This one's a riot.
Jim Alder
converted to fully automatic fire..."
Just one of several phrases indicating a great
education on the subject in a CBS article about a
California decision stating that the manufacturers
of the Tec-9 cannot be held responsible for the
actions of its subsequent owners.
http://cbsnews.com/now/story/0,1597,305097-412,00.shtml
Yes, California made the right decision for a
change!
The funny part is the picture. Nothing special,
just a shot of a tec-9 in the grip of a shooter.
But a sharp-eyed reader recognised the picture!
Check out the full uncropped version at;
https://www.keepandbeararms.com/newsarchives/XcNewsPlus.asp?cmd=view&articleid=1825
That's right. None other than everyone's
favorite gun nut, Charlie Schumer! I guess that
was the only picture of a Tec-9 that CBS had
readily available. Why did they crop out Schumer's
face? Don't politicians live and die by their
exposure? Could this be that the media is right
wing like some here will tell us? Are they trying
to keep Schumer out of the public eye? Or could it
be that Schumer seems to be having too much fun?
--
Jim
"I was told that the president cannot listen for
long, that he prefers talking himself, and within
five minutes, he gets irritable," Russian
President Vladimir Putin told reporters in Moscow.
"But it all turned out differently in actual fact.
. . . A very trusting relationship developed
immediately."
Silvio Berlusconi, the Italian premier reported
after his inaugural meeting with the fellow
conservative that Bush was "very likable and down
to earth."
German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder said he
appreciated Bush's ``friendly atmosphere.''
Robert Frenchu
>http://cbsnews.com/now/story/0,1597,305097-412,00.shtml
>
> Yes, California made the right decision for a
>change!
>
> The funny part is the picture. Nothing special,
>just a shot of a tec-9 in the grip of a shooter.
>But a sharp-eyed reader recognised the picture!
>Check out the full uncropped version at;
>
>
>https://www.keepandbeararms.com/newsarchives/XcNewsPlus.asp?cmd=view&articleid=1825
>
> That's right. None other than everyone's
>favorite gun nut, Charlie Schumer! I guess that
>was the only picture of a Tec-9 that CBS had
>readily available. Why did they crop out Schumer's
>face? Don't politicians live and die by their
>exposure? Could this be that the media is right
>wing like some here will tell us? Are they trying
>to keep Schumer out of the public eye? Or could it
>be that Schumer seems to be having too much fun?
Note that he is using the now-very-popular "Shumer stance"
http://www.frenchu.com/gun/guns_hypocrite6.html
Robert Hampton
It very well could be a cropped photo of Schumer, but the cropped photo and full-size "original" are NOT the same photo. I see at least 5 differences. Anyone else see them?
There is a very good possibility they are consecutive photos but they
are not the same photo. This places doubt on the credibility of the
photo as well as the poster on keepandbeararms.com. And an anti with
even a dull eye will simply claim that because of the differences, the
photo is doctored.
--
Robert Hampton
Genesis POS
http://www.genesispos.com
(866) 244-8813 Voice
(915) 942-8872 Fax
Robert Frenchu
What is he wearing on his left hand- some sort of sissy shooting
glove? Geez this guy is such a pussy. Anyway, first thing I noticed
was in the full photo the chamber is just opening while in the CBS
photo it's already closed and a casing is in flight.
David Voth
<robert_frenchu@ya-take_out-hoo.com> was kind enough to write:
>> Robert Hampton <rham...@genesispos.com> wrote in <3B701119...@genesispos.com> :
>
>>Jim Alder wrote:
>>
>>> "The TEC-DC9, a high-capacity pistol easily
>>> converted to fully automatic fire..."
>>>
>>> Just one of several phrases indicating a great
>>> education on the subject in a CBS article about a
>>> California decision stating that the manufacturers
>>> of the Tec-9 cannot be held responsible for the
>>> actions of its subsequent owners.
