Gun Control

Father of Sandy Hook Victim Wasn't Heckled at Connecticut Gun Control Hearing

Deceptive edits from MSNBC

|

doesn't seem like he thinks he was heckled either
CTN

A public hearing was held in Hartford, Connecticut this week on guncontrol and among the witnesses was the father of one of the victims of the mass shooting at Sandy Hook elementary. Some media outlets, most prominently MSNBC, reported he was heckled, even offering video to corroborate.  However, the clip was highly edited and the full video of the testimony shows that the father actually asked the audience "why anybody in this room needs to have one of these assault-style weapons or military weapons* or high-capacity clips." When no one answered, he used the silence as a rhetorical tool, saying "not one person can answer that question." That's when he got an answer from the audience.

MSNBC previously got into hot water for deceptively editing the 911 call George Zimmerman placed when he was following Trayvon Martin and is now "reviewing" the video.

The edited clip:

*Jacob Sullum on what is an assault weapon

NEXT: ATF Screw up Milwaukee Sting Operation

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. However, the clip was highly edited

    If it wasn’t for you meddling kids and the internet, I would have gotten away with it too!

    1. Sharpten was pulling this shit last night. They should rename his show Tawana Brawley Lite.

      1. You sound like a white interloper to me.

    2. “Why anyone would need… a high capacity clip.”

      Clip? There sure are a hell of a lot of gun homicides committed by WW2 and Korean War vets with M1 Garand rifles, aren’t there?

      1. Just stop with the clip/magazine thing. Words evolve. Get over it.

        1. Just stop with the clip/magazine thing. Words evolve Ignorance abides. Get over it.

          Really, you shouldn’t complain too much. People who say “clip” for “magazine” have just clued you in that they are not very knowledgable at all about a topic that they are such experts on that they want to set national standards.

          1. Been hunting all my life. Never realized it was an issue until I came in contact with pompous, arrogant uptight shooting range types. Hunters call them clips.

            So you pompous, arrogant uptight shooting range types can all fuck off and die in a fire.

            And anyone who disagrees with me is worse than Hitler.

            1. Thread…winner?

              1. Based on Godwin’s Law, yes.

          2. People who say “clip” for “magazine” have just clued you in that they are not very knowledgable at all

            Yup.

            1. Still not true. You can be very knowledgeable about small arms of all kinds and get the terms confused. Especially given that the difference is a measly as a feeding spring, and most modern magazines have them, so of what use is the word “clip”?

              Casually dismissing people over lack of knowledge on minutiae is the sign of being a Weapons-Grade Asshole.

              1. You can be very knowledgeable about small arms of all kinds and get the terms confused.

                I’ve known the difference between a magazine and a clip since before I had hair on my balls.

                Casually dismissing people over lack of knowledge on minutiae is the sign of being a Weapons-Grade Asshole.

                RC was referring to people who write policy that is backed up by violence.

                They should not be legislating from ignorance.

                1. I’ve known the difference between a magazine and a clip since before I had hair on my balls.

                  oooh *fap fap fap*.

                  Usually one doesn’t brag when one is a late-bloomer.

                  1. OK Randian, I get it. You’re defending people who don’t know the difference between a magazine and a clip because you yourself didn’t know the difference until recently, and if you agree with the people who actually think that words mean things (ha ha! so quaint!) then you will feel ignorant.
                    I’m sorry your emotions are so fragile.

                    1. I do the know the difference. I just have a modicum of social skills and politeness not to bray about it like a autistic jackass.

                    2. “So the other day someone had the audacity to ask about my ‘girlfriend’. I laughed in his face and told him to take his cissexual heternormative privilege and stuff it, and if he can’t be bothered to learn the difference between transsexualism and transgenderism then he can go be a yokel somewhere else. Whee look at how smart I am!”

                    3. Ahhh! You slay me!

                      /strawman

                    4. Don’t like it when pedantic dickism gets used on you, don’t be a pedantic dick.

                    5. Don’t like it when pedantic dickism gets used on you, don’t be a pedantic dick.

                      Fuck, Randian. Were you grown in a special laboratory that studies unselfawareness?

                    6. Fuck, Randian. Were you grown in a special laboratory that studies unselfawareness?

                      You mean the one where I consistently roll my eyes at Mr Technically Correct is the Best Correct, The “Derp MAGAZINES” crowd AND the pedants on gender and sexuality?

                    7. Ok, buddy. You are never pedantic about stupid shit that doesn’t matter. My bad.

                    8. If I am I encourage you to tell me. No, really, if I am lacking in self-awareness call me on it when it happens.

                    9. He called it “Mom”.

                    10. I do the know the difference.

                      Yeah. Since you googled it after gun control became the topic of the day.

                    11. I’ve been in this man’s Army for 13 years. Blow it out your ass.

                    12. 13 years in the Army and you didn’t know the difference between magazine and clip until recently?

                      That’s pathetic.

                    13. Can you point to the exact date and time where I found out the difference? You seem to think it happened “recently”. What gives you that idea?

