In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.

Mother Jones pro gun fact check

Waco WaltzWaco Waltz Member Posts: 10,836 ✭✭
edited January 2013 in General Discussion
What do you guys think? There is even contact info for the writer.



http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/01/pro-gun-myths-fact-check

Comments

  • US Military GuyUS Military Guy Member Posts: 3,645 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    I am not sure I want to take the time to point out all of the holes in their arguements, but a few that I noticed right off the bat:

    #4 - Sure, let's use our statistics to prove our statistics.
    I especially liked the "...she was a security officer..." (evidently 'regular folks' can't own guns, but security officers aren't 'regular folks') and "...was no regular Joe...US Marine" (I am not sure if "regular Joes" are the same as 'regular folks', but evidently, if you are that is OK?) and "...shooting was apparently already over..." (sure, no sense of stopping the bad guy - from leaving the scene, if he is already done).

    #7 - I think the point is women should be shooting the guns not being shot at with the guns.

    #8 - Seriously? Per capita spending is the base line? "A land without guns virtually eliminates shooting deaths"? OK, we have no Polar Bears in Southwest Iowa and virtually no deaths by Polar Bear. I don't know what the deaths by Polar Bear are in Alaska.

    *9 - I'll bet that is not an accurate statement as of the last couple of months. Also, I love it when they say they don't know how many guns are out there, but they do know that men average 7.9 (THAT WAS 7.9! - RIGHT DOWN TO THE 1/10 OF A PERCENTAGE POINT) guns each.

    #10 - Three of the point validate the argument. Why not enforce those laws being broken?
Sign In or Register to comment.