New York Times Admits Assault weapons are a myth

[nipprdog]

New York Times Finally Admits ?Assault Weapons Are A Myth? | The Federalist Papers

 

[Mgderf]

I wonder how that slipped by the editors?

 

[Denny347]

Huh....who would have thunk it?

 

[femurphy77]

I wonder how that slipped by the editors?

They're all out of town on vacation. Looks like at least one intern will be looking for gainful employment elsewhere Monday!

 

[cobber]

A tad dated, but true nevertheless.

Writer probably still at the re-education camp.

 

[KG1]

Don't worry, this little slip up will be dealt with and it will be business as usual. An even bigger shocker would be if someone over at the other NY rag (Daily News) would ever have the guts to post an honest and fair assessment such as this. Neeeeever happen. They are too busy pumping out their anti-gun vitriol.

 

[Principal Skinr]

Well, it may be that they are changing tactics and are planning o going after "semi-auto" or "repeating" rifles, thus turning them into the new scary weapon. The anti's have gotten smart to ways around their definitions. At least some of them have.

 

[Expat]

Pfft... everyone will just ignore it since it doesn't fit the narrative. They ran that article last year admitting that there really were WMDs in Iraq, but everyone (interestingly on both sides) just ignored it. This will be the same deal.

 

[Principal Skinr]

Pfft... everyone will just ignore it since it doesn't fit the narrative. They ran that article last year admitting that there really were WMDs in Iraq, but everyone (interestingly on both sides) just ignored it. This will be the same deal.

It always amazed me that anyone could know of dead Kurds who had been gassed....MANY years ago, and yet wanted to believe there were no WMDs in Iraq.

I do think they will be trying to come after semi-auto rifles at some point. Looking closely at the new Democrat AWB points clearly in that direction, to me.

 

[Arthur Dent]

I'm not sure of the date of the article in the link but the NYT article is from September 2014.

 

[KG1]

I'm not sure of the date of the article in the link but the NYT article is from September 2014.

Yeah. Cobber pointed that out upthread and It did sound kinda familiar but as cobber stated it still rings true.

 

[Hookeye]

FTNYT.

The article is not any admission or error. It is merely a declaration for a new starting point.
Like the good Principal said..............they want more.

 

[cobber]

What it shows is that the antis haven't had anything approaching a fresh idea since 1994.


People are beginning to notice the same old tripe being recycled. It doesn't taste any better than it did 21 years ago. Just like michelle's fetid school lunches.

 

[Spear Dane]

I like this part:
Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom of Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretence, raised in the United States. – Noah Webster, An Examination into the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution, 1787

 

[throttletony]

thanks for this. good post.

 

[IndyDave1776]

Pfft... everyone will just ignore it since it doesn't fit the narrative. They ran that article last year admitting that there really were WMDs in Iraq, but everyone (interestingly on both sides) just ignored it. This will be the same deal.

It always amazed me that anyone could know of dead Kurds who had been gassed....MANY years ago, and yet wanted to believe there were no WMDs in Iraq.

I would also point out that the renown hotbed of right wing conspiracy theory, ABC News, reported that, contrary to the 'findings' of Joseph Wilson, which were based on Corona-talk at the hotel bar, and later admitted by Wilson to be falsehoods, we did in fact capture a large quantity of yellowcake uranium in Iraq which was subsequently transferred to a Canadian energy producer.