It’s Time For Some Real Push-Back About Violence Caused By Guns.

I’m going to make a prediction that my friends in the gun violence prevention (GVP) community won’t like but it needs to be said nonetheless. And my prediction goes like this: Unless and until the advocates for reducing gun violence get it together and start slugging it out toe-to-toe with the pro-gun gang, the possibility that we will see a significant decline in gun violence will remain somewhere between nothing and nil. Let me give you an example.

kim             Last week the boys in Fairfax posted a story about Kim Kardashian’s latest attempt to inject a little reality into the debate about guns. Basically she called for more restrictions on people who are convicted of a misdemeanor, or have been served a temporary restraining order; in other words, closing some of the loopholes which allow an awful lot of dangerous people to legally get their hands on guns.

The NRA referred to Kardashian’s comments as ‘barely-intelligible’ and ‘ignorant’ despite the fact that what she said about legal loopholes wasn’t all that different from what we know to be true. Would her comments pass muster in an amicus curiae brief to the Supreme Court? Of course not. But when was the last time that any mouthpiece for Gun-nut nation said anything that remotely aligned with the truth?

On the same NRA webpage which carried the attack on Kim, the NRA also linked to a Breitbart posting that calls out Shannon Watts for promoting female political candidates who, once in office, will push more gun-control laws. Of course there’s nothing about Shannon’s views which should surprise because she’s simply a creation of Bloomberg’s big bucks.

In these two stories alone I count at least five errors along with slanted, misleading opinions and a generally nasty attitude towards two women who don’t deserve to be attacked by media organizations which claim to be publishing the latest ‘news.’ But if we have learned anything from the last six months and our sleep-deprived President, it’s that what used to be the line between facts and opinions has disappeared. And nowhere is this more the case than in the so-called ‘debate’ about guns.

But in fact there isn’t any debate about whether the existence of 300 million personally-owned guns gives the United States a level of gun violence that is seven to twenty times higher than gun-violence rates in the rest of the OECD. In a recent column I mentioned that a new study by pediatricians at Mt. Sinai Hospital found that 80% of all gun injuries suffered by children occurred in the 16-19 age group, whereupon a pro-gun advocate told me that these gun-violence victims were all gang members or criminals, hence, they weren’t ‘kids.’ This is the kind of nonsensical thinking that Gun-nut Nation employs every time that any credible research on gun violence appears. Is it different from stating that anything Kim Kardashian or Shannon Watts says is stupid and wrong because they are being promoted by Bloomberg’s big bucks?

Enough is really enough. If James Comey can sit down in front of a Senate Committee and call that schmuck in the Oval Office a ‘liar,’ then it’s high time that GVP took off the gloves and started talking like they mean it as well. With all due respect to my public health friends at Harvard and Hopkins, evidence-based research just won’t do it alone; you also need to push back with the same degree of anger and volume that appears in every comment made by the other side.

When a right-wing ‘think’ tank says that banning assault weapons won’t do anything to curb gun violence, they are lying and they need to be called ‘liars’ in direct and no-nonsense terms. When an organization that is supported by a publicly-granted tax deduction says that guns don’t kill people, only people kill people, they need to be told that what they are saying is a BIG LIE. The problem with GVP is that it’s too polite. And politeness only provokes the other side to behave even worse.

 

 

Advertisements

10 thoughts on “It’s Time For Some Real Push-Back About Violence Caused By Guns.

  1. Totally agree.

    Here’s the novel I’m working on. It’s as nasty as the topic.

    Greg Gibson

    Quoting mikethegunguy :

    > mikethegunguy posted: “I’m going to make a prediction that my > friends in the gun violence prevention (GVP) community won’t like > but it needs to be said nonetheless. And my prediction goes like > this: Unless and until the advocates for reducing gun violence get > it together and st” > >

  2. “And my prediction goes like this: Unless and until the advocates for reducing gun violence get it together and start slugging it out toe-to-toe with the pro-gun gang, the possibility that we will see a significant decline in gun violence will remain somewhere between nothing and nil.”

