BTW, the statistics he quotes are either incorrect or misleading.
My bet is on misleading.
Mine too, somewhat.
My question is, who on "our side" is well versed enough, and well respected enough, to write the rebuttal opinion and get it published in the NYT? And have it read by intelligent citizens who were taught the art of critical thinking?
Critical enough that they could analyze this statement:
"The 46,445 murder victims killed by gunfire in the United States between 2012 and 2016 didn’t need to perish so that gun enthusiasts can go on fantasizing that “Red Dawn” is the fate that soon awaits us."
Mr Stevens does not take into account the number/percentage of the 46,445 "murder victims" that were not innocent victims. Those that were gunned down in mostly major cities by their criminal cohort. Yes, if it was half, 23,222.5 victims were killed, across 4 years, across 50 states and the DC area and perhaps that number were "innocent".
That's just one example that could be used in a rebuttal. I'm sure a person with the time and interest could garner more "misapplied" statistics from Mr Stevens' article.
Our biggest problem as supporters of 2A rights, as I see it, is having a person who can speak to the undecided and even some of the smarter antis and get the point across beyond the emotional appeals of many of the detractors of the 2A.
Geno
PS, knowing a fair amount of "liberals", not ALL of them believe the misleading "news" reports. Many of them just have no use for our way of life and see no reason to protect something that they see as not affecting them. Besides, there's the mentality that "children" (including 19 YO gangbangers?) are more important than any other human being (If it'll save one child line of thinking)
