Century Arms AK NOT Linked to Paris Attack. Fast and Furious II?

Eyewitness accounts are one thing; they can be wrong and often are.

But the real disconnect comes when there is direct evidence of something contradicting an earlier narrative, and it is either not reported at all, not adequately reported or reported but ignored by readers/listeners.

Either an authenticable paper trail exists for this firearm going to Florida and then to Paris or it doesn’t. Either a firearm with this serial number has been in Mexico since March or it hasn’t.

That kind of evidence is nothing like the emotionally charged accounting of someone being shot at trying to describe who was shooting at him or her.

The press is failing its duty to inform the public, raise questions and demand answers. The press has taken a side in the cultural debates and seeks only to push that one side. The failure of the press applies to your example as well as mine.

The press should be just as much an “enemy” to totalitarian politicians and government agencies as the RKBA is. Both 1A and 2A serve the same purpose, just from different angles.

Eyewitness accounts. If 40 people witness an event you’ll get 62 versions, none of which match what happened, of the event.

This is where the alex jones of the world get their advantage to make themselves rich and famous. They know that first accounts and eyewitness accounts are nearly worthless. From that confusion they build a “theory” and run with it.

Every single one?

This has been researched extensively. It’s no great secret.

Eyewitness testimony, especially from people placed in danger that are not used to that, is among the most unreliable evidence there is.

But, if you want a specific example just to get you started in your own self-study, check out the conflicting stories given…at the time of initial interview (ie, not changes later)…for the OKC Bombing.

That’s why investigators look for common facts across a set of eyewitnesses, not rely on the statements of any specific eyewitness.

You also run into the problem of eyewitnesses lying about what they saw or even that that saw anything at all. Check out the Michael Brown incident in Ferguson and the Trayvon Martin incident in Florida for two fun examples of this.

There are many, many, many examples.

I once testified in an armed robbery case that I (as a witness) was not sequestered which was the norm in the court district I usually testified in. As such, I sat in the courtroom and heard testimony from other witnesses (which, being typically sequestered, I usually did not get to hear). One such witness was an “Eyewitness Research Expert” and it was utterly fascinating the facts and data he shared.

That was in the late 90’s or maybe 2000. So, the field has had an additional 15 years to mature since then, and even then, the facts he related about unreliability if eyewitness statements were pretty convincing.

no, of course not every single one and i think you know that. I’m getting the sense you don’t want to or can’t back up your statements and you’ve simply doubled-down

then you try to lead us down a bunny trail with an anecdote about an unusual experience you had and what an expert said.

If there are “many,many,many” then name one. To be clear I asked “Please provide examples of major events where your statement is correct.”

I’d be happy with 1 or 2

and don’t bother responding with some flippant comment about how I need to do my own research and you’re not gonna do it for me. I made some statements and backed it up with sources and you made some and didn’t and cant point to anything specific.

on a side note, I realize something gets lost online. but to me, this is just spirited debate of sorts and I while I’m a little annoyed with your response I have no malice