January 16, 2010

Our "Elite" Media: Anyone With a Gun is a Sniper

Just in case you haven't been paying attention for oh, your entire life, our media operates by creating fears, and then compelling you to tune in/buy a copy/listen to the next segment so that you can find the solution (and they can sell more advertising). That truth applies to the national media you likely despise, and the local newsmen and women you've come to " and trust."

A wonderful example of selling fear is the story of the so-called "Berea Sniper." Someone has been shooting at cars in this Ohio town since this past August. No one has been injured by the shooter, who police said is using a weapon that is "something in between" a BB gun and an assault rifle.

Well they have a suspect in custody now.

Check out what passes for a sniper's weapon in this day and age.

No, that isn't the wrong photo.

The suspect, Paul Hausmann, has been tooling around this Cleveland suburb plinking and his fellow citizens with a .22-caliber replica of an old cowboy six-gun.

But a story a story about what is essentially vandalism—even vandalism with a firearm—doesn't get the local chiropractor and car dealer to buy advertising. Heavily hyped stories that sell fear keep our local Ron Burgundy wannabes paid. We live in an age where any crank with any sort of a firearm (even BB guns) is a "sniper," because hyping fear is what sells advertising.

The truth only matters if it pays.

Posted by Confederate Yankee at January 16, 2010 05:35 PM

Somewhere between an assult rifle and a BB gun, eh? Talk about covering some ground.

I don't belong to some sort of crime lab but I have been around guns all my life. It's not that hard to tell the differnce between the damage done by a BB and that done by a bullet. I mean, I'm just saying.

Posted by: Tom Usher at January 16, 2010 06:48 PM

Hmm, "Just vandalism"?

Last I checked, a .22 can kill ya dead.

Posted by: mockmook at January 16, 2010 07:24 PM

And newspapers and the media in general wonders why it is going under? As more people own guns, the worse the media looks. They become laughable and so unworthy of purchase. How many jobs have been lost or destroyed in those industries just because of Obama? How many more because of irresponsible gun coverage? Though those two might be linked. Depends on how far into statistical data one wishes to go I suppose.

Anywho, let them keep telling us about the big bad gun as millions get into shooting and pass it on (and defend against this type of smearing). I suppose we can bankrupt them down to single men prints. That's not all bad either, think of the trees created or saved by a vast reduction in print! Grrhahahaha

Posted by: Doom at January 16, 2010 11:33 PM

Maybe it had some square backed bullets.

Posted by: brando at January 17, 2010 04:25 AM

A sniper is anyone who shoots at others from a concealed location.

I suppose I would worry for my children had they been driving Ohio roadways.

Posted by: Steve Schwab at January 17, 2010 08:36 AM

Last time I checked (a few years ago) shooting into a vehicle was a Federal felony.

Posted by: Purple Avenger at January 17, 2010 12:23 PM
Posted by mockmook at January 16, 2010 07:24 PM

and so can a thrown rock. Which has absolutely nothing to do with the hysterical and uninformed coverage of the media by this incident. Your poorly disguised attempt to excuse their incompetence just shows you up as equally ridiculous.

Posted by: iconoclast at January 17, 2010 04:43 PM

Iconoclast, I don't believe Mockmook was trying to excuse the incompetence of the media, rather it seemed He was pointing out that the behavior of the Suspect was closer to Reckless Endangerment/Attempted Murder than vandalism. At least that is how I read his comment.

Posted by: Jeremy at January 17, 2010 07:35 PM