GunTalk-Online.com

Found this on the net. Must be a real rare, valuable one. Sounds like it might even be a rimfire shot gun.

SEKIU, Wash. - A woman in Washington state says her cast-iron stove shot her in the leg. Cory Davis tells the Peninsula Daily News that she had just stoked the heating stove in her home Sunday when she heard a loud bang and was struck in her left calf.
ADVERTISEMENT

She says she initially thought "that was one fast hot coal flying at me."

In fact, she was hit by part of a 22-gauge shotgun shell that she had accidentally put into the stove with newspapers she used to light it. A box of shells had spilled nearby a few weeks before.

Davis says she removed the metal fragment herself Sunday and sought treatment for the shallow wound the next day.

Greener... (I didn't see a smiley...)
could it be a Liberal-Leftest-commie-journalist
that doesn't know his muzzle-from-a-hole-in-the-ground...

and it was just a ( CCI? ) .22LR ShotShell ??
-- toy

I should have put the smiley on it. Could have been anything 20ga, 28ga, .22.

The press is very good at not getting it correct.

greener wrote:I should have put the smiley on it. Could have been anything 20ga, 28ga, .22.

The press is very good at not getting it correct.

Rob, be truthful. They are much better than good at getting things wrong, even better than excellent.

I should have put the smiley on it. Could have been anything 20ga, 28ga, .22.

The press is very good at not getting it correct.

I'm surprised they didn't say is was an 88 gauge shotgun shell - that's four times bigger than the original claim. The national new media is great for sensationalizing (stretching) the *facts.

(*) They did claim this was a "Fact" in the original news release.

Meanwhile, I just laugh when I see, or hear, stuff like this from the media. My bride used to work for a local TV station and we used to joke about this stupid stuff all the time. She thought that I should become a source expert for their station in matters of weaponry and military issues, naturally I declined.

R,
Bullseye

Almost every news "event" I've been around, the press seems to go out of their way to get it wrong. They are darned good at getting a sound bite to prove their story.

A couple of months ago after the second time an armed man came out of the bushes and tried to assault a female jogger at my daughter's school, she was stopped by a TV reporter while jogging. Her response to the aren't you scared question was a laugh followed by "It's kind of scary if you aren't aware of your surroundings and are out where no other people are around" made the evening news as "It's kind of scary."

Might have been fun if her response had been that her dad suggested some range time, her choice of his handguns or one of her own.

There's no emotional value to sensationalize with her original response, therefore the producer has to snip it to entice the viewers - Details at eleven!

It's kind of like the Leno selection "Jay Walking." I'm sure that plenty of people get the answers right, but they only show the really stupid responses, and that makes everyone look dumb.

R,
Bullseye

Most TV news pieces are 15-20 seconds. They have to tell the "story" quickly and just don't have time to fact check or get in something doesn't follow the story line. There is a real art to responding to reporter's questions with short sentences that can be butchered in editing.

I used to fume a lot about gun and military reporting. Now I just save my fretting and fussing to the air pollution stories that always show the reporter in front of things billowing white clouds out the top--usually condensed water vapor from cooling towers.