CBS intentionally violated posted gun show rules in phony undercover stunt

[shadowrider]

“‘Bullet Button’ Used To Get Around California Gun Laws,” CBS 5 San Francisco reported Tuesday.

“CBS 5 went undercover to a recent gun show at the Cow Palace in Daly City and found ‘California legal’ assault rifles throughout,” they claim.

It’s a non-story, really, as their undercover team found nothing illegal—they weren’t even looking for that—or that couldn’t have been obtained openly. The entire purpose of the “investigation” appears to be to gin up public frenzy about a legal device that allows for changing magazines on semi-automatic firearms that comply with California’s specific model and cosmetic features bans.

“I've emailed the gun show proprietors and asked them if they post signs prohibiting unauthorized photographs and recording of patrons and dealers,” this columnist noted on The War on Guns blog. “I also note the covert video includes audio, and California appears to be a two-party consent state, which raises the question of whether or not our intrepid ‘undercover reporters’ were the only lawbreakers in the room--funny, though, how they choose not to do covert ops against the population causing all the ‘gun’ problems. “

http://www.examiner.com/article/cbs-intentionally-violated-posted-gun-show-rules-phony-undercover-stunt

[Cooley Hurd]

1. CBS 5... an affiliate - NOT the network.

[Renew Deal]

2. The video rules are irrelevant.

What's relevant is the story.

[ManiacJoe]

4. But there was no story.

[gejohnston]

9. the story was

Last edited Sat May 5, 2012, 10:04 PM - Edit history (1)

complaining about a "loophole" that wasn't. California law specifically allows a tool such as a bullet tip as a tool. That is not a loophole, nor is it any secret.
The article is grade school journalism. How do you go "undercover" in a public venue? Even better, the article is not about street gangs etc. it is about every day people at a range:

John Largaespada loves his AR-15 and goes to the range every week to fire it. And he’s got plenty of company. “There is usually like a 30 minute to an hour wait for rifle lanes,” he said.

That’s because the most popular guns at the range these days are semi-automatic rifles. In a state with some of the strictest gun laws in the nation, how is it these military-style guns are legal?

nothing about crime, gangs, but what amounts to archery with noise.

Here is a gem:

So why isn’t law enforcement cracking down on what appears to be a loophole in the state’s gun control laws? CBS 5 put the question to Bay Area police departments. None would comment, same with the California Department of Justice.

They are asking law enforcement "why aren't you going after people obeying the law?" At least CA law enforcement is not in the habit on answering stupid questions.
http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2012/05/01/bullet-button-used-to-get-around-california-gun-laws/#disqus_thread

[NewMoonTherian]

28. This really gives me the giggles.

CBS 5: Why aren't you cracking down on this?
LEO: Cracking down on what?
CBS 5: On the bullet button device.
LEO: It's not illegal.
CBS 5: Well what does that have to do with anything?

[Clames]

23. And what exactly was relevant about it?

Did you find the author's complete technical ignorance relevant? Josh Sugarman's whining ignorance? How do people who are ignorant of the law make a story relevant?

[Straw Man]

46. You must love warrantless wiretaps.

The video rules are irrelevant.

What's relevant is the story.

As long as it's against those people, right?

[pneutin]

67. CBS5 also committed a felony during the story

by installing a MagMagnet on the AR-15 in the story, they committed a felony of constructing an illegal assault weapon.

Do you think CBS5 should be prosecuted?

[Hoyt]

3. Boo friggin hooo -- The poor pitiful plight of the gun culture.

[DragonBorn]

59. Laws?

So you have no problem with people breaking the law as long as its being used against lawful gun owners? You sound like a real progressive.

Sheriff Joe Arpaio feels the same way about those damn mexicans, I guess you agree with him amiright?

[Hoyt]

60. Guns are so "progressive." Lots of things are legal - like flying a swastika - but they ain't right.

Sheriff Joe loves the Minute Men and their use of guns for intimidation.

Why does just about every Newbe that comes to the gungeon spout junk about guns being "progressive?" It's BS and you know it. But, welcome anyway.

[ManiacJoe]

61. Luckily, Hoyt does not get to set the definition of "progressive" for the rest of us.

[Hoyt]

64. I suspect if we move out of the Gungeon, the "rest of you" would be a small assed number.

Well unless we screw up and end on the NRA or other right wing websites.

[ManiacJoe]

65. Previous DU surveys suggest otherwise.

[Hoyt]

66. Howsabout a link? I'd love to see how questions were phrased, date (pre or post Zimmerman), etc.

[oneshooter]

71. Just as soon as you provide a link to the study/poll that proves your oft

repeated meme that CHL is a form of pollution.

Oneshooter
Armed and Livin in Texas

[Hoyt]

72. It's as obvious as climate change. Sorry your response doesn't cut it.

[oneshooter]

75. But you have no scientific proof. Just"It's as obvious as climate change."

Climate change has a provable scientific base. You have none. "Because Hoyt says so" means squat. You need to supply provable, repeatable scientific evidence of the "facts" you spout.

