The story "Assault rifles: Dangerous , deadly and on our streets" posted at: http://www.tampabays10.com/news/local/article.aspx
?s=rss&storyid=58284 contains information that is not wholly factual, and is in fact quite misleading.

This title has little to do with the actual story. From what I can ascertain, the actual news was that two convicted felons were arrested for dealing drugs, while illegally in possession of an illegally modified rifle. Had Tammie Fields spend a few moments researching the topic, instead of focusing her attempts on making the story sound sensational, she would have come to the realization that the arrest of a few drug dealers has little to do with a bank robbery shoot-out. In addition, it is not not correct to describe a rifle as dangerous and deadly. It is common sense that a firearm only becomes dangerous and/or deadly in the hands of someone who is irresponsible or a criminal.

The information that is factually inaccurate is referencing the SKS rifle as a "high powered assault rifle". In fact, the 7.62x39 cartridge used in the SKS is considered an intermediate cartridge, relative to high powered military cartridges such as the common .30-06 cartridge. Also, it is important to note that the SKS does not fall under either the industry or legal definition of "assault rifle". The term "assault rifle", in the common use refers to a single-soldier-portable infantry rifle, capable of both semi- and automatic fire. Once again, a few minutes of research would have uncovered this information.

Some other pertinent background information:
-While the SKS is a "military rifle", is in fact categorized (under most circumstances) as a "Curio/Relic" by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. This is due to the fact that the SKS has been out of production and service for around 50 years. It was adopted for use by the Soviet Army in 1949, and was replaced around 1955 by the famous Kalashnikov assault rifle.
-Felons may not legally possess a firearm. Clearly felons don't follow the law, but an informed reporter would have asked about weapons charges against the drug dealers.
-It is illegal, in many instances, to modify a rifle by cutting off the stock. The story should have been about the arrest of these criminals, instead of a story about scary guns. Since they clearly broke other laws, this story would have been more complete if that had been mentioned.

Although Tammie Fields makes it somewhat clear that she is merely quoting the officers interviewed, follow-up research is standard practice in any kind of journalism.

I am making an open-ended offer to give safe, hands-on instruction to any member of the media who needs a fact-based understanding of firearms. Good research is the key to good journalism. Reporting on a topic, especially a controversial one, without any background knowledge what-so-ever is dishonest, unprofessional, and unethical.

Gregory Morris
Oldsmar, FL