Video: No, the father of a Sandy Hook victim wasn’t “heckled” by gun-rights supporters

posted at 4:31 pm on January 29, 2013 by Allahpundit

Here’s an example of a story not only being too good to check but being so good — potentially — that it warranted a little “help” from the media to reach that full potential. It has everything a fair-and-balanced gun-control advocate/reporter could want: An eminently sympathetic victim calmly making the case for more regulations while the ogres known as “gun-rights supporters” try to silence him by shouting him down. It’s a passion play, the supreme manifestation of what Obama was trying to achieve by having kids onstage when he signed his executive memoranda on gun control a few weeks ago. If you oppose new gun regs then you’re basically in favor of murdering children. Heckling the father of a boy killed in Newtown is simply the logical conclusion of that impulse.

Except that’s not what happened. I’m going to send you over to Twitchy to watch the vid (click the image below to watch), but first you must watch the clips at MSNBC and HuffPo to see how the media’s crack video editors are presenting the exchange. It’s not “deceptive,” it’s outright propaganda designed to demonize gun-rights supporters. But it’s useful to gun-control activists as a parable of how fanatic and terrible their opponents are so naturally it’s making the rounds. Piers, of course, bought it hook, line, and sinker and doubtless will defend getting fake-outraged about it even after he sees the unedited video:

But then, Piers is also wont to say things like this:

Exit question: If you’re going to take the position that all other rights, including freedom of speech, must bow to regulation if it’s designed to protect children, why circumscribe it by saying “by a gun”? Does protecting children from murder by knives or arson not quite rise to the same level?


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

This is another volley in the culture war. We will lose if we shrug this and other incidents off as the ruminations of LSM and claim that certain members are discredited. They plant a thought, it takes root, they win the skirmish. Our side is not doing a very good job of battling this kind propaganda. Every time one of these stories is presented and we do not take to the rooftops to scream the truth, we give ground. Time to look at this realistically and start to fight back.

InTheBellyoftheBeast on January 29, 2013 at 7:37 PM

Piers Morgan is British fecal matter.

ultracon on January 29, 2013 at 7:57 PM

I got it.

Why don’t we just eliminate all murder. Let’s make all murder illegal!

Oh, wait, it’s not the murdering that the gun abolitionists are opposed to; it’s the ability to murder.

So let’s get rid of all guns, and all knives, and all potentially poisonous materials, and all explosive materials and all highly flamable materials, and all cars, and all baseball bats, and all groups of three or more, and all fists — and for all those Three Stooges fans out there, all first and second fingers.

But, seriously, how exactly do you prevent murderous rampages by people who are ultimately suicidal?

Mandatory psychological screening for everyone? (That’s ObamaCare.) And then close monitoring of those who are listed as possessing personalities or views considered dangerous or counter-productive to society? (That’s the DHS.) And banning these people from access to guns? (That’s the current argument.)

The broad infringement of the right to bear arms based on a statistical modelling, or upon political viewpoints, is a serious danger that the Constitution was meant to prevent.

This moves the whole population from the “presumed innocent until proven guilty” category to the “presumed guilty until proven innocent” category. Up to now, you had to be proven incompetent or criminal by a judge or jury. But now it will be done by bureacracy. (That’s the CDC.)

This isn’t just about guns anymore. It’s about using health care to justify all sorts of infringements.

We all need to be watchful of the usage of the government’s medical establishment in modifying gun laws.

flicker on January 29, 2013 at 7:57 PM

Does your dead child demand we give up our rights to first amendment too? No one can rebut your emotional plea?

Mormontheman on January 29, 2013 at 8:07 PM

AZfederalist on January 29, 2013 at 7:00 PM

Thanks, that got by me, weird since I am from VA and it hasn’t been that long ago.

Cindy Munford on January 29, 2013 at 8:12 PM

The truth no longer matters… mission accomplished. Forward!

MT on January 29, 2013 at 8:26 PM

Over 30,000 idiots on HuffPo have commented on this story. Even before I read this, I attempted to provide the proper context. You can imagine how that’s going.

The line was crossed after the beginning of the Iraq War, when the Tolerant Left decided that it was no longer enough to disagree…now their opponents must be stomped into the dirt, dehumanized and painted as pure evil. This is just another brush stroke, and the sheeple eat it up like cake.