Oneshooter
Armed and Livin in Texas

[Hoyt]

76. That's it, let's wait 20 years to see how 50% of population handles carrying guns on street. By then

there will be 200 million more of the damn things to deal with.

[ManiacJoe]

77. You say that like it is a bad thing!

[ManiacJoe]

73. Definitely pre-Zimmerman, on DU2.

Feel free to search for them, most likely in GD forum.

[Hoyt]

74. Makes sense then. I think people are starting to realize what's walking around in public

with lethal weapons.

[DragonBorn]

62. And?

So you support violating the law against people you don't like. Why don't you go steal those Neo Nazi's flags then? Do you key peoples cars with republican bumper stickers?

Is the law only suppose to protect people you agree with?

[Hoyt]

63. Welcome to DU. Actually I am pointing out that being within the law is not always desirable.

Well, unless you like swastikas, confederate flags, stinking cigars, some SOB blipping unmuffled motorcycle throttle next to you while you have your windows down, etc.

Enjoy your guns.

[AnOhioan]

5. Your outrage is noted

[shadowrider]

6. If you can point out MY outrage, I'd appreciate it. All I did was post the article.

[tridim]

7. For starters, your sig is outrageous.

[shadowrider]

8. But true.

[bongbong]

29. Even truerDesignat

Designated concealed carry areas are SUPER-DUPER target-rich areas.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

58. I missed this.

Perhaps you could define the word "truer"??

[GreenStormCloud]

10. Yes, it is outrageous that people should be deprived of the ability to protect themselves. N/T

[shadowrider]

11. .

[Hoyt]

16. Do both of you guys avoid going into "gun free zones" over fear of being accosted?

I feel sorry for you.

[DanTex]

17. Well, that would explain the small-minded worldview.

If you're afraid of "gun free zones", you certainly can't venture outside the US very often, or even visit a lot of the more liberal part of this country.

[derby378]

19. Sure can't visit Mexico

What with all those Zetas and La Familia types running around killing everything in sight - how are their gun laws working?

[DanTex]

20. Of course, because the problems in Mexico are due to their gun laws!

[derby378]

22. THANK YOU!

It's what I've been saying all this time.

[GreenStormCloud]

68. Gun-free zones are a rarity in Texas.

So I don't have to worry about them.

[Hoyt]

69. Doesn't surprise me a bit. Lots of little boys that never grew up - a la georgie bush, ricky perry.

They gotta have their machismo, bombs, war games, etc. If can't have those, guns have to fill void.

[gejohnston]

70. don't forget

Mollie Ivins, Jim Hightower, LBJ, Maury Maverick

Bush actually grew up in New England prep schools.

[tridim]

21. Nobody is forcing you to visit or live in a gun-free zone.

Nobody is being deprived of the the ability.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

25. Really???

I can't remember who but someone on DU said that it was a RIGHT to live in a gun-free zone.

[bongbong]

30. How TERRIBLE!

Some people want to live without worrying about being shot by some Zimmerman type.

OH THE HORROR!

[Hoyt]

31. LMAO! How true.

[Union Scribe]

32. Aw, you think a sign will dissuade the bad guys, huh?

That's adorable!

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

33. How true! :)

I can just see some whacked guy with maybe a "Dirty Harry" gun going into to maybe a church. As the door closes behind him he draws the gun and is immediately informed by an usher of the rules. After they confiscate his "bullet hose" he takes out a pocket size dictionary and, ripping out a few pages, he grabs a hostage threatening paper cuts.

Oow... It just gives me the chills.

[PavePusher]

34. Isn't s/he just precious? n/t

[ileus]

41. Most antis are only worried about denying the rights of legal carriers.

Criminals they expect to carry illegal weapons...

[bongbong]

43. Tired, tired old Talking Point

Hilarious how often this talking point is destroyed, and how often the gun-religionists keep resurrecting it.

"Gun control laws are useless because they get broken! I WIN!"

This means speed limits should all be gotten rid of since people speed all the time.

Gun-religionists love to waste Liberals' time debunking and re-debunking the same old washed-up "arguments".

[friendly_iconoclast]

47. The belief in word magic amongst the restrictionistas is quite widepread...

[hack89]

36. Because we know criminals will obey all gun laws?

there is no such thing as a gun free zone to someone that wants to carry a gun there. Look at VA Tech as exhibit one.

[bongbong]

44. Tired Talking Points

Hilarious how often this talking point is destroyed, and how often the gun-religionists keep resurrecting it.

"Gun control laws are useless because they get broken! I WIN!"

This means speed limits should all be gotten rid of since people speed all the time.

Gun-religionists love to waste Liberals' time debunking and re-debunking the same old washed-up "arguments".

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

45. "...speed limits should all be gotten rid of since people speed all the time."

