I'm not sure what the problem is with journalists/editors and guns. It seems like every time a journalist tries to write a story involving guns, they get facts wrong. It's almost like they go out of their way to look like uninformed, sloppy knuckle-heads.
Case in point: Some Fox News reporter named Perry Chiaramonte is writing a piece about the Foot Hood Shooting and trial. Pretty simple, right?
Actually, no. Here's the line in the piece describing the firearm used.
Three witnesses took the stand after opening arguments, including the manager of the store Guns Galore, where Hasan had purchased the Glock 27 model 5.7 handgun used in the attack.Wait, what? A "Glock 27 model 5.7 handgun"? What the hell is that? A Glock model 27 is this:
See? It says "Glock" on the side. That's the name of the manufacturer, like Coca-Cola, or BMW, or Apple. The number 27 refers to the model number, like it's a Coca-Cola Classic, or a BMW 325i, or an Apple iMac. It's a basic, subcompact, semiautomatic .40 caliber handgun.
An FN Five-Seven is an entirely different thing. Entirely different. This is an FN Five-Seven:
Notice anything different? Well, for starters, other than being a handgun, it's totally damn different. Different manufactuer, different caliber, different size, shape and...you get the idea.
Here's what really gets me: there's no such thing as a "Glock 27 model 5.7 handgun". It only exists where unicorns dance around with magic elves. It's not a thing.
Where is the editor on this screw-up? Look, I understand if you're a newspaper editor who knows nothing about guns. But shouldn't you know that and maybe run it buy a guy in the office who can alert you to the fact that you're making up imaginary things?
And people wonder why newspapers are failing.