                    14. What gives you that idea?

                      It is fairly easy to recognize when someone has been doing some furious googling.

                    15. Right, so in other words, you’re just making shit up again.

                      It’s a free country, I guess. Lie away.

                    16. Right, so in other words, you’re just making shit up again.

                      Yeah. As you furiously google up information to post to Ice down there!

                      Ha! What a chump!

                    17. ooh, boy, somebody is touchy today.

                    18. ooh, boy, somebody is touchy today.

                      Yes, yes you are! Furiously googling up information and spitting it out before you have a chance to digest it! So obvious! Ha! Thirteen years? Ha ha!

                    19. You’re lying again.

                      Mommy! Sarcy’s making stuff up about me! Mooooooom!

                    20. It is fairly easy to recognize when someone has been doing some furious googling.

                      That’s your comeback? Pretty lame sarc.

                    21. Yeah, now that he’s shown he has a bad tendency of lying and trolling, he went into the filter.

                    22. Yeah, now that he’s shown he has a bad tendency of lying and trolling, he went into the filter.

                      Ha ha! Don’t like it when someone calls your bullshit. Poor baby.

                2. RC was referring to people who write policy that is backed up by violence.

                  Indeed. For casual bullshitting/conversation, I don’t care.

                  But if you are proposing to write laws, you better have every single fucking duck in a row. Because when it comes to laws, regulations, and generally controlling people, exact words matter a great deal.

                  1. For casual bullshitting/conversation, I don’t care.

                    Ah, well, then I apologize for the implication that you were being difficultly pedantic.

                    I maintain my grudge with the rest of these fuckers, however.

                    1. Ah, well, then I apologize for the implication that you were being difficultly pedantic.

                      You should also apologize for having the reading comprehension skills of a three year old since I only pointed that out a dozen times.

                      Fucking moron.

                    2. I am not asking you. Please feel free to rent a backhoe to get all that sand out of your vagina.

                    3. Please feel free to rent a backhoe to get all that sand out of your vagina.

                      Did you just look that up on google like the difference between a clip and a magazine?

                    4. You’re lying again.

                      Mommy!

                  2. Indeed. For casual bullshitting/conversation, I don’t care.

                    That’s not what Randian said. Randian said that anyone who points out the difference between a magazine and a clip is a pedantic prick who looks down their nose at the ignorant fuck who doesn’t know the difference.

                    Doesn’t matter if it is casual conversation or someone writing rules.

                    Randian said so so it must be true.

                    You don’t know what you meant. Randian did.

                    Right Randian?

                  3. This. As the NY legislature found out recently.

          3. I agree with RC. Those that use incorrect terminology have clued me in to their ignorance of the issue.

            Definitions matter. Don’t like it? Then use the correct terminology.

            1. The M1 used a clip. The minor changes to the M1’s action became the M14, and one of the changes was to switch to a detachable magazine.

              So, you have this thing in your hand that holds ammunition that goes into the weapon to reload it. One lacks a spring and the other has one.

              Whoopdee-doo.

              1. You are free to use whatever terminology you like. Chastising those that use the correct terminology smacks of ignorance, or laziness.

                1. I am not chastising you for using the correct terminology. I am chastising you for looking down your nose at people who say things that have some historical backing. Look at the development of the M14 and the M1911 sometime and maybe you’ll see how the two get conflated.

                  You guys are like mirror versions of microaggressions or Jezzies who get all pissed when I fail to properly call a MTF person “she” or “he” or say “transvestite” instead of “cross-dresser” or “transsexual”

                  Just shut up already.

                  1. I am chastising you for looking down your nose…

                    Recognizing that someone is ignorant on a particular subject does not equal looking down your nose at them.

                    It means “Hey, this person doesn’t know what they’re talking about. Yet they’re pushing for policy that will be backed by violence. This can’t end well.”

                  2. No, you shut up!

                2. He’s not chastising those who use the correct terminology, he’s chastising those who are pedantic dicks about it.

                  1. I’m sorry, but if you are writing policy that will be backed by violence, you should at least know the basics of the subject about which you are writing the policy.

              2. The M1 used a clip but it was magazine fed. The clip went into an internal magazine which then fed the rifle. A clip feeds a magazine a magazine feeds the gun, pretty simple to understand actually.

                1. Yes, IceTrey, I know that. That doesn’t contradict what I said:

                  So, you have this thing in your hand that holds ammunition that goes into the weapon to reload it. One lacks a spring and the other has one.

                  1. Stripper clips don’t go into the weapon. What are you in the Army? A computer geek.

                    1. This is how you load an M1 Garand:

                      Youtube Clip (ha ha)

                      Note how the *CLIP* goes into the weapon. Please tell me again how that CLIP right there didn’t go into the weapon. Please.