The speed limit analogy is a poor one since the nature of speed limits vary from state to state. Where I live, speed limits are absolute. The sworn testimony of a LEO giving conclusive evidence that your speed exceeded the posted limit results in your conviction. In some states, California for one, speed limits are prima facie. This means, while exceeding the posted is sufficient to bring one to trial, it is not sufficient for conviction. The accused can demonstrate that his/her speed was safe and reasonable for prevailing conditions, such as moving with the flow of traffic. We have speed limits because it is safer to have vehicles near each other travel at similar speeds.

More to the point, gun-free zones make illegal the possession of a firearm in a certain area by certain people. Murder is illegal because the victim has a right to life. There is no "right" to live, work, eat, walk, swim, learn or fly a kite in an area free of firearms.

Making murder illegal is a just thing to do. Making it illegal for a violent convicted criminal to buy a pistol is essentially a just thing to do. Making it illegal for a violent convicted criminal to carry concealed is a just thing to do. Making it illegal for EVERYONE to possess a firearm within or on the grounds of a public library is a waste. It's like posting a speed limit of 36, 37 and 38 on road already posted 35.

[bongbong]

50. wasting time

> The speed limit analogy is a poor one since the nature of speed limits vary from state to state.

A completely illogical and nonsensical statement. Gun laws vary from state to state, and their enforcement does too. Exactly like speeding laws.

> Where I live, speed limits are absolute

Wrong, they can always be contested. I'll let you search for "attorneys to fight traffic tickets"

.......

Just more nonsense from the gun religonists that are wasting my time.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

51. I accept...

...your inability to address the substance of my post or defend your own as your concession.

Eschew obfuscation.

[bongbong]

53. worshipful

> your inability to address the substance of my post or defend your own as your concession.

Ah yes, the old "declaration of victory", so beloved of those who worship guns.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

56. "...so beloved of those who worship guns."

If You say so, I wouldn't know.

[friendly_iconoclast]

48. Use of the phrase "talking point(s)" is *not* a saving throw when you can't refute something.

Just FYI...

[bongbong]

49. yes

> Use of the phrase "talking point(s)" is *not* a saving throw when you can't refute something.

Yeah, but I refuted that Talking Point before. I get sick of repeating myself for all the gun religionists. They have been told to waste Liberals' time, by posting tired old Talking Points that were destroyed decades ago.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

52. It does seem...

...rather disingenuous (or just lazy) to repeatedly involve oneself in an exchange only to assert having refuted the position elsewhere.

It's also kind of pointless.

[bongbong]

54. Read & learn

> ather disingenuous (or just lazy) to repeatedly involve oneself in an exchange only to assert having refuted th

You should try reading my posts. You might learn something (other than the NRA Talking Points you got down pat)

[Clames]

55. You have to make educated posts...

...before others can learn from them. Lame, thoughtless VPC talking points have nothing educational to offer which is about all your posts consist of.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

57. Regarding...

"...Talking Points you got down pat"

Thanks, I do so enjoy irony.

[GreenStormCloud]

37. In Texas gun-free zones are rare.

They aren't something that I have to concern myself with. I pretty much pack where I want to, with very few exceptions.

[tridim]

39. Well, good luck with that. You'll likely need it.

[DanTex]

12. Hey CBS! Leave those gun traffickers alone!

There's nothing worse than investigative reporting!

[gejohnston]

13. investigative reporting

of non crimes, asking why "police don't crack down" on legal activity, and what trafficking? They were complaining about everyday target shooters at a range. Hardly in the same league as Gary Webb.

[DanTex]

14. According to David Codrea?

Noted right-wing loon and promoter of Fast and Furious conspiracy theories? Yeah, there's a great guy to talk about journalistic integrity!

[gejohnston]

15. read the original "news" piece

there is a whole thread on it. Codrea is a pundit. Besides, I did not question their integrity, merely their competence.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1172&pid=36445

http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2012/05/01/bullet-button-used-to-get-around-california-gun-laws/

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

18. As sports reporting legend Biff Barf...

...aka George Carlin, once said, "I call 'em like I see 'em; if I don't see 'em, I make 'em up."

[NewMoonTherian]

24. I'll question their integrity.

They had an agenda, and by golly, they were going to push that agenda, regardless of the fact that they found zero violations of California's unreasonable laws. If they don't have an anti-gun agenda, then they're just whoring themselves for viewership, and they don't care whom they screw over in the process.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

26. "...whoring themselves for viewership..."

MSM?? Oh no, say it ain't so.

[gejohnston]

27. They most likey did have an anti-gun agenda

but they made themselves look more like the Onion than BBC. They were not overtly dishonest, just merely foolish. The interesting thing was the comments, in SFO of all places.

[PavePusher]

35. "Fast and Furious conspiracy theories"?

Did it happen or not?

Were/are attempts made/being made to cover it up or not?

[PavePusher]

78. You do seem to have problems answering direct questions about facts. n/t

[GreenStormCloud]

38. What investigation?

Legal guns being legally sold in a legal venue that is open to the public and you call that investigating?

[ellisonz]

40. ...

babies

[Remmah2]

42. First Amendment used to abuse the Second Amendment.

SSDD.