SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Mike McPhate reports in The New York Times that two home shopping industry veterans, Valerie Castle and Doug Bornstein, are set to premier GunTV, a new 24-Hour shopping channel for guns, that aims to take the QVC approach of peppy hosts pitching "a vast array of firearms," as well as related items like bullets, holsters and two-way radios. The new cable channel hopes to help satisfy Americans' insatiable appetite for firearms. The channel's forthcoming debut might seem remarkably ill-timed, given recent shootings at a Planned Parenthood in Colorado Springs and at a social services center in San Bernardino, California but gun sales have been rising for years, with nearly 21 million background checks performed in 2014, and they appear on track to a new record this year. The boom has lately been helped by a drumbeat of mass shootings, whose attendant anxiety has only driven more people into the gun store.
The proposed schedule of programming allots an eight-minute segment each hour to safety public service announcements in between proposed segments on topics like women's concealed weapon's apparel, big-game hunting and camping. Buying a Glock on GunTV won't be quite like ordering a pizza. When a firearm is purchased, a distributor will send it to a retailer near the buyer, where it has to be picked up in person and a federal background check performed. "We saw an opportunity in filling a need, not creating one," says Castle. "The vast majority of people who own and use guns in this country, whether it's home protection, recreation or hunting, are responsible .... I don't really know that it's going to put more guns on the streets."
Critics suggest that Gun TV could make the decision to purchase a weapon seem trivial—on the same level as ordering a Snuggie or a vertical egg cooker. "Buying a gun is a serious decision," says Laura Cutilletta, senior staff attorney at the Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence. "If you are going to buy a gun for your home, it's not a decision you should be making at three in the morning because you are watching TV."
(Score: 2) by ikanreed on Friday December 11 2015, @05:46PM
You accept guns can be used to kill?
You accept that guns can be used to kill?
Hey guys? Did you know that forks can be used to eat? And weedwhackers can be used to trim plants? And vehicles can be used as transportation? Or stamps can be used to send letters?
What kind of dimwitted fuckwit are you that you have to treat acknowledging the primary functional purpose of something as this giant rhetorical giveaway that just taxes your integrity to an extreme to even acknowledge. I'm not sorry for this: you're a goddamn petty asshole.
(Score: 2) by Tramii on Saturday December 12 2015, @12:25AM
You posted:
There's a slice of the country who cannot accept the day-to-day reality that firearm deaths are a big part of preventable deaths in the US.
I posted:
I accept that guns can be used to kill.
I was agreeing with you. You claimed that there were people who would not accept the fact that guns kill, and I pointed out I was not one of them.
This is the second time you've taken something I've said and tried to twist it around it mean something else entirely. I think it's pretty clear that you have ceased thinking rationally. In fact, even though you blame other people for "A. [not] respecting the words I've actually used without writing some fantasy onto them, and B. not using a single trite saying about guns?" *you* are doing those exact things. The very qualities you claim to despise are the qualities your have demonstrated.
I'm probably wasting my time posting all this, since I can see that you don't want a rational discussion. You instead use strawman arguments, make ad hominem attacks and appeal to emotion, instead of having a civil discourse. I'll stop responding now since I can see I'm simply wasting my time.