                    2. He said stripper clip. An M1 clip is not a stripper clip, but an en-bloc clip. PEDANTIC.

                    3. Seeing how I never used the words “stripper clip”, this means that IceTrey’s rejoinder refuted absolutely nothing about my original point, which was:

                      So, you have this thing in your hand that holds ammunition that goes into the weapon to reload it. One lacks a spring and the other has one.

                    4. Seeing how I never used the words “stripper clip”

                      To the tune of the Pink Panther

                      Pedant pedant
                      pedant pedant pedant pedant pedaaaaaaant
                      pedadedadant

                    5. Wow. You are dense. A clip without a magazine is useless. No firearm ever made was fed by a clip. Not the M1, not the Mauser, not the M16 nothing. Let me try one more time. A clip holds rounds of ammunition so they can be used to load a magazine. A magazine holds rounds of ammunition to be loaded into the chamber of a firearm and expended. Your statement is wrong because clips don’t load weapons they load magazines. Magazines load weapons. Your statement is also wrong because, as I pointed out, there are types of clips, strippers, which do not have to go anywhere near a firearm to perform their function. The longer you continue with this crusade the more foolish you look.

                    6. Here is what I said:

                      So, you have this thing in your hand that holds ammunition that goes into the weapon to reload it. One lacks a spring and the other has one.

                      Now, is an internal magazine OUTSIDE or INSIDE the weapon? I’ll give you some time.

                      Please go watch the youtube clip I provided for you.

                    7. The longer you continue with this crusade the more foolish you look.

                      Keep it up Randian! You look good in tights and a funny hat! Don’t stop!

                    8. The fact is that I was right in what I said:

                      So, you have this thing in your hand that holds ammunition that goes into the weapon to reload it. One lacks a spring and the other has one.

                      An M1’s en-bloc clip goes “into the weapon” to reload it. Even the Army used this terminology in its field manual. When they switched to a detachable magazine, the differences between a clip and a detachable magazine (mistakenly but understandably) merged because each “thing” contained rounds that went into the weapon to reload it.

                      The difference is the spring, of course, but telling people that they are categorically stupid because of a feeder spring is not the hallmark of a well mind.

                      Thus endeth the lesson.

                    9. Here, IceTrey, here is the Field Manual on the M1-Garand. Maybe you can tell them that they were wrong to say “load a full clip” or “load a partial clip”

                      FM 23-5, 1965

                    10. Furiously googling! Ha ha! Those bells on the hat are a good touch!

                    11. It doesn’t matter you’re still wrong. The clip still loads the magazine.

                      “…place a full clip on top of the follower assembly.”

                      Since you’re so ignorant I’ll tell you that a follower is part of the magazine. “Load a full clip” means load it into the magazine. Epic fail once again.

                    12. Epic fail once again.

                      C’mon Randian! Google up some more stuff and spit it out! You can do it! Can you juggle too?

                    13. Uh, Ice? I’m aware the clip still loads a magazine. I’ve said that all along.

                      Please, for the fifth time, read what I wrote:

                      So, you have this thing in your hand that holds ammunition that goes into the weapon to reload it. One lacks a spring and the other has one.

                      Unless you are asserting that the magazine is not part of the weapon, then what I am saying is correct: in light of the fact that a “clip” goes into a weapon and then a magazine goes into a weapon, the mistake is understandable and being a pedantic dick about it is socially retarded.

                    14. Let’s be aware of the argument here: What I said was that being a pedant over the use of “clip” and “magazine” was silly in light of the fact that an M1 uses a clip but an M14 uses a detachable magazine, and that for many people the two became conflated because a clip and a detachable magazine are both “things that hold ammunition that go into the weapon to reload it”, and being hypertechnical on this point is supreme dickery.

                    15. Here’s more context for what I am saying here, Ice:

                      I am chastising you for looking down your nose at people who say things that have some historical backing. Look at the development of the M14 and the M1911 sometime and maybe you’ll see how the two get conflated.

                    16. “things that hold ammunition that go into the weapon to reload it” is an incorrect statement. What part of “a stripper CLIP doesn’t have to be near a firearm to function” do you not understand? Clips load magazines, magazines (integral or detachable) load guns. That’s the way it is and all of your puffery won’t change that fact.

                    17. Careful Trey. Keep calling Randian’s ignorance and you might end up on his iggy list! He don’t like it when people call his bluff.

                    18. This is better than an abortion thread!

                    19. The best part is that I’m now on Randian’s iggy list!

                      No more straw men and ad hominems from the self righteous asshole!

                      Woo hoo!

                    20. The M1 Garand doesn’t use a stripper clip. It uses an en bloc clip, and therefore is a thing that goes in the weapon to load it.

                    21. The court jester is still furiously googling, I see.

                    22. I’m merely using the stripper clip to prove that clips don’t load weapons. If you took the follower and follower spring out of an M1 and dropped in an en bloc clip the rifle would not function. Why? Because clips load magazines and magazines load weapons.

                    23. You are right, but that doesn’t make me wrong:

                      So, you have this thing in your hand that holds ammunition that goes into the weapon to reload it. One lacks a spring and the other has one.