>>>
>>> http://cbsnews.com/now/story/0,1597,305097-412,00.shtml
<snip>
>>> https://www.keepandbeararms.com/newsarchives/XcNewsPlus.asp?cmd=view&articleid=1825
>>>
>>> That's right. None other than everyone's
>>> favorite gun nut, Charlie Schumer! I guess that
>>> was the only picture of a Tec-9 that CBS had
>>> readily available. Why did they crop out Schumer's
>>> face? Don't politicians live and die by their
>>> exposure? Could this be that the media is right
>>> wing like some here will tell us? Are they trying
>>> to keep Schumer out of the public eye? Or could it
>>> be that Schumer seems to be having too much fun?
>>
>>It very well could be a cropped photo of Schumer, but the cropped photo and full-size "original" are NOT the same photo. I see at least 5 differences. Anyone else see them?
>>
>>There is a very good possibility they are consecutive photos but they
>>are not the same photo. This places doubt on the credibility of the
>>photo as well as the poster on keepandbeararms.com. And an anti with
>>even a dull eye will simply claim that because of the differences, the
>>photo is doctored.
>
>What is he wearing on his left hand- some sort of sissy shooting
>glove?...
Looks like a wrist brace.
--
"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always
so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts."
-- Bertrand Russell
D. Staples
Fits.
--
Don Staples
For current views on Forestry and the Environment, watch the news groups
bionet.agroforestry and alt.forestry. In additon, About.com/forestry/
"Jim Alder" <jima...@sssnet.com> wrote in message
news:3B70055C...@sssnet.com...
Robert Hampton
Wrist brace of some sort maybe? And no eye protection? Hmmm. Always fun 'til a politician gets an eye put out! There were a couple of other discrepancies but I'll wait and see if anyone else points them out before I post my list. :)
Jim Alder
>
> It very well could be a cropped photo of Schumer, but the cropped photo and full-size "original" are NOT the same photo. I see at least 5 differences. Anyone else see them?
Oh, come now. It is obviously the same event,
and I'm sure there were a million photographers
there. It is the same background, the same hands
holding it, as you can see by whatever is being
held in the rear hand with the red lettering on it
(is that a wrist brace?). The bolt is partially
open on one with an expended cartridge in the air
on the other.
> There is a very good possibility they are consecutive photos but they
> are not the same photo. This places doubt on the credibility of the
> photo as well as the poster on keepandbeararms.com. And an anti with
> even a dull eye will simply claim that because of the differences, the
> photo is doctored.
Antis ALL have dull eyes, or they wouldn't be
antis. This is possibly two frames from the same
video footage. The images in both cases are from
news coverage, so I doubt they are doctored. Chuck
would certainly have complained. Is there really
any doubt in your mind that these are the same
shooter?
Bill Twist
> os.com> :
> >
> >>Jim Alder wrote:
> >>
> >>> "The TEC-DC9, a high-capacity pistol easily
> >>> converted to fully automatic fire..."
> >>>
> >>> Just one of several phrases indicating a great
> >>> education on the subject in a CBS article about a
> >>> California decision stating that the manufacturers
> >>> of the Tec-9 cannot be held responsible for the
> >>> actions of its subsequent owners.
> >>>
>
> <snip>
>
> >>> [10]https://www.keepandbeararms.com/newsarchives/XcNewsPlus.asp?cmd=view&ar
> ticleid=1825
> >>>
> >>> That's right. None other than everyone's
> >>> favorite gun nut, Charlie Schumer! I guess that
> >>> was the only picture of a Tec-9 that CBS had
> >>> readily available. Why did they crop out Schumer's
> >>> face? Don't politicians live and die by their
> >>> exposure? Could this be that the media is right
> >>> wing like some here will tell us? Are they trying
> >>> to keep Schumer out of the public eye? Or could it
> >>> be that Schumer seems to be having too much fun?
> >>
> ull-size "original" are NOT the same photo. I see at least 5 differences. Any
> one else see them?
> >>
> >>are not the same photo. This places doubt on the credibility of the
> >>photo as well as the poster on keepandbeararms.com. And an anti with
> >>even a dull eye will simply claim that because of the differences, the
> >>photo is doctored.
> >
>
> Looks like a wrist brace.
