When Detroit Gun Rights Examiner Rob Reed reported last week that University of Kansas Professor of Journalism David Guth wants the children of NRA members to be killed in mass shootings, he was unfortunately not describing a unique event. This kind of sick, blind, "wish-you-were-dead" hatred from those who claim to be working for "violence prevention" is nothing new. It's not even new among journalism professors.
First, a bit of background, for those who may have missed the story last week. On September 13, Associate Professor David Guth, of U of K's Wiliam Allen White School of Journalism and Mass Communications, edified the Twitterverse (in a tweet that has since been removed) with this bit of wisdom:
Oh, yeah--almost forgot to mention that the deaths of NRA members' children are not enough for him--he also wants the grieving parents to suffer eternity in Hell's lake of fire (and no--that's not new, either). According to Campus Reform, when offered the opportunity to step back from the brink and retract his obscene fantasy, he instead stuck to . . . whatever it is gun prohibitionists stick to when normal, decent people are said to "stick to their guns":
Speaking with Campus Reform on Wednesday, Guth confirmed it was he who sent the controversial tweet.
“Hell no, hell no, I do not regret that Tweet,” he said. “I don't take it back one bit.”
A second tweet on the subject (also since removed) responded to criticism by implying that such slaughter would be "God's justice":
“God’s justice takes many forms,” he tweeted in response.
But as mentioned earlier, Guth is not blazing a new NRA-hating trail for journalism professors. We talked about another one back in June. That time, it was Marshall University Professor of Journalism Christopher Swindell who called for the execution by firing squad of NRA members, for "treason":
Here it is. The NRA advocates armed rebellion against the duly elected government of the United States of America. That's treason, and it's worthy of the firing squad.
As an old hand at fielding accusations of "treason," this correspondent has become accustomed to asking the accuser how anything the accused has done would fit the necessarily very narrow Constitutional definition of "treason." Oddly, that question never seems to get answered.
Professor Swindell, by the way, did try to back off a bit, but not very convincingly.
The fact that these are journalism professors cannot be too heavily emphasized. These are the people who are shaping the minds of the next generation of "Authorized Journalists," who as such, with their media-amplified voices, will in turn shape the attitudes of society as a whole.
Remember when the Tucson shooting was blamed on Sarah Palin's ad with a map showing crosshairs on districts she thought Republicans could wrest away from Democrats? That the killing was to some extent the fault of "incivility" on the right? Does anyone believe that such a map is nearly as "uncivil" as a loudly and publicly expressed wish that the children of one's political enemies are murdered, and that those enemies be damned to Hell? If the next deranged, Obama-supporting, "gun control"-advocating killer chooses the NRA as his target, who wants to wager against the probability that more blame will be placed on the NRA itself (they get blamed for the damndest of things) than on the incitement of Professors Swindell and Guth?
And it's hardly as if the mass media is not already thoroughly in the tank for the forcible citizen disarmament crowd, with National Gun Rights Examiner David Codrea reporting a brand new example just yesterday (and he has scores more--this perhaps the most egregious). Another item to file under "Should Surprise No One" is the fact that rabidly anti-gun President Obama "hates" new media, and that rabidly anti-gun U.S. Senators Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and Dick Durbin (D-IL) are well on their way to protecting their anti-gun (hate mongering anti-gun) allies of the press, while "kneecapping" bloggers.
These people hate us, and want us dead. They want our children dead, and us burning for all eternity. They are paid to dispense their version of "news" to society, and they have the backing of the most powerful officials in the U.S. government. And people ask us why we need so-called "assault weapons" and "high capacity" magazines.
- AP ‘top 10’ list confirms media still ignoring Fast and Furious story
- EXCLUSIVE: Fourth Estate Fifth Columnists
- Government prepares for war with the people, and mass media approves
- Obama’s 'hatred' of new media understandable but selective
- Durbin shows as much respect for First Amendment as he does for Second
- Journalism professor advocates firing squad for millions of Americans
- 'Firing squad professor' apologizes--that's not going to cut it
- Senate panel brings federal law one step closer to kneecapping bloggers
- Latest target: free speech and alternative media
- Kansas university professor wishes death on NRA family members in mass shooting
- AP 'real reporters' spread disinformation to support gun ban agenda