                      And here’s what you said:

                      If you took the follower and follower spring out of an M1 and dropped in an en bloc clip the rifle would not function.

                      Right, so in other words, what I said was correct. Again.

                      And with you now knowing where the confusion came from and given that fact that it likely spread during the M1/M14 conversion among Soldiers who actually performed in combat, it’s a far cry to call anyone who makes this minor mistake “ignorant” and “safely ignorable”

                      And please be aware that you never apologized for this little barb:

                      Stripper clips don’t go into the weapon. What are you in the Army? A computer geek.

                      When I didn’t say “stripper clip”. I said “clip”, your deliberate conflation of the two terms to try to make *me* look stupid being completely lacking in truth.

                    24. Pendantic, nit-picking? Call it whatever you want, but words have meaning.

                      If not, then anyone can say any shit they want to willy-nilly and by Randian’s rules, if they you get called on it, just stammer loudly “That’s not what I meant!” like an embarrassed 3rd grader and we just have to accept their correction.

                    25. So when I say that a clip goes in the weapon, what does that mean? It means what those words by the dictionary say they mean.

                    26. And please be aware that you never apologized for this little barb:

                      Randian demanding an apology for a barb? Haaaaaaaaaa ha ha ha ha!

                      Hooooooo ho ho ho!

                      Oh that’s funny. That’s really fucking funny!

                      Haaaaaaaaaaaa ha ha ha!

                      I’m out of breath! Make it stop!

                      Haaaaaaaaaaaa ha ha ha!

                      *wheeze*

                      Oh man that was good!

                      Wheeeeeeeeeew!

        2. Machine parts kind of demand one, accepted term.

          For instance, I cannot find a single retailer that sells clips for a glock. I went to the gun shop, looked online, even tried calling glock. Glock told me that they don’t make clips for their products because it has a removable magazine, but there are third party universal pistol loaders.

          Alright off to drive to work in my pick-up potato.

          1. That’s funny – I can’t seem to find anyone who will sell me a M-198 Howitzer even though I keep hearing that the nation is awash with guns.

          2. You should have tried the intertoobz. They knew exactly what I meant.

        3. Nobody that takes firearms seriously calls a magazine a ‘clip.’

          1. Don’t say that to Randian you hate filled pedantic dick!!

      2. Deep dish isn’t real pizza and anyone who would eat such crap is sub-human.

        1. Have your second contact mine so that we may find a suitable field of honour on which to settle this grave insult!

      3. Anyone who eats mayonnaise is gay. NTTAWWT. Real sandwiches are made with Miracle Whip.

        1. Real sandwiches are made with barbecue sauce. And barbecue. Brisket, smoked sausage links or pork, your choice, but the sauce is not optional.

          1. Let me guess. Texan?

            *shakes head in disgust.

          2. well said.

          3. *Gently sucks barbecue sauce off of thumb*

            Damn straight.

        2. Real sandwiches are made with Miracle Whip.

          Miracle Whip is Satan’s jizz. You’re gonna burn in Hell.

          1. I disagree, but that was a very funny remark, acid.

            1. You’re right. It’s cat jizz.

          2. Yay! I’ll have company.

      4. If your parents didn’t have the decency to have you circumcised, they should be imprisoned for child abuse.

      5. The M1 was actually magazine fed. The clip went into an internal magazine.

      6. So…. 9mm or .45? 😀

  2. On my morning digital depression tour, I came across this trope metastasizing on DailyKos. It will be good knowing the truth as I watch the lefty-hate bloom throughout rest of today.

  3. The edited clip shouldn’t even be controversial.

    1. I thought the same thing. CNN (and the womenfolk in my office cafeteria) were apoplectic about this issue and how we lack the common decency to even allow debate. But the man isn’t debating, he’s emoting.

      1. Funny how they insist that the “national conversation” only goes one way. You know, like grownups lecturing the children.

        1. Funny how they insist that the “national conversation” only goes one way. You know, like grownups lecturing the children.

          And it’s only going to get worse being as the “national conversation” we had looks to be ending in nothing but political posturing and grandstanding, but no relevant anti-gun legislation. They are fuming about the fact that they are fucking impotent in this matter, and will only use that anger to strike out more and more viciously against gun owners.

          Feinswine’s bill will not pass, nor will any other bill that seeks to limit the RtBA.

      2. The guy asked. It wasn’t rhetorical. He even looked around the room waiting for an answer. The respondents weren’t even quite sure if they should answer until he continued with, “You see, no one can answer the question” bullshit.

        Fuck MSNBC! Fuck CNN! What I would give for an objective mainstream media outlet. Hey Reason, why don’t you start a network news channel?

        1. The guy asked. It wasn’t rhetorical.

          I know that now. Even at the time I didn’t find it offensive; if you’re going to tell law-abiding people that their preferences don’t matter because you’re sad that your kid was killed then you deserve to be told off. It’s defending against speech with speech.

          Hey Reason, why don’t you start a network news channel?

