It’s not surprising that the mainstream media would quickly jump on the question of gun control in the wake of the mass shootings at Virginia Tech on Monday. On Tuesday, the second day for its new hosts, CNN’s "American Morning," broadcasting live from the Virginia Tech campus, jumped almost immediately on the gun control angle, citing from the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, one of the leading gun control groups in America.
CNN correspondent Greg Hunter did two live reports on the guns that were used in the massacre during the competitive 7-9 am Eastern time slot. The first report, which came a mere 6 minutes after the top of the 7 am hour, cited that Virginia is "a state that is pretty easy to get a handgun, according to the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence." Hunter then cited the reasons for this "finding" by the Brady Campaign, which included Virginia’s lack of a waiting period and no license requirements. He also cited the Brady Campaign’s advocacy of a "three-day background check."
In his second report, Hunter characterized one of the weapons used in the shootings, a Glock, as a "paramilitary weapon." He then repeated the Brady Campaign’s talking points about Virginia. He also contradicted what he had said earlier about gun shows in Virginia, stating that "there’s no checks at gun shows," when he had said in his first report that instant background checks are performed at gun shows. There was no mention of any gun rights group in either report.
A partial transcript of Greg Hunter’s first report, which started at 7:06 am EDT:
JOHN ROBERTS: I have read some reports that he may have purchased at least one of the guns on Friday the 13th, last Friday. Anything to confirm that?
GREG HUNTER: Nothing to confirm that, but this is a state that is pretty easy to get a handgun, according to the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence. You'll remember Jim Brady, who was shot in the head by John Hinckley at that failed assassination attempt in the early '80s. They say this is an easy state to get a gun in, only second only to the state of Georgia.
And the reason why, there's no waiting. You can walk in and get a gun that day. There's no license requirements, there are no -- where they have gun shows down here in the state, they don't really have any kind of background checks. At gun shows, they do have instant background checks to keep felons from getting guns. And also, someone from out of state with the right I.D., like me, can go out and buy a rifle. Not a handgun, but I can go out and buy a rifle today if I want."
ROBERTS: Right. But he had handguns.
HUNTER: He had handguns, that's correct.
ROBERTS: Right. Yes, I've been to a couple gun shows in the state of Virginia. I live here, and they always say, hey, it's easy to get the gun. Just a quick instant check.
Authorities say that gun dealers say that the insta-checks are enough to identify if anyone has a background of felonies. But what could they do to identify someone who perhaps had a grudge or had some reason to go commit violence as this person did yesterday?
We don't know if he had any kind of a felony background, but perhaps he didn't. Is there anything to stop a person like that from buying a gun in this state?"
HUNTER: That's just a great unknown. That really is a great unknown. And they tried to do the background checks, but who knows. It's one of those things.
ROBERTS: Yes. We should point out, too, the Bradys were advocating the three-day background check.
Also, the key part of Hunter’s second report, which started at 8:25 am EDT.
ROBERTS: Do we know more about how this student got a hold of these weapons or how he could in the State of Virginia get a hold of them?
HUNTER: Well, the State of Virginia has some pretty easy gun laws - that's according to the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence. Now, just a little bit about the Brady Campaign. That is Jim Brady and Sarah Brady founded this. Jim Brady, of course, was the White House press secretary shot in the head by John Hinckley, and they say this is the second easiest state to get a gun, a handgun or a rifle. In this case, a handgun. There is no waiting. There's no license required. But if you get a license, you can buy more than one gun. That's the caveat there. Also, there's no checks at gun shows, and somebody from out of state could buy a rifle. That's neither here or there.
—Matthew Balan is a news analyst at the Media Research Center.




















Editor at Large
Comments Policy
"But what could they d
April 17, 2007 - 16:54 ET by Dave in Texas"But what could they do to identify someone who perhaps had a grudge or
had some reason to go commit violence as this person did yesterday?"
Well John, I've got your answer. NOTHING! Oh wait, we could have all gun dealers ask the following question: "Do you have a grudge against anyone or intend to commit a violent act with this gun?" If they answer yes, then don't give them the gun. Problem solved.
He had the serial numbers fil
April 17, 2007 - 17:04 ET by tracheostomyHe had the serial numbers filed off.
He was shooting in a "gun free" zone.
So what's the point? People with malice intent will find a way to get guns if they want them.
I work in an office that brought the V-Tech incident up and I compared it to that mall shooting awhile back. Anyone remember that?
Wonder what would have happened if an off-duty cop, soldier, or other good samaritan with a concealed carry permit took off after the shooter like at the mall?
-PJ
Massacre
April 17, 2007 - 17:06 ET by Jerry MackIt is sickening to see the liberal msm turn a massacre of innocent college students into a political situation. Shameless bastards!
Are Liberals really this igno
April 17, 2007 - 17:08 ET by I-BurnAre Liberals really this ignorant? I mean do they really not grasp that the Second Amendment, which they abhor and want so desperately to repeal, is the only reason they still have the First Amendment they all claim to worship (unless it's something they don't agree with, of course)?