This will not end well.

Kenz on January 29, 2013 at 8:36 PM

Lol. The LEFT doesn’t play by any RULES. And CIVILITY ONLY WORKS, AMONG CIVIL PEOPLE. Which the LEFT is NOT.

An armed society is a civil society. Lock and load.

djtnt on January 29, 2013 at 8:38 PM

The truth no longer matters… mission accomplished. Forward!

And at this point what does it matter?

flicker on January 29, 2013 at 8:55 PM

The line was crossed after the beginning of the Iraq War, when the Tolerant Left decided that it was no longer enough to disagree…now their opponents must be stomped into the dirt, dehumanized and painted as pure evil. This is just another brush stroke, and the sheeple eat it up like cake.

This will not end well.

Kenz on January 29, 2013 at 8:36 PM

That’s ok; I’ve decided the same thing about them at this point.

Midas on January 29, 2013 at 9:01 PM

The gun control faithful have a long history of respectful and reasoned debate of the issues. So, not surprising in the least.

novaculus on January 29, 2013 at 4:36 PM

You forgot the /sarc/ tag.

Solaratov on January 29, 2013 at 9:03 PM

this is a good illustration of what the left thinks a conservation is.

Piers Morgan thinks that a question to an audience is Always Rhetorical. No answer needed. I mean, as with any theater, if an actor on the stage faces the audience and asks a question we don’t answer him…it is theater

this is who the left is…they tell us what to think and ask us rhetorical questions…us hillbillies are supposed to stfu and stfd

r keller on January 29, 2013 at 9:12 PM

Over 30,000 idiots on HuffPo have commented on this story. Even before I read this, I attempted to provide the proper context. You can imagine how that’s going.

The line was crossed after the beginning of the Iraq War, when the Tolerant Left decided that it was no longer enough to disagree…now their opponents must be stomped into the dirt, dehumanized and painted as pure evil. This is just another brush stroke, and the sheeple eat it up like cake.

This will not end well.

Kenz on January 29, 2013 at 8:36 PM

It will only end when they call for the actual murder of dissidents. As in, when the fatwas are no longer conducted by just kooks on Democrat Underground and the DailyKooks… but dispassionately by ordinary rank-and-file Dems. You and I know that’s coming.

They can all FOAD. Then the world would be a better place.

Myron Falwell on January 29, 2013 at 9:33 PM

dentarthurdent on January 29, 2013 at 5:33 PM

Exactly.

And all the hoplophobic wailing about kids killed by guns is a great big FU to the parents and survivors of any child killed in the ways you mentioned.

As if only children killed by guns have any meaning.

It’s despicable.

soundingboard on January 29, 2013 at 9:34 PM

Piers Morgan – poster boy for restricted immigration.

ghostwalker1 on January 29, 2013 at 10:53 PM

Well at least two lefty media outlets are backtracking now, CNN and Slate. It’s past time for the others to do so.

juliesa on January 29, 2013 at 11:28 PM

Does Piers include a child who hasn’t been born yet?

ramrants on January 29, 2013 at 11:39 PM

Good job, Allahpundit.

williamg on January 30, 2013 at 12:04 AM

Piers Morgan is British fecal matter.

ultracon on January 29, 2013 at 7:57 PM

Justly invokes that classic Monty Python joke:

What’s brown and sounds like a bell?

DUNG!

pilamaye on January 30, 2013 at 7:34 AM

These people certainly deserve to be heard and understood after the terrible tragedy they’ve experienced. No parent should have to bury their child for any reason. Those children were innocent and had their entire lives ahead of them before they were senselessly murdered by a dastardly psychopath.

However, many feelings emotionally expressed are just that. They are the product of unmitigated candor not necessarily grounded in realistic conclusions.

The fact of the matter in this case is that almost none of the measures being advocated by these parents would have saved their children. None. That’s hard to state, but it is honest and sincere.

You can never eliminate evil from this world. Therefore believing you can do so by trying to ban guns, nuance the purchase of ammunition or intruding on the rights of a substantial number of citizens who happen to be legal, responsible gun owners is not the answer. What purpose will that serve? To what end is that directed? The fact is it is a utopian view not achievable on this earth. It also does not comport with facts and wisdom. It is, as I stated, emotional and therefore not fully rationalized in a realistic sense.