          Great, an echo chamber with 0.9% market share. I’m sure Murdoch will pull out all the stops to prevent it.

        2. Huffpo has it as their number one most popular story at the moment.

        3. Its worse than that, Francisco.

          The audience had been specifically told to stay quiet during testimony. They weren’t allowed to respond, and then their lack of response was used against them.

          1. The audience had been specifically told to stay quiet during testimony. They weren’t allowed to respond, and then their lack of response was used against them.

            Is this true? I can’t watch the full clip at work, so I don’t know what rules/restrictions were put in place.

            1. From what I have read, yes, commentary during testimony is not permitted.

              1. Which is completely standard for these sorts of hearings.

  4. I swear if I was ever in the position of being grilled by NBC News, their history deceptive video editing would be brought up throughout the interview, from Dateline and exploding gas tanks to Zimmerman to this. They should have no credibility.

    1. “They should have no credibility.”

      They don’t have any credibility – but that matters not when your TEAM is the beneficiary of such rubbish.

    2. They do some good journalism, too. Like the time they used the footage of the tea partier toting a gun to talk about how the racist tea party was in a rage over the mere existence of a black president, only they cut off the tea partier’s head so you couldn’t tell that he was actually black.

      Wait. I guess that was just more bad journalism. Oh well, who can even tell anymore?

      1. And oh let’s not forget the Zimmerman edit.

      2. I appreciated last week when Jim Cramer was mad at me because, “investors aren’t being fair to Apple”. I should just shut up and do whatever CNBC tells me to do.

    3. Agreed, FOE. It’s been one thing after another over the years at NBC News.

    4. Somebody had to take the babysitter home. Then I noticed she was sitting on [splice] her sweet [splice] can. [splice] — so I grab her — [splice] sweet can. [splice] Oh, just thinking about [splice] her [splice] can [splice] I just wish I had her –[splice] sweet [splice] sweet [splice] s-s-sweet [splice] can.

      1. I went looking for that clip. Why is it so hard to find Simpsons clips that aren’t overdubbed in Spanish?

        1. Fox aggressively pursues having them taken down, is my guess.

      2. We will return to Homer S: Portrait of an Ass-Grabber, starring Dennis Franz, after these messages.

    5. “…if I was ever in the position of being grilled by NBC News, their history deceptive video editing would be brought up throughout the interview…”

      This is why you will never be grilled by NBC.

    6. Reynold’s advised following the rule of always bringing your own video equipment.

    7. their history deceptive video editing would be brought up throughout the interview…

      And edited out.

    8. I see you wearing a huge Flavor Flav like clock around your neck so viewers can watch it jerk ahead in time as they cut important parts out.

  5. I heard the audio on the radio last night. They guy asked repeatedly if anyone could name a good reason for having assault weapons or whatever, several times before the audience tried to say anything. The speaker then threatened to clear the gallery if people didn’t shut up. Then the guy started to ask the question again before apparently realizing that his rhetorical use of the silence of the audience was not going to work after they were told they could not respond.

    1. First off, why are we listening to this guy over anyone else? Because his kid was a victim. Why does that make his opinion worth more than anyone else’s?

      before apparently realizing that his rhetorical use of the silence of the audience was not going to work after they were told they could not respond

      This is the dumbest part of that video. Silence? No one has an answer! Answers? Throw them out for interrupting!

      1. Hush! We’re having a national conversation here, and you keep interrupting!

      2. “First off, why are we listening to this guy over anyone else?”

        Well, that’s the real question. Why would you look to someone who has recently experienced a pretty extreme personal trauma to have good, rational opinions about anything really? It should not be news that the father of a murdered child is upset and wants to blame something.

        1. This is why it’s impossible to actually have a “national conversation” about anything in this country. Leaving aside whether we need one or not…

        2. It should not be news that the father of a murdered child is upset and wants to blame something.

          God forbid the grieving parent might actually blame the shooter.

          1. But then he wouldn’t be able to do anything about it; the shooter is already dead. Honestly, I can’t blame the guy for wanting to do something, given what he is dealing with. But I can blame the state legislators who gave him the stage as if his opinions are worth more than any other random person off the street.

            1. While I understand your compassion, I don’t share it. I do blame him.

              He is allowing emotion to trump reason. On top of that, he’s using his dead kid to further his political agenda.

              Fuck him.

              While I’ve never experienced such loss, and therefor cannot possibly know for sure, I’d like to think I could remain rational.

              But then he wouldn’t be able to do anything about it; the shooter is already dead.

              I think this has a lot to do with it. It’s not about laying blame where blame is due. It’s about laying blame so that he can extract some modicum of revenge. The responsible party is already dead… Who/what can I blame to make me feel better and avenge my son’s death????

      3. “First off, why are we listening to this guy over anyone else? Because his kid was a victim.”

        Well, duh, cold detachment never leads to good policy….