"The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government."
-Thomas Jefferson
They got it backwards
April 17, 2007 - 19:33 ET by kbworkmanThe MSM got it wrong. There should have been more guns. If the teacher who was killed trying to bar the door had been armed there might have been a quite different outcome.
He was Israeli. In Israel everyone is supposed to perform military service. They know that they are in danger at all times. They also aren't trained to stand around like sheep waiting for someone else to come and make the bad man go away. If he had been armed there might have been quite a different outcome.
If WE weren't being trained to stand around like sheep while someone comes and makes the bad man go away and members of the student body had been armed and knew what to do, there would definitely been a different outcome. Since they were very aware who the attacker was, they could have avoided collateral damage which the police are so want to inflict.
So if there had been more guns involved, not less, there would probably been less blood shed.
Unfortunately, we don't teach our young how to use weapons properly for their own defense. We let them watch the MSM with shows that teach them to avoid protecting themselves and wait for someone else to come and make the bad person go away, or the new which makes the bad persons actions so sensational that they want to emulate them.
What a country, huh?
I dont bellieve you can repea
April 17, 2007 - 20:26 ET by ahusserI dont bellieve you can repeal the 2nd amendment. It is part of the Bill of Rights. The first nine amendments are untouchable. However they have been going around the amendment forever because of its vague language about the militia, which is always the sticking point with liberals.
The 10th Amendment is pretty
April 18, 2007 - 04:24 ET by ltcolusmcretThe 10th Amendment is pretty much ignored or has been rendered diminimus by the SCOTUS over the years.
If the 2nd Amendment is repealed in my lifetime it will be war.
As is the Ninth. And post M
April 18, 2007 - 04:43 ET by sarcasmoAs is the Ninth. And post McCain Feingold Incumbent Protection Act, so's the First, even...
JMR
Not to mention the Fifth, ala
April 18, 2007 - 11:32 ET by JoeBobNot to mention the Fifth, ala Kelo.
Without recognizing the ordinances of Heaven, it is impossible to be a superior man. - Confucious
Something tells me that if a
April 17, 2007 - 17:57 ET bySomething tells me that if a person is evil enough to take two guns into a college and murder over 30 people, that he is not going to obey gun laws. duhh..
I mean, seriously, what do these nut-jobs think?
Gun-man says to another gun-man, "Oh, we will have to knife everyone to death, cause guns are illegal."
Jeepers,
Debra...
Just like Rush Limbaugh made
April 17, 2007 - 18:09 ET by mostlymoderateJust like Rush Limbaugh stated this morning, I say before banning guns we should halt LEGAL and ILLEGAL immigration. That's right, no more IMMIGRATION!!! Makes about as much sense as banning guns, eh? And guns are really not the problem. What about explosives? Does anyone know that an explosive could have killed triple the amount of people. So I suppose fertilizer and deisel fuel should be banned too, eh? How about poison? Let's ban anything that has the REMOTE ability to poison someone.
Gun control don't work. It's the PEOPLE we have to control.
Don't understand the bold print
April 17, 2007 - 18:10 ET by WisdomI don't really understand the significance of the bold print in the article, because actually it is "really easy" to obtain a gun in Virginia. So essentially, Roberts was reporting the truth. Now, "really easy" can be up for debate, I understand that. But the actual gun shop owner that sold the gun to the VT killer said "you can be in and out in 20 minutes." And that's not with a hunting rifle, that's with a semi-automatic Glock. Twenty minutes is a "quick instant check" if you ask me.
On waiting periods
April 17, 2007 - 21:05 ET by UnsaneWaiting periods are VERY effective if you ask me! Without the 15-day waiting period in effect for state purchases, Colin Ferguson would have been able to shoot up a commuter train in New York!
Wait a minute...
"HAV3 TH3 BRIDG3S OF INSANITY B33N CROSS3D AND FOR3V3R R3TRACT3D???." - Meshuggah, "3ntrapm3nt", from Catch Thirty Thr33 (2005)
If I did have an issue with t
April 17, 2007 - 18:31 ET by Gat New YorkIf I did have an issue with the Virginia law it would be with the fact that a non-citizen who is a legal resident, as this kid was, can get a firearms license, which have more to do with immigration policy and not just firearms policy.
Another thing the media shoul
April 17, 2007 - 18:36 ET by Gat New YorkAnother thing the media should consider. What if just one kid on the classroom had a weapon? How many lives would have been saved? There was a mall shooting in Utah recently where a man shot 5 people but was stopped by an off duty officer who shot him. What if that officer was barred from carrying a weapon? How many more would have been killed? I think the media need to revisit the fundamental reason why the founding fathers insisted on the right to bear arms.
.
April 17, 2007 - 19:15 ET by directorblueMaybe CNN could explain how the Mayor of Nagasaki was just assassinated despite Japan's unbelievably strict gun laws.
