Olbermann just described the NRA’s “Eddie Eagle” program as “Joe Camel with feathers” (meaning, I guess, that it’s pro-gun propaganda aimed at children).
I’m no fan of the NRA, which is actually a (“moderately”) pro-gun-control organisation and a Republican PAC, but this particular charge is a bum rap. As a former NRA member I’m quite familiar with the Eddie Eagle program, and there’s no pro-gun propaganda in it. The program consists pretty much entirely in conveying to kids the lesson “If you see a gun, STOP! a) don’t touch; b) leave the area; c) tell an adult.” That’s it.
Which part of that is Olbermann against?
Maybe he wants the children of gun owners to exterminate themselves.
I had the same reaction. As far as I know, the NRA started out as a gun safety and hunter education outfit before it got more political. I doubt they’ll be giving the kids any lectures about the Second Amendment.
I’d be more worried they’d be using obscene language like “law abiding citizen.” I’m usually a pretty tolerant guy, but there are limits.
Yes and no. It was originally a gun training outfit, but the NRA was originally founded by a gang of Army officers just out of the Civil War (Gen. Ambrose Burnside was its first president), and was founded with the express purpose of helping the U.S. government’s soldiers learn how to murder people more efficiently. So I’d argue it was a political outfit in a rather strong sense, although my understanding so far is that its political agenda had more to do with upholding the theo-nationalist civic religion broadly, more than with the day-to-day details of legislation.
I’d be curious whether anyone knows whether the NRA took any public stance, during the 1870s, on the efforts by Southern state governments and by the Klan to forcibly disarm Southern blacks. Cruikshank was in 1875, just 4 years after they were founded, and most of the men in charge were former Union soldiers who supported Reconstruction. But I don’t know whether or not the organization took any public stance at the time. Anyone here know?
According to David Hardy, the NRA helped southern blacks arm themselves. Much of the early leadership of the national organization was comprised of Civil War veterans and Klan fighters.
Sigh. Shows how much I know.
I didn’t see Olbermann’s segment about that, but I’d be real curious to know whether he actually explained at all what the “Eddie Eagle” program is.
How often do talk shows (or newspaper editorials for that matter) actually explain or link to the real argument they oppose? Very seldom I’m willing to bet.
That’s what gets me about idjits like Andrew Keen who wring their hands about the poor quality of amateur journalism, the lack of fact-checking, etc. One of my pet peeves is conventional reporters who do stories centering on leaked government documents and other written sources, and don’t have a clue about how to cite it properly so that people can check it on their own. I don’t know how many wire service stories I’ve seen that just give a misstated version of the title of some document, with no date or catalog number or anything else. OTOH hyperlinking to what you’re reporting on is what online journalism is all *about*.
I had the same reaction. As far as I know, the NRA started out as a gun safety and hunter education outfit before it got more political. I doubt they’ll be giving the kids any lectures about the Second Amendment.
I’d be more worried they’d be using obscene language like “law abiding citizen.” I’m usually a pretty tolerant guy, but there are limits.
Kevin, I’ve seen that for years – any time newspapers report on a bill that has passed, whether state or federal, I have yet to see a link to the “Thomas.gov” LoC website or some other source where you can read the bill. It is also uncommon for them to include the relevant bill number as used by the legislature, to aid in research.
i think that gun control should always be imposed at all times to reduce violence.`–
If you know a way to impose gun control without violence, please tell. If “at all times” includes imposing it on cops and soldiers, it probably would reduce violence a great deal–but I doubt they’re inclined to cooperate. OTOH if your project is to reduce violence by imposing gun control on everybody except the most authoritarian, power-crazy thugs in society, I’m pessimistic about the prospects for success.