MSNBC reported that the Canadian shooter used
- Thread starter jrdolall
- Start date
- Status
Would you believe.... it was a Winchester whose tubular magazine has been standard since the Civil War ?
Of course MSNBC and their numb-nuts staff haven't a clue.
(Now the reports are saying double-barreled "shotgun," ...
but until they name actual make and model I still
don't believe they have a clue.)
.
Of course MSNBC and their numb-nuts staff haven't a clue.
(Now the reports are saying double-barreled "shotgun," ...
but until they name actual make and model I still
don't believe they have a clue.)
.
Last edited:
BobTheTomato
Member
Tommygunn
Member
No one remembers Chuck Connors in "The Rifleman" of any of John Wayne's westerns .....
Field Tester
Member
Is this picture taken from footage of the shooting or one from his Facebook?Would you believe.... it was a Winchester whose tubular magazine has been standard since the Civil War ?
Of course MSNBC and their numb-nuts staff haven't a clue.
(Now the reports are saying double-barreled "shotgun," ...
but until they name actual make and model I still
don't believe they have a clue.)
.
It's not necessarily guaranteed that he used the same firearm as shown on his Facebook.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/ottawa-shooting-where-did-michael-zehaf-bibeau-get-his-gun-1.2811249
As can be seen in a much more detailed account below, the shooter fired at least four more times inside the Parliament as he entered and then spinted down the halls. (So much for double-barreled anything).
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/ott...that-ended-the-attack-on-parliament-1.2812802
postscript: And as described in the endgame:
....> Vickers did not hesitate.
....>
....> In one motion, sources told CBC News he dove to the floor around the
....> pillar, at the feet of [the shooter] Bibeau, turning on his back as he landed
....> and simultaneously firing his weapon upwards at Bibeau.
....>
....> Bibeau was hit multiple times and fell to the ground. Vickers kept firing,
....> emptying his entire magazine.
Sly Stone ain't got nutin' on Kevin Vickers.
Ya jus' can't make this stuff up.
Once again, ...the staff of the mass media generally haven't a clue.
As can be seen in a much more detailed account below, the shooter fired at least four more times inside the Parliament as he entered and then spinted down the halls. (So much for double-barreled anything).
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/ott...that-ended-the-attack-on-parliament-1.2812802
postscript: And as described in the endgame:
....> Vickers did not hesitate.
....>
....> In one motion, sources told CBC News he dove to the floor around the
....> pillar, at the feet of [the shooter] Bibeau, turning on his back as he landed
....> and simultaneously firing his weapon upwards at Bibeau.
....>
....> Bibeau was hit multiple times and fell to the ground. Vickers kept firing,
....> emptying his entire magazine.
Sly Stone ain't got nutin' on Kevin Vickers.
Ya jus' can't make this stuff up.
Last edited:
JFrame
Member
I'm surprised that MSNBC didn't just say that the shooter used a "high-powered assault weapon."
.
.
WestKentucky
Member
HOO that sure is purty.
the article I pulled it from doesn't say
Purdey, Holland and Holland, Merkel just a few of the makers of high end double rifles
Panzerschwein
member
Man.
So much for trusting the media to report the facts. Simply silly.
So much for trusting the media to report the facts. Simply silly.
morcey2
Member
From the surveillance video, it sure looks like a lever action and not a double rifle. I really doubt it was a double rifle. Remember, the lever action was the "assault rifle" of its day when it first came out.
Matt
Matt
I know there are actually double barrel rifles and double barrel shotguns and tube fed guns that look like double barrel rifles. I just wish the media (normally the left leaning in the case of guns) would at least try to get the "facts" semi straight before reporting.
Double Naught Spy
Sus Venator
We say this a lot and it is true, but at the same time the information often comes from sources that should be in-the-know, such as the police. I have seen this several times where the police give out wrong information and the reporters report what they have been told and then the reporters get slammed.
No, they don't know everything. Nobody does. That is why the reporters use sources that are supposed to know what they are talking about.
The same thing just happened with the Ebola mess in Dallas where the CDC gave out wrong information and the reporters reported what the CDC said about Ebola.
It is the nature of reporting.
True, true... but the consequences of getting it wrong can be catastrophic (tho' in this case it's merely an exhibition of pass-it-along stupidity).
"As reported in the New York Times" cited as a the qualifying source of viral news articles has utterly destroyed many people I've been involved with in public life. The truth that comes out long afterwards is then oft interred with their bones.
No one who was a credible police source would have mis-characterized the weapon as a "double-barreled shotgun" (which was the a multi-page google response), nor could the absolutely iconic shape of a Winchester be mistaken for a Cape double rifle by anyone even faintly competent to be taken seriously. (That would be like seeing Telly Savalas sucking on a lollipop and reporting him to be Robt Redford)
Ignorant reporters wield no a dangerous weapon than the actual shooters in many cases -- save in the Style & Culture section articles that detail the bride wore a Chanel Couture wedding gown featuring intricate beading, a floral design, a sheer skirt, and a gorgeous train --- completing the look with glamorous loose waves and a cathedral-length veil with flutter sleeves and a keyhole opening in the back....
...when it was really an Oscar de la Renta
.
Last edited:
Art Eatman
Moderator In Memoriam
And now back to proper subjects for the forum.
- Status