If there is one thing that absolutely makes me sick, it is dishonesty in the media when it comes to their coverage of firearms and firearms incidents.
Now, we already know that the “news” media, in general, has an anti-2A leaning. It’s not exactly a secret to anyone who has been paying attention.
But once you see how clear and blatant the attempt to shape the narrative is, you may find the need to go relieve the nausea that will come along with it. Luke McCoy writes,
Interestingly, the ABC13 article refers to the deceased individual as the “victim” and the armed resident as the “suspect.” This choice of language is concerning in the context of a reported home intrusion, where the person defending their residence has not been charged with a crime and appears to have responded to a forcible and unlawful entry. While “victim” and “suspect” are often standard terms in police reporting and media coverage, their use in this context can mislead readers into assuming criminal guilt or innocence before an investigation concludes. It is more accurate in such incidents to refer to the person who was allegedly breaking in as the “alleged intruder” and the person who used force as the “resident” or “defender,” unless formal charges dictate otherwise.
It’s absolutely appalling to label the person who had to take defensive measures as the “suspect” when they were simply defending themselves and their family, including children in the home.
But most people, when reading news stories, don’t take a critical eye to what they’re reading. They don’t notice the bias. They don’t notice the subtle dishonesty.
It’s pretty disgusting once you recognize it. But recognize it you must if you want to find out what is actually going on in the world. Because just because the media reports something, that doesn’t mean the conclusion that they want you to come to is true.