    Except there has been a significant decline in violent crime, and it correlates with the rolling back of restrictions on the right to keep and bear arms.

    And anti-gun activists don’t engage the opposition. You heavily censor your comment section to exclude points of view you don’t want, and only grant interviews to people who will lob softballs at you. Your fellow compatriots are equally aloof.

    You talk amongst yourselves and either cower or start swearing when somebody disagrees with you.

  3. The trouble is, when these major organizations take off the gloves, they also are willing to dispense with the truth. I’m not a big proponent of the NRA or of its idea that more guns have anything to do with less crime–I think they are unrelated correlations and so do most reputable scholars. But a new web site went up that had me rolling on the floor laughing with its willingness to bend,twist, fold, and mutilate the truth regarding the NRA’s efforts to corner the concealed carry market.

    https://gunsdownamerica.org/

    For one, I don’t think any insurance company would willingly take on a whole population of high risk individuals and offer “murder insurance”. The insurance company statisticians who looked at the NRA Carry Guard program may be greedy, but they are not fools. Furthermore, George Zimmerman may have been an armed idiot, but he was never convicted of murder or a lesser offense (manslaughter), and SYG laws have not been proven to cause murder to “skyrocket”.

    Guns Down doesn’t even say who it really is. At least I can cuss out Wayne LaPierre and the NRA board.

    The problem is this: myth, hyperbole, and emotion work much better at galvanizing support than facts or figures. That’s why Trump is president and Clinton is not. She was a pretty good policy wonk (her dumb move on having a private server with content forwarded to Anthony “look at my” Weiner notwithstanding) but as stale as week old Wonder Bread on the campaign trail. Trump took a page out of Mein Kampf and won the election–which says more about the average voter than it says about him.

    It would sadden me to see other important policy matters, GVP among them, hijacked by warped hyperbole when the facts speak for themselves. The bottom line is that there has been interest balancing in civilian ownership of weaponry going back to post Norman England, it has and can be done today democratically rather than for the King’s Peace, and that is not a bad thing. (with thanks to Mike for posting the link to that Duke symposium).

  4. “In a recent column I mentioned that a new study by pediatricians at Mt. Sinai Hospital found that 80% of all gun injuries suffered by children occurred in the 16-19 age group, whereupon a pro-gun advocate told me that these gun-violence victims were all gang members or criminals, hence, they weren’t ‘kids.’ This is the kind of nonsensical thinking that Gun-nut Nation employs every time that any credible research on gun violence appears….”

    Now where the heck did “Gun Nut Nation” come up with this “nonsensical thinking”???

    ….Oh yeah, they got it from the ACTUAL CONCLUSIONS OF THE STUDY:

    “This data confirms prior studies finding socioeconomic and racial/ethnic disparities in pediatric firearm-related hospitalizations, the majority being those with Medicaid, from the lowest median household incomes and being Black or Hispanic. The majority of firearm-injuries are reported as unintentional in children <15 years old, while for 15-19 year olds, the majority are reported as due to assault…."

  5. The American Academy of Pediatrics recommends people be under pediatric care up to the age of 21. So there is nothing unusual or deceptive about the abstract, or of Mike’s description.

    If people want to write off the poor and minorities as worthy of being shot, just say so. Otherwise, maybe its time we had a real discussion of how to reduce these incidents.

    The Right wants to have it both ways. No controls on firearms to keep them out of the hands of gangs, and no taxes or policies to try to intervene in those parts of the U.S. that have degenerated into war zones. Pathetic.

  6. Reblogged this on Mister Journalism: "Reading, Sharing, Discussing, Learning" and commented:
    It’s Time For Some Real Push-Back About Violence Caused By Guns.
    by mikethegunguy
    I’m going to make a prediction that my friends in the gun violence prevention (GVP) community won’t like but it needs to be said nonetheless. And my prediction goes like this: Unless and until the advocates for reducing gun violence get it together and start slugging it out toe-to-toe with the pro-gun gang, the possibility that we will see a significant decline in gun violence will remain somewhere between nothing and nil. Let me give you an example.

Leave a Reply