This is a textbook example of a news-story with a lot of information, but very little in the way of truth.
First the fake news:
1.) The 30k+ gun deaths in America trope is trotted out. Come on, even the anti-gun groups in the US not concede that roughly 2/3 of those are suicide.
2.) The citation to the Stanford Study (which has already been highly criticized) without also citing John Lott’s competing studies is dishonest journalism.
3.) I don’t know anything about a lot of these right/left identity groups, but I know a little about the Proud Boys. I follow Gavin McInnes and his lawyer Ron Coleman in relation to the defamation case that was filed against the Southern Poverty Law Center. [Also Gavin is kind of funny.] The Proud boys do not appear to be a white supremacist group. In fact many members are decidedly non-white, or married to and raising mix-raised children with, spouses who are non-white. Their bias is in favor of Western Civilization. Or at least that is what their organizing principles say. The most serious event (in NYC) they are associated with, that became violent, was their own event where they were attacked in the street after the event was over. It now seems that the NYC and NY State authorities want their head on a platter. The criminal trial, charging many of the proud boys with crimes in cases where they were arguably engaged in self-defense, is set to open later this year.
The first wrong fact is lazy, sloppy, agenda-driven “journalism.”
The second wrong fact is a sloppy, agenda-driven editorial.
The third wrong fact is agenda-driven propaganda.
But the powerful information to be gleaned from the article, in spite of itself, is the attitude of the lefty gun group. Once you filter for slant by the media-jackal who wrote this, the real story is that the lefties want the same thing the righties do. (Well, at least he sane ones on both sides.) They insist on the right to exercise self-defense independent of a state apparatus. They don’t trust the government with their lives, health, property, and ideas. They want a fundamental, individual, right to keep and bear arms as check on anybody, or any body (government or non-government) acquiring too much political power.
Well, good for them. I can be neighbors with someone like that.
This is a textbook example of a news-story with a lot of information, but very little in the way of truth.
First the fake news:
1.) The 30k+ gun deaths in America trope is trotted out. Come on, even the anti-gun groups in the US not concede that roughly 2/3 of those are suicide.
2.) The citation to the Stanford Study (which has already been highly criticized) without also citing John Lott’s competing studies is dishonest journalism.
3.) I don’t know anything about a lot of these right/left identity groups, but I know a little about the Proud Boys. I follow Gavin McInnes and his lawyer Ron Coleman in relation to the defamation case that was filed against the Southern Poverty Law Center. [Also Gavin is kind of funny.] The Proud boys do not appear to be a white supremacist group. In fact many members are decidedly non-white, or married to and raising mix-raised children with, spouses who are non-white. Their bias is in favor of Western Civilization. Or at least that is what their organizing principles say. The most serious event (in NYC) they are associated with, that became violent, was their own event where they were attacked in the street after the event was over. It now seems that the NYC and NY State authorities want their head on a platter. The criminal trial, charging many of the proud boys with crimes in cases where they were arguably engaged in self-defense, is set to open later this year.
The first wrong fact is lazy, sloppy, agenda-driven “journalism.”
The second wrong fact is a sloppy, agenda-driven editorial.
The third wrong fact is agenda-driven propaganda.
But the powerful information to be gleaned from the article, in spite of itself, is the attitude of the lefty gun group. Once you filter for slant by the media-jackal who wrote this, the real story is that the lefties want the same thing the righties do. (Well, at least he sane ones on both sides.) They insist on the right to exercise self-defense independent of a state apparatus. They don’t trust the government with their lives, health, property, and ideas. They want a fundamental, individual, right to keep and bear arms as check on anybody, or any body (government or non-government) acquiring too much political power.
Well, good for them. I can be neighbors with someone like that.