One of the most frustrating tactics employed by the corporate media is to deliberately oversimplify a concept and attempt to circumvent the glaring omissions through rhetoric and slang which resonates with the activist side of the political ledger. This is especially prevalent when publishing gun content from the prospective the anti-gun lobby.
A recent article posted about “smart guns” on the electronic tech news and aggregate site Gizmodo, encapsulates everything that is wayward with shapeless and uninspired form that journalism has morphed into. And the New York Times wants their essence back as the mouthpiece of the Beltway was at least borrowed for the TED talk missive which takes a couple of underhanded barbs at Second Amendment supporters.
Not only does the editorial piece branded as news claim that gun owners are “finally coming around” to the notion that “smart guns” are the unabashed future of self-defense, but the author frequently copies and pastes cliches that have been regurgitated multiple times, that one has to question are writers getting paid residuals in utilizing well-worn platitudes and indirectly disproving their conclusion?
The narrative that the feature is trying to pawn off to its liberal audience, is that all gun control advocates are loyal and bound to the NRA, and these “backwards” followers are reticent to accept any technological innovations past an 8-track tape player housed in a Charger or a pick-up. Toss into the cumbersome word salad an obligatory quote from Everytown for Gun Safety without printing a rebuttal from gun rights advocates, and the contemporary canvas of intellectual dishonesty colliding with sculpted propaganda veers towards the proximal gravity well of Pravda under the direction of Dropov. In three decades plus since the demolition of the Berlin Wall, the Cold War has once again been rekindled under false pretenses hunting and circulating throughout the infrastructure of social media with the directive to indoctrinate. The applicable philosophical metaphor of “If it is not mentioned, than the audience still remains informed,” emerges through a wispy silhouette of gulags and the prisons of state housing dissolving into the contrived worlds and realities forged by AI and a dusting of imagination.
While the author manages to delve into stereotypes and sweeping generalizations, the written assumptions are indicative of an arrogance and ignorance bred from the inability to understand the nuances of firearms community. The so-called factual numbers are egregiously erroneous and used as ammunition to mischaracterize gun owners as all about the price point in completing discounting the adherence and importance of selecting a firearm that promotes safety. Curiously omitted from the editorial is any mention of the “smart guns” being susceptible to hacks, and tracking addons which compromise privacy.
Similar to logical folks skeptical of the current state of development pertaining to the alternative energy industry, people are able to discern that while technological advances in “smart guns” has been astronomical, the framework of functioning as a reliable tool for self-defense has not reached a reasonable level of performance. Even though the possibilities are intriguing, especially with safety enhanced features protecting children, however, the reliability and eloquence of a traditional gun is still the best bet when one is reacting to a threat in a life and death situation measured in micro-seconds and with no room for error.
As big tech has the propensity to overengineer, time-tested tools of reliable self-defense, are being painted by the corporate media as archaic weapons and echoing the beliefs of a forceful group which secretly wishes for the US to have a knife violence epidemic rivaling the current crises afflicting London. If that disheartening point is reached, the anti-gun lobby will have completed the foundational phase of constructing a monumental disaster, and with the help from banal and shallow editorials that fail to accurately address the critical issues, the assault from basic liberties will continue come from all sides.