joelrosenberg (![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small} joelrosenberg) wrote,@ 2005-06-17 05:45:00 |
|
My latest email to KARE11
I still haven't gotten much of a direct response from KARE11 to my email on their report of last weekend -- either from the producer, Lonnie Hartley, or the reporter, Scott Goldberg -- but Goldberg has been sending out a largely boilerplate response to a few folks, which I've been copied on.
So I sent this:
Dear Scott:
While I haven't -- yet -- gotten a response from you or Ms. Hartley to my emails on your story of last weekend, I have been copied on your boilerplate response to several folks, and the response is deficient in several respects.
I'll not repeat myself on matters I've gone into in detail previously; let me just refer you to my previous email, and restrict myself, here, to correcting new errors, rather than pointing, once again, at repeated ones.
You suggest in your boilerplate that Sheriffs McGowan and Fletcher are not well-known, vocal critics of the law. I've got to ask you: where have you been for the past couple of years?
Both of them, before the first MCPPA passed, took every opportunity that they could to get in front of any microphone to oppose the (then) proposed change in the law, which eventually removed their unlimited discretion to deny carry permits, and require that they have evidence that an applicant might be dangerous if given a permit to do so. Weren't you paying attention then? Didn't you ask them about that in preparation for your report? Why not? Didn't you ask them about the manifest padding of their expenses for their carry permit program? (See http://www.livejournal.com/users/joelro
As to your implication of a lack of cases of lawful self-defense with a handgun, again: where have you been for the past couple of years? The April 1, 2004 defensive gun use in Eden Prairie wasn't the first since the MCPPA passed, and it wasn't the last, but it was the first well-documented one, complete with police reports (a copy available at http://www.ellegon.com/bingo.tif ) and not only were the police reports available to any citizen who asked, but after writing an essay on it -- see http://www.ellegon.com/features/data/bi
It's hardly the only case, as I've said. Just a few days after that, there was the attempted carjacking of David Haagensen's car, as he was on his way to work one night. David's a nurse, and a gulf war vet, and very well-spoken, and would have been a terrific subject of an interview, and still would be. See Jim Ragsdale's piece at http://www.twincities.com/mld/twincitie
Hell, if you wanted a recent example, you could simply have turned to your competitor, KMSP -- see http://www.kmsp.com/news/story.asp?1640
Not good.
I'm sorry, but in order to cover this issue accurately and fairly, it's going to take some work. I'd be happy to help, next time around -- and I'm hardly the only person in the self-defense movement willing to -- but the bottom line is that for your station to do a good job on this, you'll have to work harder and smarter next time than you did this time.
All of which suggests a question, which I'm sure is bothering at least a few folks in addition to me. I know at least some of what you left out in this story (see previous emails, and my livejournal), and know how you failed to follow up obvious leads in this one (like the BCA report on the sheriffs' expenses). That's because I follow these matters more closely than I do most.
Is your station equally sloppy on other things? When I see another "investigative" piece on KARE11 -- on a subject matter where I don't have a lot of background -- I'll certainly wonder.
What I won't wonder about, alas, is how eager KARE11 has been to correct errors, and respond to specific, detailed criticism of omissions.
Sincerely,
Joel Rosenberg
I still haven't gotten much of a direct response from KARE11 to my email on their report of last weekend -- either from the producer, Lonnie Hartley, or the reporter, Scott Goldberg -- but Goldberg has been sending out a largely boilerplate response to a few folks, which I've been copied on.
So I sent this:
Dear Scott:
While I haven't -- yet -- gotten a response from you or Ms. Hartley to my emails on your story of last weekend, I have been copied on your boilerplate response to several folks, and the response is deficient in several respects.
I'll not repeat myself on matters I've gone into in detail previously; let me just refer you to my previous email, and restrict myself, here, to correcting new errors, rather than pointing, once again, at repeated ones.
You suggest in your boilerplate that Sheriffs McGowan and Fletcher are not well-known, vocal critics of the law. I've got to ask you: where have you been for the past couple of years?
Both of them, before the first MCPPA passed, took every opportunity that they could to get in front of any microphone to oppose the (then) proposed change in the law, which eventually removed their unlimited discretion to deny carry permits, and require that they have evidence that an applicant might be dangerous if given a permit to do so. Weren't you paying attention then? Didn't you ask them about that in preparation for your report? Why not? Didn't you ask them about the manifest padding of their expenses for their carry permit program? (See http://www.livejournal.com/users/joelro
As to your implication of a lack of cases of lawful self-defense with a handgun, again: where have you been for the past couple of years? The April 1, 2004 defensive gun use in Eden Prairie wasn't the first since the MCPPA passed, and it wasn't the last, but it was the first well-documented one, complete with police reports (a copy available at http://www.ellegon.com/bingo.tif ) and not only were the police reports available to any citizen who asked, but after writing an essay on it -- see http://www.ellegon.com/features/data/bi
It's hardly the only case, as I've said. Just a few days after that, there was the attempted carjacking of David Haagensen's car, as he was on his way to work one night. David's a nurse, and a gulf war vet, and very well-spoken, and would have been a terrific subject of an interview, and still would be. See Jim Ragsdale's piece at http://www.twincities.com/mld/twincitie
Hell, if you wanted a recent example, you could simply have turned to your competitor, KMSP -- see http://www.kmsp.com/news/story.asp?1640
Not good.
I'm sorry, but in order to cover this issue accurately and fairly, it's going to take some work. I'd be happy to help, next time around -- and I'm hardly the only person in the self-defense movement willing to -- but the bottom line is that for your station to do a good job on this, you'll have to work harder and smarter next time than you did this time.
All of which suggests a question, which I'm sure is bothering at least a few folks in addition to me. I know at least some of what you left out in this story (see previous emails, and my livejournal), and know how you failed to follow up obvious leads in this one (like the BCA report on the sheriffs' expenses). That's because I follow these matters more closely than I do most.
Is your station equally sloppy on other things? When I see another "investigative" piece on KARE11 -- on a subject matter where I don't have a lot of background -- I'll certainly wonder.
What I won't wonder about, alas, is how eager KARE11 has been to correct errors, and respond to specific, detailed criticism of omissions.
Sincerely,
Joel Rosenberg
