January 18, 2010
Something Borrowed?
Did ABC News swipe photos from an internet forum and claim them as their own?
While working on an article about the latest sub-par hit piece investigative report from Brian Ross and his team at ABC News blog The Blotter, I ran across an accompanying slideshow of Trijicon weapons sights, which started out with these two captioned images.
Interestingly enough, these two images appeared on the Pennsylvania Firearms Owners Association (POFOA) forum a week ago... and they weren't the original source, either.
How do we know these came from images of the same optics?
The ACOG on the PAFOA sight is clearly the same one claimed by ABC News, with very distinctive scuff marks on the body of the scope tube.
The Reflex sight on the PAFOA sight is also clearly the same one claimed by ABC News, with a small dimple to the left of the NSN number.
So which is it?
Did the PAFOA contributor acquire a copy of ABC's images early,or did ABC claim images that came from another, earlier source?
Does ABC need to next investigate EX20:15?
lol
they took a non story (whats on the site) and managed to make a story out of it through thier own laziness and stupidity if they lifted these photos.
Posted by: rumcrook™ at January 19, 2010 09:54 AMAs I just pointed out at another forum, read the 1st Amendment; "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
So the first question, Did Congress or any agent of the federal government order these inscriptions? No.
The second question is, "Is this a legitimate free expression?" Yes.
The proper response then, is to tell ABC to go forth and multiply with themselves.
Can the government order that no scriptural references be inscribed on anything purchased by the government? Perhaps but Trijicon uses scriptural references as part numbers and revision control. Can the government really control that?
So what. The manufacturers are a private company and can determine their own serial numbers. As one said earlier, it's a non-story.
Posted by: Dave at January 19, 2010 10:46 AMThis ranks up there with the time Disney was accused of drawing erotic pictures in the clouds. The numbers and letters don't make sense to anyone but those doing the writing.
I know a few soldiers with religious tats. Does that mean that don't go over?
Posted by: David at January 19, 2010 11:06 AMI had an ACOG for 7 months, and I didn't even notice that. I wrote down all the numbers for my manifest sheet, and moved on.
This makes it about 150% cooler. I think I kept some of my old paperwork. Now I want to see what my particular Bible verse was.
Posted by: brando at January 19, 2010 02:22 PMLOL.
Good work on this. Why do they always try to make themselves so much more important, and the stories so much more inflammatory than they truly are? What narcissists! Look at me! Look at me!! I'm so great, aren't I?
The press is the biggest bunch of losers I've ever seen.
Subsunk
Posted by: Subsunk at January 19, 2010 03:20 PM
