National Geographic show
Results 1 to 2 of 2

National Geographic show

This is a discussion on National Geographic show within the Politics forums, part of the Main Category category; I just got this email from GOA and wanted to pass it on here. Very interesting!! National Geographic TV Takes ...

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    107

    Exclamation National Geographic show

    I just got this email from GOA and wanted to pass it on here. Very interesting!!

    National Geographic TV Takes Aim At Your Guns

    Gun Owners of America E-Mail Alert
    8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA 22151
    Phone: 703-321-8585 / FAX: 703-321-8408
    Gun Owners of America

    Wednesday, December 17, 2008


    National Geographic Channel ran a show last night entitled, "Gun In
    America." According to the program, there are millions of misguided
    gun owners across the nation. Why? Because your guns are supposedly
    more likely to harm you than to help you in an emergency.

    "As a society, we're totally out of control with weapons," said one
    Philadelphia cop who was interviewed during the show. "You need to
    limit access that people have to these type of firearms."

    That was the basic thrust of the program. National Geographic
    recited the usual worn-out factoids that are peddled by the Brady
    Campaign. It only cited anti-gun cops. And for every person who was
    filmed stating he or she believed in a right to own firearms for
    self-defense, the program would cite "facts" to prove that such a
    hope was misplaced.

    Gun owners should let the President and CEO of National Geographic
    know that the channel should stick to showing pictures of kangaroos
    and foliage -- images that we normally attribute to National
    Geographic's magazine -- and keep his personal, anti-gun views to his
    private conversations around the Christmas dinner table.

    The National Geographic Channel presents itself as an educational,
    unbiased alternative. But "Guns in America" was hardly unbiased, as
    can be seen by the following agenda items that were pushed during the
    program:

    1. "Guns in America" would have you believe that the guns in your
    home are 22 times more likely to kill a family member than to protect
    you. This statistic can (surprise, surprise!) be found on the Brady
    Campaign website, but its source has been highly discredited. The
    factoid originates with Arthur Kellerman, who has generated multiple
    studies claiming that guns are a net liability.(1) But Kellerman has
    been found guilty of fudging his data, and even the National Academy
    of Sciences has stated that his "conclusions do not seem to follow"
    from his data.(2)

    The truth of the matter is actually quite encouraging for gun owners.
    Anti-gun researchers for the Clinton Justice Department found that
    guns are used 1.5 million times annually for self-defense, which
    means that each year, firearms are used more than 50 times more often
    to protect the lives of honest citizens than to take lives.(3)

    Isn't that strange? You would think anti-gunners wouldn't mind
    citing a study that was commissioned by the Clinton Justice
    Department! Apparently, the results of the study didn't fit their
    agenda.

    2. "Guns in America" overstates the number of children who die by
    unintentional gunfire. The program would have viewers believe that a
    child dies by accidental gunfire, once every two days. But you can
    only reach that figure if you count violent-prone teens as
    "children."

    In fact, when you look at the statistics involving younger children
    (ages 0-14), you see that kids have a greater chance of dying from
    choking on things like the peanut butter and jelly sandwiches that
    you feed them.(4) Hmm, why doesn't National Geographic want to
    report on those killer peanuts?

    3. "Guns in America" portrays twelve times as many negative uses of
    guns as positive uses -- even though in the real world, the truth is
    quite the opposite (as guns are used at least 50 times more often to
    save life than take life). The program does start with a
    dramatization of a legitimate self-defense story with an actual 911
    call playing in the background. But after that, every dramatization
    is about drive-by-shootings or cops being shot or gang-related
    warfare.

    The lesson for the viewer is: Guns are bad.

    4. "Guns in America" only quotes anti-gun
    "authorities," thus leaving
    the impression that all law-enforcement support gun control. Never
    mind the fact that when one looks at polls of the police community,
    they overwhelmingly hold pro-gun attitudes:

    * Should any law-abiding citizen be able to purchase a firearm for
    sport or self defense? -- 93% of law-enforcement said yes.(5)

    * Do you believe law-abiding citizens should be limited to the
    purchase of no more than one firearm per month? -- 70.1% of
    law-enforcement said no.(6)

    * Do you agree that a national concealed handgun permit would reduce
    rates of violent crime as recent studies in some states have already
    reflected? -- 68.2% of law-enforcement said yes.(7)

    It's bad enough that a liberal teacher's union controls the education
    of our kids in the public schools, and that many of them are being
    brainwashed with politically correct thinking. We don't need
    supposedly neutral programs like National Geographic peddling the
    Brady Campaign's favorite factoids to an unsuspecting public.

