Disgusting Evidence of Media Twisting of Firearm Instance


For anyone with any awareness of how the world works, it doesn’t take long to realize that, too often, the media twists the truth of a situation for their own purposes. Sometimes it’s just sensationalism so they can sell more advertising by attracting more eyeballs. Sometimes, though, it’s intentional misrepresentation for the purpose of pushing an agenda.

A recent story about an incident in Jackson, Mississippi might have you thinking that law-abiding gun owners are careless people who cause other people to be injured through that carelessness. Bob Irwin gives us details:

USA Today reports on 05-26-2017 in Jackson, Mississippi, Story Headline “She’s in jail after dropping purse — because gun inside it went off”

A 58 year old woman from Philadelphia, Mississippi was in Lakeland Family Medicine Center on the University of Mississippi Medical Center campus Thursday when she had a mishap.

The woman dropped her purse and the gun inside it discharged. Another woman waiting in a doctor’s office was wounded by the bullet. An ambulance transported the victim, whose name was not released, to the nearby hospital’s emergency room. Her wound to the leg is not believed to be life threatening.

Mississippi has one of the most permissive gun laws across the USA, allowing a person “constitutional carry” privileges of having a concealed firearm without a state-issued permit. However, the building where the incident occurred had signs outside forbidding firearms on the premises.

She was charged with three misdemeanors – possession of a stolen firearm, carrying a concealed weapon and simple assault according to the jail website. Campus police arrested the “shooter” and booked her into the Hinds County Detention Center.

Now, if you’re like many people who only read the first two or three paragraphs, you would think that it’s just that gun owners are careless and shootings like this probably happen all the time. And, hey, if gun owners are so careless, then they shouldn’t have guns, right?


But you finally get a few more details in the last two paragraphs: This wasn’t a legal gun owner (the gun was stolen). Beyond that, what the article doesn’t tell you is that the lady who was arrested was a convicted felon who isn’t legally allowed to have a gun. Oh, and she was in a building designated a gun-free zone (that obviously stopper her from carrying, didn’t it?).

In other words, this lady broke three laws that didn’t have anything to do with legal and responsible gun use.

So, USA Today implies that gun owners are the problem.

Unfortunately, I’m not surprised, and neither should you be surprised. This is why we all must remain vigilant to be responsible gun owners, to help other people become well trained responsible gun owners, and to also keep telling other people the truth about gun ownership: criminals are the problem. Not legal gun owners.



  1. Take the time, like I have on multiple occasions, get ANY NEWSPAPER from any medium sized or larger city, record every instance of criminal activity where a gun is involved and you will plainly see the fallacy of gun laws. I have never had a result of less than 92% of those arrested, usually higher, who are not using a stolen gun, are people who are already, by EXISTING LAW, banned from having a gun or some other criminal activity. It is a rare occasion when the problem is with the law abiding citizen, it is simple, it is the criminal, not the gun that is the problem.

  2. Man runs over pedestrian and hits another car and bicycle. Man was out on parole,had no drivers license and car was stolen. Does this mean all drivers are the danger or just one who was a criminal,and he was the problem not all drivers? These who are calling themselves media are more of the problem by not telling the truth and are pushing the anti drivers and bad car lies. Today’s media is a bought and paid for group. The ones with big money can buy anything they don’t like to be done away with. Not like in the 50s where truth ruled.

  3. The media strikes again. All the myriad laws we have already are enough. Enforce them, and do not blame criminal conduct on law abiding citizens. There are countless stories of how responsible gun ownership (our Second Amendment right) has saved untold lives.

  4. Some people know that sensational stories on the front page PAY BETTER than a blip on page 8. GOOD things can’t be sensationalized and usually get ignored. The fact that a good person with a firearm stops crime daily is (sometimes) only mentioned in the local paper.

  5. Plain fact, USA Today deals in and with half the story, half truths, like many branches of the media tree, all to often serving as propaganda outlets rather than sources of factual information and or the whole story, the whole story, when and if told creating an entirely different slant or picture. Shame on USA Today, shame on media.

  6. Well I tried an experiment with guns I legally own the experiment was as follows. I placed a Loaded rifle and a loaded hand gun on the dining room table. I sat and watched both guns for 24 hours drinking a lot of coffee in the process. After 24 hours I gave up watching because neither of the guns got off the table and went out and fired themselves. I unloaded the guns and locked them up again. The experiment was to see just how dangerous the guns were. My findings were that guns don’t commit crimes PEOPLE DO.!!

  7. This incident is not a legal occurrence and as such, cannot be held up as an example. As such, it has no bearing on “gun control” But my stance on that issues is that accidents or killings are a people issue, not a weapons issue. Yet we are a long way from solving the people issues. As a result, we have to have the right to defend ourselves and we do.

  8. I am a Liberal, a gun owner, and a concealed carry permit holder in 4 states, which means that I can and do legally carry in 40 some states. I do read and listen to lots of information and news sources including this site. The article itself does not give enough information to get that excited about much of anything, for example we do not know what “stolen” means in this context. Does it mean that she held up a gun store? Or did her boy friend give it to her only to say that she took it without permission only to save himself from jail time himself, context is important.

    What strikes me as truly odd is that in all of the gun safety and gun carry courses that I have to get and maintain concealed carry permits in multiple states I have never once heard “Oh yes please be sure not to drop your fire arm because modern firearms are designed so poorly that they will of course discharge and kill the person with a lawyer standing next to you.” To the contrary I have always been told that “you can hit it with a hammer or throw it against a wall” and a modern firearm will not discharge unless one pull the trigger.

    If this actually was a newspaper story, why is no one asking the question of why a discharge from a drop – it would seem to me that if this in fact was the case that the manufacturer would be liable.

    • Not an expert here, but she may have probably had one of those built-in safeties and had it cocked. Can’t wait to read about the mishandlings of those new cell phone guns.

Comments are closed.