The facts are the Sandy Hook murderer was coddled by an ineffective system that for years allowed his mental illness to largely go untreated due to the societal “stigma” proper treatment people purport would follow. In a contemporary society elevating political correctness above realistic, practical and diagnostically correct assessments- it is the perfect storm waiting to happen. Not reaching that assessment is both intellectually dishonest and unrealistic.

As for the guns he used, they were stolen due to the fact that when he went to make a purchase on his own he was rightly denied. Somebody please explain to me how trying to ban assault weapons (and some handguns), limiting magazine sizes, registering legal gun owners and almost all measures focused on guns that are being proposed would have changed that?

The simple, unvarnished truth is they would not.

Marcus Traianus on January 30, 2013 at 8:13 AM

Yeah, he did use the rifle. Early news reports were wrong on that like they were about many things.

Mark1971 on January 29, 2013 at 5:12 PM

Wrong.

I watched the live coverage of the aftermath, and the POLICE SPOKESMAN, in a press briefing after they had secured the crime scene, asserted that the rifle was found in the TRUNK of Lanza’s car, and the pistols were all that was found in the school.

The story has been changed to fit the agenda. You drank the MSM Kool-aid.

Shepherd Lover on January 30, 2013 at 8:28 AM

Tough to watch that.
I think it’s fair to say he wasn’t heckled.
But he also wasn’t given an answer to his question.
Would’ve been more respectful to be silent and not shout slogans in reply to what was largely a rhetorical question.
The Dad’s response to the shouts was emblematic of an amazing thoughtfulness – considering the weight of the issue on him in comparison to anyone else who was in that auditorium.

And I think – despite many of the knee jerk admonishments here – Mr. Heslin swayed a lot more folks to his view than the ‘shouters’ did to theirs.

verbaluce on January 30, 2013 at 8:57 AM

Honestly, I don’t know what to believe. Was the first report true, but changed to fit what someone wanted the story to be, or was the first report crap and the next iteration was true, or… ?

Midas on January 29, 2013 at 6:00 PM

.
The conflicting/contradictory reports have yet to be resolved, unless one of you heard something I missed.

listens2glenn on January 29, 2013 at 7:17 PM

What are you saying isn’t resolved…what weapon was used for the massacre?

verbaluce on January 30, 2013 at 9:03 AM

Wrong.

I watched the live coverage of the aftermath, and the POLICE SPOKESMAN, in a press briefing after they had secured the crime scene, asserted that the rifle was found in the TRUNK of Lanza’s car, and the pistols were all that was found in the school.

The story has been changed to fit the agenda. You drank the MSM Kool-aid.

Shepherd Lover on January 30, 2013 at 8:28 AM

Is this an actual conspiracy theory that’s out there…
or is Shepherd Lover a lone nut of a different kind?

verbaluce on January 30, 2013 at 9:09 AM

40th anniversary R v. W, millions murdered. Move on, nothing to see here.

philoise65 on January 30, 2013 at 9:45 AM

in reply to what was largely a rhetorical question.

verbaluce on January 30, 2013 at 8:57 AM

Everyone thought it was a rhetorical question. That’s why there was silence initially. Then he used the fact that no one answered as part of his argument and he suddenly got some answers. So, no, it wasn’t a rhetorical question.

GWB on January 30, 2013 at 9:55 AM

Shepherd Lover on January 30, 2013 at 8:28 AM
verbaluce on January 30, 2013 at 9:03 AM

Read this

http://www.ct.gov/despp/cwp/view.asp?Q=517284

tommer74 on January 30, 2013 at 11:51 AM

The msnbc clip seems to have changed. I think it is unedited now other than being short. I may be remembering wrong.

I don’t fault Mr. Heslin’s despair at losing his son, but he doesn’t seem to understand what the 2nd ammendment is really about.

TerryW on January 30, 2013 at 12:25 PM

How many children are murdered every year by their parents/guardians?
About 1k³ more than by anonymous, raging, random actors.
F’ing idiots.
~(Ä)~

Karl Magnus on January 30, 2013 at 12:36 PM

The conflicting/contradictory reports have yet to be resolved, unless one of you heard something I missed.

listens2glenn on January 29, 2013 at 7:17 PM

.
What are you saying isn’t resolved…what weapon was used for the massacre?

verbaluce on January 30, 2013 at 9:03 AM

.

