Allie Morris, writing for Hearst newspapers, published a story headlined: “Taxpayer-funded gun locks are free to Texans — unless they have the wrong ‘political agenda.’”
The story is taken from the alleged experience of Leesa Ross who is an active advocate in Austin for what she calls safe firearm storage. Ross has given out gun locks as part of her efforts and when she learned that Governor Abbott authorized a $1 million grant for a ton of gun locks to be given out free, she went to her local police station to ask for 100 of them.
The basis of the entire article is that the police station said “no” and then claims that: “Behind the scenes, the firearms trade association overseeing the grant advised the Austin Police Department not to give Ross the locks because of her association with a group that advocates gun control, according to emails obtained by Hearst Newspapers.”
The story claims: “The National Shooting Sports Foundation, the group that Abbott’s office contracted to distribute the locks, voiced concerns that such association could risk alienating gun owners.”
Here is the basic problem with the story’s slant, which is obvious in that headline: “Taxpayer-funded gun locks are free to Texans — unless they have the wrong ‘political agenda.’” The woman wanted 100 gun locks given to her, a private citizen with only her word they would be properly distributed.
The gun locks are to give to households directly to use if they so desire. Ross has no business demanding dozens of free gun locks much less 100 from the program.
As an advocate she can buy that many locks and then be free to distribute them as she wishes in her own program.
Story on free gun locks in Texas is ridiculously slanted
The story is taken from the alleged experience of Leesa Ross who is an active advocate in Austin for what she calls safe firearm storage. Ross has given out gun locks as part of her efforts and when she learned that Governor Abbott authorized a $1 million grant for a ton of gun locks to be given out free, she went to her local police station to ask for 100 of them.
The basis of the entire article is that the police station said “no” and then claims that: “Behind the scenes, the firearms trade association overseeing the grant advised the Austin Police Department not to give Ross the locks because of her association with a group that advocates gun control, according to emails obtained by Hearst Newspapers.”
Here is the basic problem with the story’s slant, which is obvious in that headline: “Taxpayer-funded gun locks are free to Texans — unless they have the wrong ‘political agenda.’” The woman wanted 100 gun locks given to her, a private citizen with only her word they would be properly distributed.
The gun locks are to give to households directly to use if they so desire. Ross has no business demanding dozens of free gun locks much less 100 from the program.
As an advocate she can buy that many locks and then be free to distribute them as she wishes in her own program.