only increase the chance of public support for restrictions on these weapons. In addition, few people can envision a practical use for these weapons,” Violence Policy Center Executive Director Josh Sugarmann wrote back in 1988. So-called “journalists” who either don’t know the difference, or know but have an interest in perpetuating public ignorance, have been playing along with VPC ever since.
That several of the major media players in this instance have been informed of this development, yet have chosen to ignore such information, goes beyond laziness and/or deliberate indifference to accuracy. This is documented evidence they cannot refute, proof that they don’t care about the truth of this matter and are willfully misleading their readers and audiences. This demonstrates for any who care to see that their “news” accounts are little more than agenda-driven propaganda disseminated by committed anti-gun activists masquerading as news organizations.
That makes it fair to wonder what other topics they do this with, and why anyone caught spreading falsehoods who refuses to correct the record should be trusted in anything they say about any topic where “progressives” have a control interest.
While such complicity of what Joe Biden refers to as “legitimate news media” and Dianne Feinstein calls “real reporters” is hardly news to gun rights activists, perhaps others will begin to question where and when else “Authorized Journalists” have been lying to them, and come to the correct conclusion that many are nothing more than “Fourth Estate Fifth Columnists.”
If you’re a regular Gun Rights Examiner reader and believe it provides news and perspectives you won’t find in the mainstream press, please subscribe to this column and help spread the word by sharing links, promoting it on social media like Facebook (David) and Twitter (@dcodrea), and telling your like-minded friends about it. And for more commentary, be sure to visit “The War on Guns: Notes from the Resistance.”
When it comes to gun laws, the antis love them so much they’d like to make a patchwork quilt out of them. The latest GUNS Magazine “Rights Watch” column is online, and you can read it before the issue hits the stands. Click here to read “Preemptive Strike.”