Wrong.

I watched the live coverage of the aftermath, and the POLICE SPOKESMAN, in a press briefing after they had secured the crime scene, asserted that the rifle was found in the TRUNK of Lanza’s car, and the pistols were all that was found in the school.

The story has been changed to fit the agenda. You drank the MSM Kool-aid.

Shepherd Lover on January 30, 2013 at 8:28 AM

.
Is this an actual conspiracy theory that’s out there…
or is Shepherd Lover a lone nut of a different kind?

verbaluce on January 30, 2013 at 9:09 AM

.
Yes, it is an actual “conspiracy theory” that the AR-15 never made it into the school, and that the massacre (and subsequent suicide) was carried out with four handguns.

Currently, I’m not siding one way or the other.

What I would like is the doctor on the scene (who stated clearly that all of the bullet wounds were .223 caliber) and the Police (who stated clearly that only four handguns were found inside the school) to get together and resolve these apparent contradictions.

listens2glenn on January 30, 2013 at 12:36 PM

What I would like is the doctor … and the Police … to get together and resolve these apparent contradictions.

listens2glenn on January 30, 2013 at 12:36 PM

Read that statement that tommer74 links to. The police statement agrees with the doctor.

GWB on January 30, 2013 at 1:20 PM

How many children are murdered every year by their parents/guardians?
About 1k³ more than by anonymous, raging, random actors.
F’ing idiots.
~(Ä)~

Karl Magnus on January 30, 2013 at 12:36 PM

The obvious answer is all children must be confiscated from their parents and raised by the government…..
Because, well, if one child’s life is saved, and all….

dentarthurdent on January 30, 2013 at 1:33 PM

This man needs time to collect his wits, he is in no condition to be lobbying for any cause so shortly after this tragedy. His state of mind is very fragile right now.

And yes he twice looked over his shoulder and asked the audience for an answer, they should have stayed silent, but the few responses were in NO WAY heckling.

scotash on January 30, 2013 at 4:17 PM

One other thing, he asserted the audience’s silence was proof that nobody could justify being against his gun control ideas. They felt they had to respond at that point.

scotash on January 30, 2013 at 4:36 PM

Proggies consider themselves to be so honourable and proper.

Tell me, again, who was it that heckled George W Bush at Obama’s INAUGURATION?

“Na, Na, Hey, Hey, Kiss Him Goodbye!”

WTF heckles anyone at a solemn occasion like THAT except for classless ‘tards?

Nope, no hypocrisy there. Move along.

Resist We Much on January 30, 2013 at 8:05 PM

I was impressed by the respectful hearing Mr. Heslin received as well as his reasonableness. He does not support banning guns, but limiting the size of magazines. When he asked why that wasn’t possible, a few people quoted the Second Amendment phrase “the right . . . shall not be infringed.” The chair immediately called for them to be quiet and they were during the rest of Mr. Heslin’s statement.

There was no jeering, disruption or chanting of the kind that characterizes demonstrations like those of Code Pink or Occupation Wall Street and the rest of the supposedly “civil” disobedience practiced by the left. This accusation is just part of their typical pattern of charging their opponents with engaging in their own obnoxious tactics.

While we all feel Mr. Heslin’s heartache and loss, it doesn’t right the wrong to take away the rights of the vast majority. One should only ban substances, practices and objects that are nearly always harmful to the individual or society in general. That can’t be said of guns or large clips. There is nothing inherently immoral about owning the means of self-protection. It’s the behavior, not the tools that needs to be dealt with.

Piers’ statement that “A child’s right not to be murdered by a gun supersedes ANY other right,” is absurd on its face, especially when one asks about the right of an unborn child’s right to live. It’s only appeal is emotional, the sophistry of waving the bloody shirt.
This is typical of the MSM and the main reason I ignore CNN and MSNBC and many of Fox’s evening programs.

Those who demand new prohibitions and bans every time a tragedy occurs usually assume that passing a law will solve the problem, and never seem to realize the harm it does to pass laws that will not be observed and which they aren’t willing to expend resources on enforcing. All that does is put the law in disrepute and lead to resentment and disobedience.

flataffect on January 30, 2013 at 9:59 PM

Comment pages: 1 2