  6. A biased media outlet using selective editing to make something seem worse than it actually is? INCONCEIVABLE!

    1. Lying liars lie. It’s kind of what they do and it should not surprise anyone.

      1. Surprised? No.

        Doesn’t mean it should be tolerated.

  7. We can do the inuendo, we can dance and sing…

  8. I read a story about the hearing yesterday. The so-called heckling did not feature prominently in the story, although that was the headline.

    What really disturbed me was the report included the little tidbit that the police chiefs’ association wants the populace disarmed (no surprise), and they want the board which reviews firearm licenses and handles appeals ABOLISHED.

  9. Every few years I try to watch the classive broadcast 6:30 evening news. But I can never last a full 30 minutes, because it’s so awful–overheated tone, shallowness, pics over substance, opinion masquerading as objectiveness. How can anybody watch it anymore?

    1. Same. Every time I’m forced to watch CNN at the airport or doctor’s office or something like that, I just end up getting pissed off.

      1. I can’t tolerate any teevee news, broadcast or cable, anymore. The tone grates, the content is shallow, the bias is palpable. And yes, that includes Fox.

        One exception: I generally get home in time to watch the panel on Fox at 5:45 CT. Its a good look at the current Beltway conventional wisdom from a Repub/conservative angle, and I can tolerate the panellists for 15 minutes.

        Then: Borderlands 2. Level 49, bitchez!

        1. Then: Borderlands 2. Level 49, bitchez!

          How far along does that put you through TVH mode? I finished the initial story run at level 33 then got to 36 just after killing Capt Flynt. Seems to be leveling fairly quickly.

          1. If you play all three DLCs, you should be level 40 when you fight the final boss.

            With only Booty and Campaign of Carnage, I finished the final battle about L32, I didn’t get to L50 in TVH until about Opportunity (without playing either Booty or Torgue in TVH.)

            Your results may vary, I was playing in co-op (which definitely levels you faster) for part of the time, and co-op farming the raid bosses and Teramorphus.

            1. I don’t have any of the DLCs but I think I did all but one of the side missions in the original game. I actually started a new game as the assassin and damn am I missing the phaselock. I’m at level 23 with him and still trying to figure out how he’s supposed to be played.

              1. I speced him down the left hand three to be a critical hit monster and sniped everything. A friend of mine respeced Zer0 down the melee tree and just backstabs.

                All the characters seems to work best if you choose a style of play and just build that tree.

                Play the Gunzerker for a while if you are bored with Zer0. The Gunzerker is a bit weak at first, but he turns into a murder machine.

                (Besides, more characters means more places to store weapons to pass around and pass down.)

                1. I speced down to B0re in the Sniping tree going the right hand accuracy side then switched over to the melee tree because that’s what it seems like makes his stealth ability most effective.

                  I think I’m going to try the commando next to see how well the turrets go.

                  1. Only at 36, so it might not be as overwhelming at later levels, but the turret is pretty amazing, especially with the rockets added.

          2. I’m cleaning up side missions after Sanctuary relocated. Haven’t gone to the Wildlife Sanctuary yet, but will soon.

            I want to say I was in the mid-30s after the first play-through (all DLCs so far; I think there’s supposed to be one more). TVHM does level you up nicely, after levelling slows to a crawl in the basic mode. I’m not touching the DLCs until I hit level 50, so they are all top-level when I play them. For the gunz, you know.

            1. If you hit 50, all side missions and bosses (and their loot) in TVH reset to 50.

              1. Sweet, I’ll have to make sure I hold some then.

              2. Question for you, SF. Are you able to take out raid bosses in a matter of seconds? Because I’ve noticed that when I play online (dropping in through Matchmaker), the guys I’m with can frequently take out Seraph guardians waaaaaay faster than I can when playing with my regular/real co-op friends. I’m not about to actually ask any of these guys how they are doing it because I’ve found that things get . . . weird. . . as soon as they realize I’m a girl. I suspect they are using modded weapons/Bee, but maybe I just suck.

                1. Just ask them in text chat.

                  1. I hate text chat. I’m in there to shoot stuff, not hold things up with texting. ;p

                2. I cannot take out raid bosses by myself in TVH, but after level 42 or so, I can kill Hyperius or Pete solo in basic mode. Master Gee is hard to solo, though.

                  One of the updates reset Pete, Gee and Hyperius to max at level 32 in basic mode (but they no longer drop Sereph crystals and there chance of dropping orange weapons was reduced as well.)

                  In TVH, I can killed Pete solo by exploiting a cheat or with someone else (and we both have Bees.) Even with another L50 player, I’ve never beaten Hyperius or Gee in TVH.

                  I beat Teramorphus solo three or four times with a L50 solo, but I can’t do it since they nerfed the Bee for the third time.

                  I would imagine they are using weapon and shield combos (for example, a L50 Bee and L50 Lascaux would fire a burst of 35 projectiles each with roughly 10,000 DAM points before any other bonus.)

                  http://borderlands.wikia.com/wiki/Lascaux

                  1. The Lascaux is the only Dahl weapon I’ve liked thus far. I still prefer the Bitch. I just cannot get over my loathing of burst fire.

                    1. If you come across a Dahl plasma caster, give it a second look. In burst fire the accuracy goes way up.

                      Speaking of fast kills, there was a YouTube floating around of a guy that had Zer0 specced down the critical hit bonus tree, used singularity grenades to line up the robots, and with the B0re skill killed Hyperius with one shot.

                    2. I saw that! My brother plays as Zer0 and gave it a try–he failed miserably. I laughed cruelly about it until I tried the Siren solo of Voracidous using the Banshee mod with +6 Immolate, +30% fire relic, and only the Norfleet (incendiary) and Trespasser. I failed catastrophically. My Trespasser is only level 48, but with the way things went, a 50 would not have helped me. And we have not been able to get OOO to spawn, BTW. Very frustrating.

                    3. Farm yourself a Bee. It’s the easiest high level orange to farm.

                    4. I have a great Bee (grounded!)–I do love it. Not quite addicted to it (I love my Impaler and Sponge), but it is hard to beat when paired with an SMG or anything Vladof. Lately I’ve been farming for the rarer skin drops and I’m having terrible luck. Son of Mothrakk farming is a clusterfuck. Actually gave me an eye twitch in December.

        2. Borderlands 2. Level 49, bitchez!

          Oh my, so violent! Don’t you really want to play a nice game, like my little ponies rainbow adventures with peppermint patty?

  10. Why does anyone need an edited clip?

    1. Because the First Amendment gives us the right to defend our fragile worldviews from being assaulted by reality!

  11. Whenever someone pushes back a little against the emotion over reason, THINK OF THE CHILDREN, argument by anecdote, sob story bullshit that passes for political debate in this country, I’m happy.

    This guy wants to take away my rights because his kid died. Sorry, but it’s not happening. No matter how many bleating media sheep join your chorus.

    1. I’ve heard plenty of people interviewed who say they will not comply with any law that seeks to take away the guns they already own. This is going to be a big issue in NY in the coming years (if their new gun law survives legal challenges). I mean, forcing people to turn in or register their existing guns is much harder to enforce than preventing people from making or importing new guns. What are they going to do? Imprison all of rural America?

      1. It means that if you are the owner of an illegal gun, and for some reason you draw the attention of someone in government, you better have your toys far out of sight.

        Say your home is robbed and the cops come to investigate. Whoops! You’re going to prison!

        Say you’re remodeling and need the jerk from the town office to inspect it. Whoops! You’re going to prison!

        Say you resist an intruder and the cops are called. Whoops! You’re going to prison!

        Say you’re on your property doing some target practice, and some cop comes to investigate. Whoops! You’re going to prison!

        And so on and so forth.

        1. Yep. File it away under “Laws that can be abused under prosecutorial discretion”. God knows what volume we are on now…

  12. Speaking of assault journalism, has anybody else seen the “ambush” of His Tyrannous Eminence Bloomberg by the guy who asked him why he won’t surrender his armed security detail in the interest of making the streets safer?

    Bloomberg looks like he just discovered he has shit on his shoe.

    1. Yes. We need to see more of that.

      Has anyone seen the story about Perry suggesting that the revenue surplus in TX be returned to the tax payers, and the Dems all freak out and start screaming ‘Are you crazy, we have to spend that money!’.

      It’s one of the best ideas I have ever heard a politician come up with. But one that the federal government will never have to worry about since every dime they collect was spent 20 years before they got it.

      1. Read Matthew Yglesias’ new op ed about “perpetual bonds”. He advocates borrowing huge sums of money at currently low interest rates and then just not ever paying it off. He wants to use that money for more spending, of course. But if that’s not possible then he wants to “spend it” on tax cuts. All for the economy and the poor, unemployed, of course.

        1. “spend it” on tax cuts

          You see, here if just proof that we are not even the same species of hominid as these parasites. We need to isolate from those geographically and politically and let them go the way of natural selection with their economic suicide mission.

          1. Yeah. Unfortunately, we are the weirdos.

            1. It’s like being an ant in a room full of grasshoppers. They look like fools. They sound like fools. They act like fools. And they can make you do whatever they want.

      2. Jesse Ventura rebated a big surplus back to the taxpayers. Around $600 per family if I remember right. And he cut tax rates because they were collecting too much in the first place.

        I think both sides were pissed at him for doing that because they had designs on that money.

    2. Here you go.

      Then he’s followed and harassed by security.

      1. Man, this really enrages me. Mayor Fuckface is permanently surrounded by a team of armed security guards and deems to lecture us about defending ourselves? Fuck him.

  13. Also on the MSNBNC beat. When I did my two minute drive-by of Morning Joke, Bill Gates was on, talking about his charitable work. Mika looked like she wanted to writhe across the table and start licking his asshole on camera.

    1. You have the hots for Mika, just admit it.

  14. He wasn’t “heckled” to be sure although “its my right” does not answer the question he asked.

    The correct answer is to “spray as much ammo as possible”.