>
That wrist brace looking thing appears in both photos. So, while the
photos aren't the same exact frame, the principle is the same. They used
a picture of Schumer shooting a TEC-9, and cropped out the putzhead.
--
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Real men use flintlocks... In the rain.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Karl Kleinpaste
> I see at least 5 differences. Anyone else see them?
Chamber open/closed.
Empty case in flight, and gun angling from recoil.
Smoke rising/not rising from chamber.
Left thumb placement.
Blurred vegetation in background not the same.
Light across top of trigger guard's bottom differs.
> There is a very good possibility they are consecutive photos but
> they are not the same photo.
Yup. Another excuse to get chewed up in the press: Crying wolf. That
said, however, it is clearly a picture from the same event, same
(cf. wrist brace and general hand placement) person (Schumer) firing,
yet CBS still chose to crop such a picture so as not to show Schumer
in action.
--
The government which fears arms in the hands of the people...should.
Robert Hampton
> Robert Hampton wrote:
>
>>It very well could be a cropped photo of Schumer, but the cropped photo and full-size "original" are NOT the same photo. I see at least 5 differences. Anyone else see them?
>>
>
> Oh, come now. It is obviously the same event,
> and I'm sure there were a million photographers
> there. It is the same background, the same hands
> holding it, as you can see by whatever is being
> held in the rear hand with the red lettering on it
> (is that a wrist brace?). The bolt is partially
> open on one with an expended cartridge in the air
> on the other.
>
>
>>There is a very good possibility they are consecutive photos but they
>>are not the same photo. This places doubt on the credibility of the
>>photo as well as the poster on keepandbeararms.com. And an anti with
>>even a dull eye will simply claim that because of the differences, the
>>photo is doctored.
>>
>
> Antis ALL have dull eyes, or they wouldn't be
> antis. This is possibly two frames from the same
> video footage. The images in both cases are from
> news coverage, so I doubt they are doctored. Chuck
> would certainly have complained. Is there really
> any doubt in your mind that these are the same
> shooter?
My point (apparently unclear) was that:
1) the poster and website claimed that the photo was cropped
2) the "original" photo was displayed for proof
3) the cropped photo and the original are different
4) steps 1-3 cast doubt on credibility
KeepandBearArms.com stated "Here is the original photo conveniently
cropped by CBSNews:". It is NOT the orginal photo cropped by CBSNews,
is it? I also hereby avow that there is no doubt in my mind that, to
the best of my knowledge from studying the aforementioned photos (as I
was not present at the event in question), that both photos depict the
same shooter. Better? Now let's not get crazy and have a 30-post
thread slamming each other, deal? Can't we all just get along?
Sam A. Kersh
the photos have been around for years. Schumer's pictures were taken the
day before the assault weapon ban vote was taken in 1994. Like it or not,
that's Chuckles Schumer getting his jollies firing a Tec-9...
Sam A. Kersh
NRA Patron Member
L.E.A.A. Life Member
TSRA Life Member
GOA, JPFO, SAF
http://www.flash.net/~csmkersh/
===============================================================
Read Jeff Snyder's unabridged analysis of the S&W/HUD sellout
at http://communities.prodigy.net/sportsrec/jeffsnyder.html
Jim Alder
>
> Jim Alder wrote:
>
> My point (apparently unclear) was that:
>
> 1) the poster and website claimed that the photo was cropped
> 2) the "original" photo was displayed for proof
>
> 3) the cropped photo and the original are different
>
> 4) steps 1-3 cast doubt on credibility
>
> KeepandBearArms.com stated "Here is the original photo conveniently
> cropped by CBSNews:". It is NOT the orginal photo cropped by CBSNews,
> is it? I also hereby avow that there is no doubt in my mind that, to
> the best of my knowledge from studying the aforementioned photos (as I
> was not present at the event in question), that both photos depict the
> same shooter. Better? Now let's not get crazy and have a 30-post
> thread slamming each other, deal? Can't we all just get along?
No.
;^P
R M
did wear a brace , cast etc. on one arm. Don't know why, just remember him
wearing his coat with one one sleeve off and cast on arm.
