Anti gun journalist realizes...gun control doesn't work, she is shocked when she discovered this...

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by 2aguy, Oct 4, 2017.

  1. 2aguy
    Offline

    2aguy Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2014
    Messages:
    54,943
    Thanks Received:
    9,506
    Trophy Points:
    2,030
    Ratings:
    +37,453
    Yep...this journalist is anti gun....is still anti gun, but realized after actually investigating gun deaths, with the help of 2 fellow journalists, that gun control laws, from rifle bans, to magazine bans, to silencer bans, to background checks.....are all stupid and don't work...my words, but her discovery......she did the research, and admits she was wrong about gun control....

    She did find some solutions...and none of them involve gun control...

    Opinion | I used to think gun control was the answer. My research told me otherwise.

    Before I started researching gun deaths, gun-control policy used to frustrate me. I wished the National Rifle Association would stop blocking common-sense gun-control reforms such as banning assault weapons, restricting silencers, shrinking magazine sizes and all the other measures that could make guns less deadly.

    Then, my colleagues and I at FiveThirtyEight spent three months analyzing all 33,000 lives ended by guns each year in the United States, and I wound up frustrated in a whole new way.

    We looked at what interventions might have saved those people, and the case for the policies I’d lobbied for crumbled when I examined the evidence.


    The best ideas left standing were narrowly tailored interventions to protect subtypes of potential victims, not broad attempts to limit the lethality of guns.

    I researched the strictly tightened gun laws in Britain and Australia and concluded that they didn’t prove much about what America’s policy should be. Neither nation experienced drops in mass shootings or other gun related-crime that could be attributed to their buybacks and bans. Mass shootings were too rare in Australia for their absence after the buyback program to be clear evidence of progress. And in both Australia and Britain, the gun restrictions had an ambiguous effect on other gun-related crimes or deaths.

    When I looked at the other oft-praised policies, I found out that no gun owner walks into the store to buy an “assault weapon.” It’s an invented classification that includes any semi-automatic that has two or more features, such as a bayonet mount, a rocket-propelled grenade-launcher mount, a folding stock or a pistol grip. But guns are modular, and any hobbyist can easily add these features at home, just as if they were snapping together Legos.

    As for silencers — they deserve that name only in movies, where they reduce gunfire to a soft puick puick. In real life, silencers limit hearing damage for shooters but don’t make gunfire dangerously quiet. An AR-15 with a silencer is about as loud as a jackhammer. Magazine limits were a little more promising, but a practiced shooter could still change magazines so fast as to make the limit meaningless.

    ------

    By the time we published our project, I didn’t believe in many of the interventions I’d heard politicians tout.


     
    • Winner Winner x 1

Share This Page