    1. You’re certainly spraying something, though I wouldn’t call it ammo.

    2. Yeah, actually it does answer it, because nobody “needs” anything other than a mud hut and a daily ration of gruel.

      1. In a pinch you can substitute the hut for a pile of leaves and the gruel for a handful of bugs.

    3. “For the same reason police officers need an AR-15” should suffice as a soundbite.

      1. Because they come in useful for violent home invasions?

        1. They help screaming children and barking dogs into the afterlife.

    4. No, “it is my right” is the perfect response to an illegitimate attempt to restrict others to some arbitrarily defined “need” set by third parties.

    5. “its my right” does not answer the question he asked.

      It doesn’t for a non-thinking nanny-bot like you, you brainless boot licking worm.

      Go fuck yourself and die.

    6. To be fair, we should all have the right to “spray as much ammo as possible”. It levels the playing field.

    7. “pursuit of happiness” is why I like my AR-15. It’s fun to shoot.

    8. The correct answer is “My need to do something is irrelevant to whether you should be able to stop me from doing.”

    9. Go change your urine stained pants.

    10. The question is wrong, not the answer.

    11. The correct response is to ask him, “Why do you need a child?”

  15. http://tv.msnbc.com/2013/01/29…..-gun-nuts/

    Laffo. Headline was originally the same as the URL; the headline now reads “Emotional father of Sandy Hook victim heckled at gun hearing”.

    1. Why can I only see one of the comments to the article?

  16. I really think they believe the guy was heckled which makes it much worse than blatant deception. So much of this is pathological.

  17. Fifth column.

  18. I don’t see the editing. Can someone point it out?

    1. The first thing I noticed was that he explicitly asks if anyone in the room can answer the question.

      1. Aside from cutting off that preface (admittedly necessary to know to understand context), MSNBC let the video roll unaltered.

        Calling it “highly edited” is about as accurate as describing the crowd’s response as “heckling”.

        1. It’s a pretty gigantic difference though, since they left in the guy threatening to kick them all out.

          Going from:

          Guy:I want anyone in the room to answer question X. Here is question X.
          Crowd: Answers!
          Judge: Silence! Don’t interrupt him or we’ll kick you out!

          to

          Guy:question X.
          Crowd: Answers!
          Judge: Silence! Don’t interrupt him or we’ll kick you out!

          is a drastic change.

          1. Agreed, ergo my parenthetical thought.

        2. “Highly” in terms of the way the editing changes the effect, as opposed to how many raw changes were needed, perhaps?

          1. Basically. As a former TV producer I considered this clip highly edited because it cuts off the entire first part of the father’s statement and then cuts from the portion of the statement it retained immediately to the answers from the audience.

  19. Cuomo gets what he deserves.

    http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo…..fpnewsfeed

    Strike him from the 2016 hopeful list.

    1. It’s ’cause he’s another rat-face ny’er with a team of little rat-faced toadies telling him that he’s gonna be president because he’s makin’ the papers.

      No one outside the Realm of the Rat takes him seriously.

      1. Did PB just criticize a Democrat?

        1. Yeah, Cuomo must have dissed Obama sometime in the past.

        2. He’s trying to build credibility by sacrificing a minor player.

    2. I can’t really imagine any governor of NY being elected president these days.

  20. You know, even if the heckling story had been real and not concocted, I’d say GOOD! Waving around his child’s corpse to pursue an agenda isn’t an argument. It’s an attempt to shut down argument.
    I fee bad for the guy that he lost his kid. But, that shouldn’t dictate policy. And his and the legislators’ pimping out his child’s death deserves contempt.

  21. Saw this earlier up the thread, and it’s really starting to piss me off:

    What the fuck is a “national conversation” when the “conversation” is someone telling me what is going to be the “law?”

    We used to call that shit a dictatorship.

    1. Also, I’d like to state for the record that there is no conversation I’d like to have about my guns. They are mine. If you want to talk about my guns, feel free, but I don’t care and I’m not going to listen to bullshit.

    2. Newspeak is what it is.

  22. You simply can’t argue with a victim of gun violence. It’s not allowed. That’s why they’re invited to these events, because there’s nothing you can say by way of a rebuttal that won’t be considered “heckling.” Even if you prefaced your statement with “please accept my deepest condolences for your loss, but I would simply like to point out that…” you would still be a monster for daring to question the conclusions of someone who was directly affected by the tragedy.

  23. why anybody in this room needs to have one of these assault-style weapons or military weapons* or high-capacity clips.

    My weapon defends me, and my weapon did not kill your child.

  24. I may be misinformed, but aren’t we missing the bigger picture here? He’s asking who needs an assault rifle when an assault rifle wasn’t even used in the shooting! Not only are we being pushed to react to this tragedy in an emotional way by limiting liberties of law-abiding citizens, but we are being pushed in that direction with information that isn’t even true. Not surprising when the president bases his gun control policy on the ideas of seven year olds.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.