My (Short) Rant on Guns

A gun is an inanimate object. It is incapable of inflicting harm on anyone or anything on its own. It is not inherently good or evil by itself. It takes on the traits of whatever person decides to use it.

Evil exists in our world. It always has and always will, but not in inanimate objects. It is human nature, however, to place the blame for evil acts on inanimate objects.

I own a pistol. I practice shooting it a few times a year and am a decent shot. It stays next to my bed, mainly because I believe in my right as a person to protect myself if need be.

With that being said, do I believe that an ordinary person should be able to walk into a store and buy an automatic rifle? Absolutely not.

Our country's gun control laws need to be looked at. There needs to be a standard, across-the-board set of regulations that are actually enforced.

But do I believe revised gun control laws will stop evil from happening? No.

Evil doesn't follow rules or regulations. It never has, and it never will.


If you're one of the people who believes all guns should be outlawed, good for you. I don't dispute your views and I'm certainly not attacking them. Please don't waste your time telling me how bad guns are in the comment section. Let's just agree to disagree.

Behind the Scenes: Numb

Members of the media see bad news every day. After awhile it has a numbing effect. You tend to brush off the robberies and burglaries, shake your head at the drug arrests and related shootings. Chalk it all up to a harsh world and the fact that your job is caught in the crossfire.

Friday, December 14th, was a hard day for America. Instead of buying presents, the families of 20 children will be buying coffins. And aside from those families directly affected by the senselessness of this tragedy, no one felt the horror of that day more so than the media - forced to watch the tragedy unfold all day long.

We'll be criticized for the way we handled our coverage. We always are in these situations. We'll be called insensitive, tasteless, emotionless. But in all truthfulness, we were just doing our jobs -- and there is no easy way to cover these situations.

Doctors and other experts will diagnose Adam Lanza as mentally ill. The media will dutifully relay that diagnosis to our viewers because it's our duty. We won't call this man what we really want to - a monster, evil.

I'd be lying if I said stories like these don't affect us.

You can turn the channel when you've had enough of a particular story. We spend the entire day, sometimes weeks and even months, reliving these stories over and over again.

We may not call these monsters out for what they are. We may not shed tears while we're on the air. But that doesn't mean we haven't been affected, that we don't feel the heartbreak.

Maybe I'm reaching, but our jobs are one of the hardest in the world. We may not relay bad news one-on-one to those who are directly affected by it. We don't take on that huge responsibility.

We just have to relay the news to everyone else.

It is a man's own mind, not his enemy or foe, that lures him to evil ways.
Buddha

Behind the Scenes: No Comment

Members of the media aren't expected to have opinions, but when it comes down to it that expectation of impartiality is probably the hardest journalistic character trait to embody.

I speak from personal experience when I say it is impossible for news people to be impartial. We are human. We have opinions. Most importantly, we're allowed to have opinions. Where things get tricky is when we're allowed to express those opinions.

This week, one of our anchors expressed his opinion on the air about this year's college football bowl game assignments. As a producer, this is something I wouldn't even flinch at. Sports is really the only place within one of my shows where opinions are generally accepted. However in this instance, the anchor angered a viewer who supported a particular team. That viewer has since blown up our Facebook page, which in turn has invited other viewers to get in on the "argument". Fortunately for us, most of the viewers are supporting our anchor saying that he is entitled to his opinion.

So is there really no room for opinion in a newscast? And if the answer is no, is it truly possible for opinions not to somehow work their way in?

It's my opinion that opinions are always interjected into a newscast in some way. Now, I'm not saying that when I write a story I slant it one way or another. In fact, we strive to show both sides of every story in an equal way.

However, everything about my show in some way reflects an opinion - from the way it's stacked, to the way it flows together, to the very words that are chosen to tell the story.

Here's the bottom line: delivering the news is just like telling a story. Everything from the inflections of my voice to the facial expressions I'm making to the words I choose to tell you about my trip to the store make a difference.

So where do we draw the line? Obviously I'm not going to tolerate one of my anchors or reporters saying "I think he's guilty" about someone who's been arrested on murder charges. That would be ethically wrong. But should we be banned from saying "I don't agree with the way the playoffs are set up?"

One of the things we've found viewers like is when our on-air talent show their humanity. If we don't allow any opinions at all, that humanity is lost. But in allowing our anchors to express themselves, we risk angering at least one person.

So are we damned if we do, damned if we don't?

Maybe as journalists we should just go back to the basics and address our ethics. We should ask ourselves if voicing our opinion about a particular subject, story or person will jeopardize our integrity and hurt our credibility. If the answer to that question isn't clear, maybe we should avoid it.

We have to remember that journalists don't have a voice. It's not our job to tell people what we think.

It's our responsibility to give the people a legitimate voice.

Letters to Hubby

Mi amor,

This may sound like an overused cliche, but I love you more than anything. Marrying you was the best decision I've made. So I've decided to start writing you love letters at least once a month to thank you for all the great things you've brought into my life.

We've been together for nearly three years, and been married for almost three months. It feels like a lifetime.

Two weeks ago when my Papa died, you kept me grounded. If you hadn't been with me throughout that week, I would probably be dehydrated from all the tears I would have shed. You were my rock.

Even in the toughest of circumstances, you can make me smile. I hope you never lose that ability and that I am always susceptible to it.

I can't wait to spend the rest of our lives together.

Love Always,
Ashton