Stephan Rothstein
>
> Robert Frenchu wrote:
>
> >>Robert Hampton <rham...@genesispos.com> wrote in <3B701119...@genesispos.com> :
> >>
> >
> >>
> >>There is a very good possibility they are consecutive photos but they
> >>are not the same photo. This places doubt on the credibility of the
> >>photo as well as the poster on keepandbeararms.com. And an anti with
> >>even a dull eye will simply claim that because of the differences, the
> >>photo is doctored.
> >>
> >
> > What is he wearing on his left hand- some sort of sissy shooting
> > glove? Geez this guy is such a pussy. Anyway, first thing I noticed
> > was in the full photo the chamber is just opening while in the CBS
> > photo it's already closed and a casing is in flight.
>
> Wrist brace of some sort maybe? And no eye protection? Hmmm. Always fun 'til a politician gets an eye put out! There were a couple of other discrepancies but I'll wait and see if anyone else points them out before I post my list. :)
Well, my list all apply to the difference based on firing a shot, but
the case in the air, the angle of the weapon (recoil), the smoke, and
the ejection port/slide position were the ones I noticed. I also noticed
the position of the tree in the background is different.
Steve Rothstein
brooks n. texas
col...@prodigy.net says...
> We should all remember that for a period of time the Senator from New York
> did wear a brace , cast etc. on one arm. Don't know why, just remember him
> wearing his coat with one one sleeve off and cast on arm.
>
>
>
BT ;)
Robert D. Baker
Bill Twist wrote in message ...
>That wrist brace looking thing appears in both photos. So, while the
>photos aren't the same exact frame, the principle is the same. They used
>a picture of Schumer shooting a TEC-9, and cropped out the putzhead.
True enough, but the _point_ here is that the claims are incorrect.
The full-sized picture is NOT the source of the cropped picture, and any
maroon can see it. For goodness's sake, the bolt is closed in one and open
in the other! If I hadn't seen the text portion about Schumer's wrist brace,
and then looked for that in both pictures, I was ready to write the whole
thing off.
We really need to have all our ducks in a row on this sort of thing.
The website states quite clearly that the two photos are the same, and they
clearly are not. If they said "As you can see from the Senator's wrist
brace, these two images are clearly captured from the same video tape", I'd
buy it.
tt
Robert
Robert Hampton
Thank you!! I was really starting to wonder if my point was sinking in
anywhere. :)
Bill Twist
> >photos aren't the same exact frame, the principle is the same. They used
> >a picture of Schumer shooting a TEC-9, and cropped out the putzhead.
>
> True enough, but the _point_ here is that the claims are incorrect.
> The full-sized picture is NOT the source of the cropped picture, and any
> maroon can see it. For goodness's sake, the bolt is closed in one and open
> in the other! If I hadn't seen the text portion about Schumer's wrist brace,
> and then looked for that in both pictures, I was ready to write the whole
> thing off.
> We really need to have all our ducks in a row on this sort of thing.
> The website states quite clearly that the two photos are the same, and they
> clearly are not. If they said "As you can see from the Senator's wrist
> brace, these two images are clearly captured from the same video tape", I'd
> buy it.
>
I agree that it could have been worded better. I just don't think it is
as big an issue as you do. Outside our pro-gun circles, this won't even
register on the radar screen (much as we would like it to) because the
media is infallible in their own eyes.
Jim Nicholson
>
> > >That wrist brace looking thing appears in both photos. So, while the
> > >photos aren't the same exact frame, the principle is the same. They used
> > >a picture of Schumer shooting a TEC-9, and cropped out the putzhead.
> >
> > True enough, but the _point_ here is that the claims are incorrect.
> > The full-sized picture is NOT the source of the cropped picture, and any
> > maroon can see it. For goodness's sake, the bolt is closed in one and open
> > in the other! If I hadn't seen the text portion about Schumer's wrist brace,
> > and then looked for that in both pictures, I was ready to write the whole
> > thing off.
> > We really need to have all our ducks in a row on this sort of thing.
> > The website states quite clearly that the two photos are the same, and they
> > clearly are not. If they said "As you can see from the Senator's wrist
> > brace, these two images are clearly captured from the same video tape", I'd
> > buy it.
> >
>
> I agree that it could have been worded better. I just don't think it is
> as big an issue as you do. Outside our pro-gun circles, this won't even
> register on the radar screen (much as we would like it to) because the
> media is infallible in their own eyes.
If that was all we could find to complain about, we'd be home free.
--
Jim Nicholson -- http://www.tsra.com/
Sam A. Kersh
And as expected., CBS has chosen not to respond to my e-mail complaint re:Senator Putz.
dan_your_...@evergreen.edu
Bill Twist wrote:
> Outside our pro-gun circles, this won't even
> register on the radar screen (much as we would like it to) because the
> media is infallible in their own eyes.
Really? Everyone who isn't in one of your pro-gun circles sees the media as
infallible?
News flash, Mister Twist: People all believe the media is fallible. But people,
ALL people, will take from the media what they want to hear, and assume that
anything they did not want to hear was wrong. Even your pro-gun circles.
It's that level of 'us vs. them' ignorance that gives your pro-gun circles the bad
image they have in everyone else's eyes.
Michael Danielson
Jim Alder
>
> Bill Twist wrote:
>
> > Outside our pro-gun circles, this won't even
> > register on the radar screen (much as we would like it to) because the
> > media is infallible in their own eyes.
>
> Really? Everyone who isn't in one of your pro-gun circles sees the media as
> infallible?
He said outside their own eyes. I doubt most
people think the media is infallible, other than
the media itself, if you asked around. On the
other hand, people don't think much when they
watch the news, IMHO, or they wouldn't bother
watching in most cases. So odds are they absorb as
fact way too much crap.
> News flash, Mister Twist: People all believe the media is fallible. But people,
> ALL people, will take from the media what they want to hear, and assume that
> anything they did not want to hear was wrong. Even your pro-gun circles.
Nah. I don't believe much of anything I hear
from the news that isn't right there in front of
me (news footage) and even then I'm skeptical. So
most of the time I don't bother watching. Even
reading the paper is an intellectual exercise
deciding what is fact and what is something they
want you to conclude.
> It's that level of 'us vs. them' ignorance that gives your pro-gun circles the bad
> image they have in everyone else's eyes.
You just said "ALL people" feel the same. Are
you saying everyone is ignorant? Except you, of
course? Talk about "me vs them"!
Jim Alder
I wish I could say the same for the other guy's
point. This is obviously and irrefutably a picture
of Charlie Schumer shooting a Tec-9, but CBS chose
to crop him out of the shot before they demonized
the gun. Of course, all that has been lost by this
superficial aside. Oh well. I guess we have to get
our own side to see the forest for the trees
before we can make any progress with the other
side.
Jim Nicholson
I, too, thought we had wandered into a minuscule area of
insignificance until this morning when I found the heavies
discussing the same minutia. The difference is that Schumer is now
widely credited with his wild side which seems to really be enjoying
his session at the range. From the WSJ opinionjournal.com, I read:
"The Wrong Shot?
Reader John Farrar writes to question KeepAndBearArms.com's
contention, which we noted Tuesday, that CBSNews.com had run a
cropped photo of a gun that turned out to be held by Sen. Chuck
Schumer:
"I liked the bit about Chuck Schumer with the gun but, while it is
almost certainly the same photo shoot, it is clearly not a cropped
version of the same picture. In the close-up, the angle of the gun
is different and there is shrubbery or some kind of greenery
evident. In the larger shot, the immediate background of the gun is
free of such clutter."
"So, while the scene, the gun, the hands, and even the shooting
glove on his left hand make it all but certain that it is our Chucky
out there with the TEC, CBS might have chosen a different picture
that was originally a close-up without cropping out any of the good
senator."
"We took a close look at the photos, and it looks to us as if Farrar
is right. We suppose Schumer might be ticked off at us; we hope he
doesn't decide to shoot the messenger."
Rick Bowen
They couldn't, because in all likelyhood, there isn't a close up
shot.
This was done during a "photo-op". There was probably a pool of 5
to 10 photogs. More likely than not, they were kept back a
distance in a line, and photographer #4 took the original that
was used, and photographer #7 took the 2nd photo that was used.
