Article on the ammo "shortage"

[Thirties]

This is a very good web blog site. Printer format available at end of article.

http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/u...ame-mexican-cartels/

 

[Thirties]

This is a very good web blog site. Printer format available at end of article.

http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/u...ame-mexican-cartels/

 

[safearm]

It's a good rebuttal to the first article, however, I don't think a website called "Pajamasmedia.com" is going to carry the same level of credibility as the New York Times, Washington Post, or CNN, even if those three are notoriously liberal in their reporting.

 

[Thirties]

Keep reading . . . it's a blog, not a newspaper.

 

[safearm]

A blog has even less credibility.

 

[Nicksterdemus]

Articles, in my mind, do not come from blogs as a general rule.
Hell, I ain't read it yet. I might agree so maybe I'll take a peek...

 

[ArcticFox]

Pajamasmedia has broken important stories like photoshopped photos from Iraq and the Dan Rather episode and is one of the reasons the NY Times and others are losing readership.

 

[sipowicz]

Originally posted by safearm:
A blog has even less credibility.

Didn't Steve McQueen spray one with a fire extinguisher?

 

[animalmother]

Never heard of it before reading this post.

 

[Mickey D]

Blogs and zombies, the next generation!

 

[citizen gary]

Originally posted by sipowicz:

Originally posted by safearm:
A blog has even less credibility.

Didn't Steve McQueen spray one with a fire extinguisher?

Sip, your quips are a wonder to behold. I don't post often, but had to this time.

 

[Careby]

"It crawls.... It creeps.... It eats you alive! It's.... the Blog!"

 

[Wayne02]

Argue the semantics of what an "article" is all you want. Pajamamedia is a pretty decent source. New york Times, Washington post, cnn et al have more credibility??? I disagree. These type of publications have proven themselves biased, inaccurate, untruthful over a period of time now. I dismiss them as being inconsequential if one wants to get accurate information. It used to be you could at least trust these outfits to display some sense of quality, ethical, mostly unbiased journalism. That went out the window some time ago.

The internet is changing "media" as we know it. Newspapers are tanking left and right across America and their online presence is of marginal value at best. Blogs and other independent news sites are steadily becoming part of the countries reporters and news sources. People wake up in the morning and have their cup of coffee while accessing the news via their laptop and favorite news sites, blogs etc.

One needs only to have spent some time over the last 6 months on any of the firearm forums or in the stores looking for ammo to know that this pajamamedia piece is on target.

A local North Carolina Wal-Mart sells 10,000-15,000 per shift if BoE employee counts are close to accurate, and a customer (white male) at the closest one purchased 5,600 rounds just two weeks ago. Ammo sales are through the roof everywhere in the United States, not just along the southern border. This author, like some of his peers, chooses to ignore this unquestioned reality in his pursuit of a story based more often on inferences and supposition than evidence.

 

[Lee in Quartzsite]

Just go to Midway USA, Cabela's or any other online source. Most say "Out of Stock". Midway is even out of most .22 ammo, let alone any centerfire ammo. Even certain reloading supplies are getting hard to come by.

 

[glypnir]

It looks like a good article to me. Well thought out, well reasoned, good facts, good conclusions, even a nice comparison to the First Ammendment.

Would it help any if I told you that the original blog that the article came from is called "Confederate Yankee"?

Here's the conclusion:

"Why are civilian ammunition sales so high presently? Because we have anti-patriotic men and women in positions of power extending all the way into the Oval Office itself that see civilian arms usage as a threat to their goals and somehow think that the Founding Fathers intended the Second Amendment to protect the rights of Americans to own arms, but not the ammunition needed to make those arms functional. Somehow I suspect journalists who so readily parrot that argument would be greatly alarmed if they were informed of entirely parallel restrictions to their First Amendment rights.

Perhaps they should be required to only spread ideas using quill and parchment; after all, that's what the Founders had. They couldn't have imagined high-speed modern printing presses, television, radio, or the Internet's instant global reach.

Or perhaps they would eagerly submit to having a federal background check before being allowed to own an iPhone, BlackBerry, typewriter, computer, printer, or word-processing program, and would agree to the imposition of a 500-character limit on the amount of text they can type or words they can say before a government alert is triggered.

After all, if the pen is truly mightier than the sword, shouldn't the dissemination of potentially inflammatory thought be regulated more tightly than mere ammunition?

Of course, these same journalists would fight such restrictions on their First Amendment right to free speech and having the tools to spread their thoughts, with all the ferocity they could muster against the cruel tyranny of a far too powerful, far too intrusive state. They'd likely want to take up arms themselves against a totalitarian state and its bureau of speech.

It's too bad that under the same tyranny they encourage such arms could not exist."

 

[Spotteddog]

Not much?

 

[Bat Guano]

I check Instapundit (the blog carrying the link) every morning. I don't believe everthing I read by any means, but it has interesting leads to things. A lot of which will never show up in the NYT or other MSM outlets. Too much stuff going on these days to wear blinders anymore.

BTW the "pajamas" slur originated with people claiming that the Dan Rather expose was just the work of a bunch of dweebs sitting around the house in their pajamas. Funny how that worked out.