The Big Problem With ‘Journalism’ About Guns Summed Up In One Stupid Question

8
737

If you’re a journalist who talks about gun issues such as lethal force use of firearms regularly, shouldn’t it be common sense that you should actually understand what a firearm is for and why you would use it?

You would think so, especially when that “journalist” is at a major news network. But, no, apparently Wolf Blitzer can’t even be bothered to understand these types of situations so that he can intelligently report on them. Recently, Blitzer was talking with CNN’s Law Enforcement Analyst, Charles Ramsey, about the recent shooting in Philadelphia. From the CNN transcript of that exchange:

[Blitzer]: So could these officers have escalated the situation if they obviously could have used Tasers if they had them, but they didn’t have Tasers. But why shoot to kill opposed to shoot to injure and just prevent anything from going further?

RAMSEY: Well, officers are trained to shoot at what we call center mass. Despite what you may see on TV, it’s not easy to hit extremities and so forth (ph), especially under stress. So officers are trained to shoot center mass, not shoot to kill. But, unfortunately, that does happen.

The officers I’m told took him to the hospital right afterwards to try to get some assistance for him. Unfortunately, he died.

It’s always a tragedy when anyone loses their life. You know, now we have information that the officers may not have had when they responded.

Again, did he have mental health problems? After the fact, people start learning a lot more about it. But when you’re at the scene and you have an individual armed with a knife coming toward you, it’s a whole different type of situation, and the officers have to make very quick judgments.

In another instance from 2014, Blitzer asked why officers in an incident didn’t fire a warning shot in the air before shooting someone.

Advertisement

Clearly, Blitzer doesn’t understand the use of firearms for self-protection or law enforcement. Ed Morrissey clarifies it when he writes,

The safest choice [when a firearm is used] is to aim for center mass at the actual target, if police have to shoot at all [so that they don’t unintentionally injure someone else with the firearm]. It’s not “shoot to kill,” it’s “shoot to stop the threat while minimizing all other risks.” One would think Blitzer would have learned that by now.

Sadly, though, I have to agree with Morrissey that Blitzer is still clueless, and, in my opinion, it appears that his ignorance is intentional which is inexcusable.

Advertisement

8 COMMENTS

  1. I can’t think of a single Democrat who knows anything about firearms, policing, law enforcement or the Constitution.

  2. I for one would love to see some fair and balanced reporting about firearms for a change. I am sick of constantly being lied to by propagandists who don’t care one iota about facts or truth in their blatantly false lies.

    Anti-gunners do not want to be educated about what they are vehemently against, because the more facts you get the less anti-gun policies make sense. They WANT to be able to claim ignorance when they are caught in their lies.
    Anyone who knows what they are talking about when it come to firearms, and armed law abiding citizenry, know that crimes are reduced when the victims of criminals can protect themselves. Who is possibly stupid enough to claim this fact is false?
    Millions of crimes are stopped annually by armed citizens.
    Criminals in jail who were interviewed freely reported that 40% of them had at least once NOT committed a crime after seeing the presence of a firearm. Even when the firearm was never used, or even drawn from a holster, it still prevented crimes.
    The list of facts goes on that prove firearms save lives, prevent crime, and are used lawfully and safely in well over 99% of all the times they are used. Facts anti-gunners try to ignore, if they don’t actively suppress them.

    Actual deaths from firearms not including suicides are far fewer than the reported numbers claimed by anti-gun Leftists. Normally >60% of the gun deaths they falsely claim are murders are in fact suicides.
    Rifles, Shotguns, and all other non-handgun sized firearms including so called “assault weapons” like the AR and the AK result in roughly 400 deaths annually nationwide. This includes suicides.
    Many people shot each year survive being shot, assuming they get medical treatment in a timely manner, especially those shot with a handgun.
    The list of false claims and outright lies by anti-gunners are many and appalling, yet they continue to make these false claims every day knowing them to be misleading at best. And they continue to make the same claims even once they have been told they are lies.

    • In support of your position. The CDC did research on “gun violence” in 2012. They found that law abiding Americans used their legally owned guns to stop violent crimes 500,000 to 3 million times every year. If a government makes it difficult or expensive to keep and bear arms, some of those crimes will not be stopped. Gun control would INCREASE the violent crime rates!

  3. Wolf is *&^$%* and has no conception of the laws of most states and that whoever is killed by that warning shot is still a dead person. Shoot in the air and it has to come down. Shoot it in a city like Philadelphia you get all kinds of ricochets and if you shoot into the ground all it takes is one little pebble in the soil and, heck, you could get yourself with a ricochet.

  4. “In another instance from 2014, Blitzer asked why officers in an incident didn’t fire a warning shot in the air before shooting someone. ”

    Because it’s ILLEGAL to do so, because what goes up must come down.
    People have been killed by bullets fired into the air.
    Does the idiot think bullets fired into the air just vanish?

  5. If all media outlets who spread false information were to have their FCC licenses suspended (as Federal law provides for), none would be on the air! Typical totalitarian tactics are to spread misinformation to brainwash the constituents into thinking their “government” is looking out for their interests! Media has to “report” what the gov’t says or risk “having their ticket pulled” and losing their jobs!

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.