Hence the different angle of the bush and the closed vs. open
bolt.
IF it ISN'T Chuckie, all CBS has to do is publish their original,
uncropped picture. But, of course, they can't do that.
>"We took a close look at the photos, and it looks to us as if Farrar
>is right. We suppose Schumer might be ticked off at us; we hope he
>doesn't decide to shoot the messenger."
Rick Bowen
Cl
TSRA Life Member
NRA Member
"Molon Labe"
Member of PETA
(People Eating Tasty Animals)
B.A.S.T.A.R.D.
(Bad American Standing
Tall Among Radically
Dependant Sheeple)
Bill Twist
>
> > Outside our pro-gun circles, this won't even
> > register on the radar screen (much as we would like it to) because the
> > media is infallible in their own eyes.
>
> Really? Everyone who isn't in one of your pro-gun circles sees the media as
> infallible?
You have a reading comprehension problem. The phrase "the media is
infallble in their own eyes" only applies to the media. The implication
is that they won't report on something like this. I thought that was
quite evident from what I said, but I may have been wrong. I'll try to
refrain from using four syllable words in the future.
> News flash, Mister Twist: People all believe the media is fallible. But people
> ,
> ALL people, will take from the media what they want to hear, and assume that
> anything they did not want to hear was wrong. Even your pro-gun circles.
I am quite aware of that. In fact, I make it a point to read opinions
different than mine, because I know I don't have a monopoly on the truth.
>
> It's that level of 'us vs. them' ignorance that gives your pro-gun circles the
> bad
> image they have in everyone else's eyes.
>
I would hardly consider myself ignorant. And quite frankly, just about
anyone could be excused for having an 'us vs. them' attitude, simply
because we just want to be left alone to engage in our professed hobby,
while others want to make it too expensive for us in time, money, and
legal sanctions.
Do you know what it is like to be considered a mental defective, a
psychopathic killer, or perhaps a wild-eyed revolutionary intent on
overthrowing the government? No? I do. Simply because I choose to shoot
firearms. I also hunt. Do you know what Mario Cuomo, former governor of
New York (my home state) said about hunters? He called us guys who drink
beer, drive pickups, and lie to their wives about where they were over the
weekend. Not very flattering, is it? Rosie O'Donnell said on national
TV that I should be put in jail, despite the fact that I have never
committed an offense greater than a minor traffic violation. I could go
one, talking about Senator Feinstein, Senator Schumer, Sarah Brady, and
many others. They get the media coverage. Occasionally, you will see
Charleton Heston or Wayne LaPierre give our side of the story (well,
somewhat. But that is another story). Can you blame us for having that
mentality? Given the level of anti-gun propaganda out there (I once heard
a bolt action rifle called an "assault weapon"), it is amazing that we are
as restrained as we are.
Sad though I am to say it, we already have a bad image in many peoples
eyes. I attribute this to unintentional ignorance in most cases, and
willful ignorance in some cases. When people find out that I am a hunter
and a shooter, you can see their expressions change. People have a hard
time reconciling the techno-weenie in a plaid shirt and pressed dockers
that they see before them with their image of a deer hunter, the redneck
beer-gutted trailer-inhabiting pickup-driver who if you meet them in the
woods is likely to tell you to squeal like a pig. That is what Mr. Cuomo
was talking about, that is what we are up against.
Here is a little test for you to try. When was the last time, outside of
sports coverage, you saw shooting and/or hunting portrayed in a
positive way in the mass media? Been a long time, if ever, hasn't it?
Ever seen a target shooter in a movie? Who won the last Bianchi Cup, or
the Camp Perry 1000 yard championships? Name one United States (or from
anywhere in the World, for that matter) olympic competitor in the shooting
sports. Bet ya can't. Why? Because it doesn't get covered. Did you
know that the first gold medal of the Sydney Olympics was won by the
United States in a shooting sport? And it was a woman who won that medal.
But it didn't get covered. It was a minor blurb in the sports section of
the newspaper.
Don't try and tell me the media isn't biased.