Chill out Mr. Blue, the lib's
April 17, 2007 - 19:24 ET by JABChill out Mr. Blue, the lib's will enlighten you shortly, and yes, you may also hold your breath, because the answer is forth coming and shall make sence to any liberal.
</sarc off>
<sigh> read tag...
"To bad Ignorance isn't painful..."
directorblue
April 17, 2007 - 19:43 ET by RJGood story, directorblue, and perfectly timely today...but a suggestion....
Your linking to your own post on a blog means people have to chase for a news source before they can believe it. Better if you link to a news source or both the source and your blog post.
.
April 17, 2007 - 20:47 ET by directorblueGood suggestion, thanks.
Considering that no one has p
April 17, 2007 - 19:52 ET by GalvanicConsidering that no one has produced an arrest/conviction record for the shooter, it doesn't seem that either the 3-day waiting period or the licensing would've made a difference in this case.
Denying firearms sales to non-citizens might have deterred him; he'd have to go the illegal route and we don't know if he knew how to do that without an accomplice.
The MSMs 24/7/30 news cycle
April 17, 2007 - 19:57 ET by pocomocoAt this very moment, the MSM are shouting HOSANNAs and HALLELUJAs, because their next 24/7/30 news cycle has been saved.
The last one, of course, was Anna Nicole Smith, which took the MSM’s 24/7/30 news cycle all the way to her grave. I can’t help but think that if the VA Tech shooting hadn’t occurred, the MSM, pretty much having nothing more to glean from her, were close to putting cameras in her casket so that they could comment on how her body was decaying .
But, now, that their 24/7/30 news cycle has been saved, they can start bringing in lawyers, psychiatrists, gun control advocates, his friends, his enemies, and all the other usual suspects in order to stretch out the new cycle as long as possible.
Let’s hear it for the MSM. BARF!!!
The Pity of THis
April 17, 2007 - 19:59 ET by pbthinkerIt's a shame that VT was a gun free zone (apparently that's gun free only for those that really care about the rules) since, if it weren't, perhaps more students could have taken advantage of the gun laws in Virginia and bought themselves a Glock and shot this guy after about the 3rd student died.
How much would you bet that, if this happened, the press would have ignored this story, not totally, but given it short shrift?
Never argue with an idiot. They'll drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.
arming teachers
April 17, 2007 - 21:11 ET by LionKingI think all high school teachers and college professors should be armed. Imagine if they coulod actually use them on students...actually...now that I think about and I am not being facetious...tasers sound a GREAT idea. So much for disruptive students.
What's the downside?
when you think about it, the
April 17, 2007 - 22:03 ET by pmohbuckwhen you think about it, the same people who want to legalize drugs are big anti-gun advocates ... their rationale is that by making drugs legal, it would eliminate the drug wars because there would no longer be competition among dealers because they would be out of business.
shouldn't their rationale support a pro-gun point of view. the idea being that violent criminals would be less likely to find victims without becoming a victim themselves ... a deterrent ... sounds familiar, imagine the US eliminating its supply of nuclear weapons during the Cold War while letting the Soviet Union keep theirs ... think the world would be a different place?
criminals don't look for ARMED victims, they're looking for easy prey ... unfortunately, our nation's lax history of prosecuting violent criminals has led many americans to feel the need to defend themselves ... it is too late in the game to change anything ... our state's laws have made the US a haven for criminals. i'm a firm believer that stricter gun laws will only force normally law abiding citizens to aquire security through illegal means. i'm sorry, but i don't see useless laws overriding the natural human instinct of self-preservation/survival.
LK,Like I posted somewhere ye
April 17, 2007 - 22:13 ET by bigtimerLK,
Like I posted somewhere yesterday afternoon somewhere, if we could make that a law where they were required to be armed, after they took courses and such (I know that will never happen) can you imagine the quality of teaching we would really having teach our young minds for a change...
Liberals/leftists would exit faster than you could say boo!
I was in Austin, Texas in 196
April 17, 2007 - 22:51 ET by gordonI was in Austin, Texas in 1966 when Charles Whitman murdered 13 people at the University of Texas. At that time, the police only had shotguns and handguns, neither of which had the range to engage Whitman. Guys in pickups got the deer rifles off their gun racks and shot back at Whitman, keeping him from firing at will and causing him to have to shoot through rain spouts on the observation deck of the UT tower. Without those citizens using their guns in defense, a lot more innocent students would have been murdered by that madman. One of our state representatives had to sit by and watch a gunman put his gun to her parents heads as they sat on the floor of a Lubys cafeteria and kill both of them. She had a pistol, but it was in her car because at that time, it was illegal to carry the gun into the restaurant. Gun control laws only apply to law abiding people, not lunatics and criminals.
gordon.I have read both accou
April 17, 2007 - 22:56 ET by bigtimergordon.
I have read both accounts of what you posted over the years, both very true.
Says it all doesn't it?
Sadly.
This world will always be vio
April 17, 2007 - 23:24 ET by upcountrywaterThis world will always be violent. The second amendment is brillant, because there will always be more law adbiding people than killers.
Detonated Plutomium has a very large carbon footprint.