    ACTION: Please contact Tim T. Kelly, the President and CEO of
    National Geographic Ventures (which includes their television
    division), and urge him to steer the NatGeo channel away from
    politics. If the National Geographic Channel can't run a balanced
    program -- where they use real statistics -- then they just need to
    stick to filming those cute little animals that helped make their
    magazine so famous.

    You can go to Cruise Ship Engine- National Geographic Channel
    to cut-and-paste the sample letter below into their webform. Since
    you will need to select a Topic, please choose "I have a
    complaint."
    And for "Department," we would suggest selecting
    "Factual Questions"
    or "General."


    ---- Pre-written letter ----

    Dear Mr. Kelly:

    I will think twice before ordering the National Geographic magazine,
    because I don't want to help you fund any more anti-gun propaganda.
    Your Explorer show entitled "Guns In America" -- which has run
    several times this month -- was heavily slanted to the gun control
    position. The show used fallacious statistics without rebutting
    them, all in an effort to demonize firearms.

    For example, "Guns in America" falsely claimed that guns in
    the home
    are 22 times more likely to kill a family member than to serve as
    protection. That is simply not true. The author of this study,
    Arthur Kellerman, has been discredited many times (by groups such as
    the National Academy of Sciences), so it's shameful that your channel
    would even cite his work.

    Second, "Guns in America" overstates the number of children who die
    by unintentional gunfire. In fact, when you look at the statistics
    involving younger children (ages 0-14), you see that kids have a
    greater chance of dying from choking on things like the peanut butter
    and jelly sandwiches that you feed them. Can I expect to see a show
    in the near future highlighting the danger of feeding children?

    Third, "Guns in America" portrays twelve times as many
    negative uses
    of guns as positive uses -- even though in the real world, the truth
    is quite the opposite. According to statistics from the Clinton
    Justice Department in 2007, guns are used at least 50 times more
    often to save life than take life.

    Finally, "Guns in America" only quotes anti-gun
    "authorities," thus
    leaving the impression that all law-enforcement support gun control.
    Never mind the fact that when one looks at polls of the police
    community, they overwhelmingly hold pro-gun attitudes. (Please see
    the poll results on the website for the National Association of
    Chiefs of Police.) Why were none of these authorities ever cited?

    The National Geographic Society's purpose is "to increase and diffuse
    geographic knowledge while promoting the conservation of the world's
    cultural, historical, and natural resources." I would submit to you
    that pushing gun control is far afield from your stated purpose.

    Sincerely,


    --------------------------------

    ENDNOTES:

    (1) Arthur Kellerman has generated multiple studies that claim gun
    owners are more likely to be injured by their guns than to use those
    guns in self-defense. His results range from 3 to 22 to 43 times
    more likely to be injured by a gun in the home. His methodology has
    been debunked, however, many times over. (See endnote 2.)

    (2) See Just For Skeptics: Myth #1: A Gun In The Home Means You Are Three Times More Likely To Be Killed . Also, see Charles F.
    Wellford, John Pepper, Carol Petrie, Firearms and Violence: A
    Critical Review (National Research Council of the National Academies,
    2004), p. 118.

    (3) See Just For Skeptics: Fact Sheet: Guns Save Lives

    (4) See "Children Accidental Death Rates (Ages 0-14)," Gun Control
    Fact Sheet (2004) at GOA Fact Sheet-- 2004 Gun Control Facts

    (5) National Association of Chiefs of Police, 20th Annual Survey
    Results (Survey questions sent to Chiefs of Police and Sheriffs in
    the United States: 2008).

    (6) National Association of Chiefs of Police, 15th Annual Survey
    Results (Survey questions sent to Chiefs of Police and Sheriffs in
    the United States).

    (7) Ibid.


    We all might want to take a minute or two and let National Geographic know how we feel about their slanted show.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Gray Court, SC
    Posts
    2,934

    Default

    I got the same email. Done!
    USAF Retired, CATM, SC CWP, NH NR CWP, NRA Benefactor
    To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them... -- Richard Henry Lee, 1787

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •