MENU

Reason.com

Free Minds & Free Markets

NY Daily News' Controversial Gun Cover Offends, But It's Half-Right

God didn't reduce gun-violence rates to their lowest levels in 20 years. People and smart policies that liberalized gun laws did that.

PewPewToday's early front page of The New York Daily News created a stir on Twitter and cable news but it's not just a provocative, in-your-face assemblage (of the sort you should expect from a gritty New York-based newspaper).

It's also absolutely correct, though not in the way it intends.

Whether your believe in him or not, God is not "fixing" the problem of mass shootings—or any other policy issues that we face here in America and around the world. That is properly the province of men and women in the political and private spheres.

And the fact of the matter is that when it comes to gun-related violence, the situation today remains far better than it was 20 years ago. A couple of truly disturbing and deadly events don't change that.

As Pew Research reports, 

Between 1993 and 2000, the gun homicide rate dropped by nearly half, from 7.0 homicides to 3.8 homicides per 100,000 people. Since then, the gun homicide rate has remained relatively flat. From 2010 to 2013, the most recent year data are available, the number of gun homicides has hovered between 11,000 and 12,000 per year....

The rate of nonfatal gun victimizations declined in a similar way to the gun death rate, with a large drop in the 1990s – 63% between 1993 and 2000. The decline since then has been more uneven. In 2014, there were 174.8 nonfatal violent gun victimizations per 100,000 people ages 12 and older.

The only counter-trend in all this regards suicide by gun rate, which has been basically flat over the same time.

To be clear: God did not reduce the gun-violence rates over the past two decades any more than he drove rates up in previous years. Human beings and better, more-open policies toward gun ownership helped to accomplish that.

That gun violence rates have plummeted during the exact period when virtually every state and locality liberalized the conditions under which more types of people could buy and legally carry guns doesn't definitively prove that more guns equals less crime (correlation doesn't necessarily prove causation, natch). There are all sorts of factors involved. But it does show that increasing the number and amount of guns in circulation, and increasing the number and types of people who can legally carry guns in more situations has not led to increased gun violence.

And it does prove that the writers of newspaper headlines about "cowards who could truly end gun scourge " aren't really looking at exactly the sorts of policies that have massively reduced the carnage that's rarer now in America than it used to.

In 2011, after the shooting of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords in an Arizona parking lot unleashed a torrent of wildly uninformed and mostly wrong immediate response, Reason TV released "5 Rules for Coping With Tragedy." As we wait for more information about the horrible attack in San Bernardino, it's worth watching.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    WELL ATHEISM HASN'T FIXED IT EITHER.

  • BeefJokey||

    Thats because there are no atheistic politicians, atleast outwardly atheistic.

  • simplybe||

    The only God our politicians believe in is the Almighty $$$$$

  • Ken Shultz||

    It isn't just that. It's that saying "God isn't fixing this" in response to people talking about prayer betrays a fundamental ignorance of Christianity.

    In all seriousness, anybody who thinks that Christianity isn't aware that bad things can happen to a good person doesn't know--the first thing--about Christianity.

    Christianity might even be best defined as the logical reconciliation of the idea of an all powerful, loving God with the murder of an innocent man.

    Lashing out at Christians because bad things happen to good people is a straw man running around in a circle.

  • Bill Dalasio||

    If I remember my theology correctly, the gift of free will is supposed to be one of God's greatest gifts to man. Of course, that implies the possibility that man can choose to do evil.

  • robc||

    Considering large branches of christianity dont accept free will, I would say you arent remembering correctly.

  • Bill Dalasio||

    Which sects?

  • Knarf Yenrab!||

    Presumably robc is talking about Calvinism, though Calvinists do believe in free will via your usual tortured Christian logic.

  • Ken Shultz||

    Predestination usually has it that you're not evil because you chose to sin; you choose to sin but God already knows what you're going to choose to be evil.

    There are Christians who believe all sorts of different things. Just because some of them believe things that few of the others do doesn't mean that we can't say certain things about Christianity generally.

    If there is one principle that all Christians share more than any other, it's that Jesus was a perfectly good man, and he was crucified for it. Even the Christians who don't believe in the divinity of Christ believe in that.

    Therefore, I would contend that it is the most basic Christian principle: Jesus was a good man, and God didn't save him. Christians don't need to be told that bad things happen to good people. That is not a profound attack on the viability of Christianity generally. Rather, the principle that bad things happen to good people is the foundation upon which the rest of Christianity is built.

  • Ken Shultz||

    And, yeah, whatever else there is to know about the Christian God, the conclusion that he's a radical libertarian seems pretty likely. I thought I was radical for not wanting to prosecute drug dealers, but the Christian God gives people eternal life for claiming to be responsible for the murder of his own innocent son. The Christian heaven is a libertopian place where everyone chooses to respect each other's rights of their own free will.

    Even the predestination heaven is a place you chose for yourself. It's just that God already knew the choice you were going to make.

    I guess this is where Leibniz chimes in that God made the world the best it could be--given what is possible. He can't make a circle with three sides because that would be a triangle, and if the wonderful world that's going to evolve here isn't possible without letting people make evil choices, then maybe we're asking him to make a circle with three sides.

  • pronomian||

    If one believes in the God of the bible, the question isn't why is this happening, the question is why isn't this happening more?

  • bacon-magic||

    Who is Job?

  • Think It Through||

    Trying to explain human behavior within the context and framework of made-up religious principles is like using the rules of Monopoly to explain how ants build a colony.

  • MichaelL||

    The principles are present in most religions, being that the Golden Rule is the best advice to give anyone! And, even atheists don't root for murderers!

  • sarcasmic||

    It feels like there have been a million of these mass shootings lately! Stupid facts aren't going to sway what people feel!

  • d3x / dt3||

    More than a million!!

  • Drake||

    Allah fixed those kafirs and their Christmas party.

  • Swiss Servator||

    I wonder why they would go into deliberate asshole mode? Circulation problems? Nah....

    http://www.realclearpolitics.c....._news.html

  • Rhywun||

    Fun list but I think the NY Post is safe as houses.

  • Duke||

    Since liberals and many here don't believe in God, I suppose whatever bible verses are cited will be ignored. But still, "God is not mocked. Whatever a man sows, that he will also reap."

    This contempt for all things godly or christian seems to me to be a very new thing. I don't recall this level of contempt during the Clinton years. It seems like it's gotten worse in the Twitter years. Maybe the causality of mass killings is related to contempt for God and prayer which has all been but forcibly removed from the public space.

    I believe all this mockery will end badly for the mockers.

  • Ceci n'est pas un woodchipper||

    Well, believe what you want, but if the god you believe in would respond to being ignored by causing people to kill groups of innocents then he's a petty, childish little tyrant and I wouldn't give him the time of day even if he did exist.

  • Jacnthabox||

    So because God didn't prevent a crime, that means He caused it? That's not very rational....

  • Rhywun||

    Blame the internet. It encourages the worst to bubble up to the top. In a sane world, an idiot like Kos who claims that GOP "peeps are shooting up America" would be laughed out of the room - not endless retweeted.

  • Harun||

    Its because of alleged planned parenthood recent attack. They assume that's a christian crazy.

    Also, Obama's been letting the mask drop that he's not really religious. I mean, now we can all find out he's an atheist and that he's "evolved."

  • XM||

    A black dude executed Christians like 2,3 months ago. He shot anyone who identified as Christians.

    Of course I didn't expect the left to make any noise, because Christians aren't among their protected group. Radical Islam hits synagogues all the time and their response is that Israel is an evil occupying force.

    But a few black churches burn to the ground and oh no, it's the return of Jim Crow! Why aren't the religious right wingers worried that churches are being targeted! What's that, some of them weren't arson and at least one arsonist was a black man? Shut up.

  • Think It Through||

    Liberals don't believe in God? I've known tons who believe in God. But mostly it's a REALLY NICE GOD who hates rules, man, and loves homosexuals and sexual freedom in general except God REALLY REALLY HATES those asshole poser fakers in the Catholic Church who all abuse little boys and cover it up. Well, that's the general tenor of God I got when I went to Unitarian churches a few times.

  • ||

    I still see very little about this in the news:

    http://www.thetruthaboutguns.c.....t-attacks/

    No wonder, it would be a death blow to the gun controller's arguments.

  • Drake||

    Damn I hope that's true.

  • Mock-star||

    As do I.

  • Marshall Gill||

    God did not reduce the gun-violence rates over the past two decades any more than he drove rates up in previous years. Human beings and better, more-open policies toward gun ownership helped to accomplish that.

    Nick, it is sentences like this that make you a wonderful fit at HuffPo one day. While I understand that you wouldn't want to pass up a swipe at Christianity, you take a swing and a miss, as usual. I am an atheist. Strangely, I feel no need to attack those who believe. If you believe that God works through men, then "human beings and better, more open policies" could certainly be attributed to His work.

    You should have worked "Christfag" in there somewhere.

  • d3x / dt3||

    You're just jealous that you don't have that jacket.

  • cavalier973||

    As I understand it, The Jacket has you.

    By the way, I do not have the hubris to say that it wasn't The Jacket that reduced gun violence to it's lowest point in 20 years. The Jacket works subtly, but powerfully.

  • ant1sthenes||

    I'm not an atheist, and I'm increasingly inclined to give Nick shit for his writing, but not for this passage. It's not an attack on faith to value human agency.

  • Think It Through||

    Huh? Humans do what humans do. God does what God does (if anything; I think it's nothing, since there's nothing up there, but for argument's sake). If God ALSO gets credit for what humans do, then what's the fucking point?

  • Illocust||

    Surely these idiots realize that you're in our prayers is an expression of condolences. Someone's grandparent dies at work and a card goes around, unless your best buddies with the guy you write you're in our thoughts and prayers. This is exactly the thing politicians should be doing as these crisis's unfold. Giving speeches on their pet topic should be what's shamed.

  • d3x / dt3||

    It's just fashionable right now to take potshots at Republicans, gun owners, and white men. You know, the bad people.

  • Illocust||

    The blatant hypocrisy is annoying though. These guys have no problems taking potshots at anything that has even a whiff of a tie to Christianity, but saying something bad about Islam is racism and bad.

  • d3x / dt3||

    It is interesting how much CNN has tried to paint this as some out-of-control workplace dispute. I get the feeling that we'd be hearing a lot more about the shooter if he were a weird white guy.

  • Harun||

    The *real* enemy.

    Granted, its probably easier to hate them and pass some gun laws than stop Islamic terror.

  • Rhywun||

    Surely these idiots realize that you're in our prayers is an expression of condolences.

    Yes. I am an atheist I find the cover to be repellent for exactly this reason. They're basically shitting all over the victims even harder. It's disgusting.

  • BeefJokey||

    Yea, it's a good point, none of those tweets are implying that God is going to fix anything.

  • Curt||

    Amen. I'll generally be first in line when it comes to crapping on tweets from those douches. But they weren't saying that they're praying for gun violence to go away. That's the offensive thing about the cover.

  • Cavadus||

    The plural of crisis is crises, not crisis's. That's the singular possessive form. When pluralizing you NEVER use an apostrophe. Apostrophes are for possessives and contractions.

  • Kevin Sorbos Manful Locks||

    plz stop shaming my non;binary;punctuation identity!!!!!!!??????::::

  • Curt||

    well... there are numbers and capitals and initials. but otherwise, rock on.

    They were a couple of 5's.
    I got straight A's.
    My parents are M.D.'s.

    some are debatable, but i'm just being picky. "crisis's"... yeah, that's not okay.

  • In League with the Dark Ones||

    "When to Form a Plural with an Apostrophe", citing the Chicago Manual of Style, says you don't need an apostrophe with the first two examples you gave:

    DO NOT use an apostrophe to form the plural of capital letters used as words, abbreviations that contain no interior periods, and numerals used as nouns:
    the three Rs.
    the 1990s
    lengthy URLs
  • Unreconstructed (Sans Flag)||

    Not according to APA (or my own) style: reference

  • gaoxiaen||

    Apostrophes can be used for pluralizing acronyms if there's a possibility that the s might be mistakenly considered part of the acronym.

  • Ceci n'est pas un woodchipper||

    I'm an atheist, but I was late to the last meeting so I must have missed the part where we're supposed to shit all over the polite condolences expressed by Christians when someone dies.

  • cavalier973||

    It's offensive and rude to refer to one's invisible sky daddy when a tragedy has occurred.

    Those 80% (or whatever the percentage is) of people who believe in fairy tales should keep their mouths shut about their delusions so that the majority of the public can actually deal with real-world issues using logic and Reason.

  • pronomian||

    Yes, we must tell the victims families that it was their family's own damn fault for being at a "sky daddy" birthday rally. If those dead didn't believe in that fairy tale they wouldn't be dead now and the victims families need to get that straight.

  • Zunalter||

    Math Note:

    If 80% believe in fairy tales, then those "using logic and Reason" not comprise a majority of the public.

  • Rich||

    SATAN, n. One of the Creator's lamentable mistakes, repented in sashcloth and axes. Being instated as an archangel, Satan made himself multifariously objectionable and was finally expelled from Heaven. Half-way in his descent he paused, bent his head in thought a moment and at last went back. "There is one favor that I should like to ask," said he.

    "Name it."

    "Man, I understand, is about to be created. He will need laws."

    "What, wretch! you his appointed adversary, charged from the dawn of eternity with hatred of his soul — you ask for the right to make his laws?"

    "Pardon; what I have to ask is that he be permitted to make them himself."

    It was so ordered. -- The late, great Ambrose Bierce

  • Tundra, well-chilled.||

    ...(of the sort you should expect from a gritty New York-based newspaper).

    Actually, I believe it's spelled 'shitty'.

  • Rhywun||

    Yeah, please. The Daily News used to position itself as the middle ground between the Times and the Post but in recent years it's been deliberately trashing down in an attempt to "beat" the Post. This is just the latest example.

  • UnCivilServant||

    NY Daily News' Controversial Gun Cover Offends, But It's Right

    Actually, since you left off the entire tireade below the headline, your statement is not right either. The cover is wrong as it calls people who are sending condolances while waiting for the facts to come in "cowards hiding behind platitudes".

    If you're going to be pedantic, at least try to be technically correct. Now you're just plain wrong.

  • UnCivilServant||

    Oh, now you've gone and fixed your headline. Glad I quoted.

  • Swiss Servator||

    Maybe the Jacket has already moved into action with regard to its host!

  • Mickey Rat||

    I would not even give it the Post a "half right". It is still an appeal to populist sentiment that problems are obviously soluable by government action except that politicians are too venal to do the necessary things to accomplish the goals.

  • Swiss Servator||

    Nick's having a bit of a bad time lately - I think the Jacket needs to have a talk with him and snap him out of this funk.

  • Mickey Rat||

    Why at if The Jacket is a manifestation of an eldritch abomination that has finally subverted Nick to its nefarious agenda?

  • Mickey Rat||

    *What if...

  • JWatts||

    "Why at if The Jacket is a manifestation of an eldritch abomination that has finally subverted Nick to its nefarious agenda?"

    So, ummm ... Libertarian moment?

  • gaoxiaen||

    No tireade? Okay, I'll have some lemonade.

  • Libertarian||

    I knew suicide was a significant percentage of annual gun deaths, but didn't realize that it is almost 2/3s! This needs to be emphasized in arguing for gun rights as well as the drop in homicides. The average person doesn't know this. Alas, Wikipedia starts off its entry on gun deaths with the now-ubiquitous phrase, "gun violence."

  • d3x / dt3||

    Sort of like the 20-year-old "children" in the gun-banners' propaganda.

  • ||

    This needs to be emphasized in arguing for gun rights as well as the drop in homicides.

    I'm not sure. Certainly don't refute facts, but it can/will/does quickly degenerate into giving up your guns for your own good and the good of those around you. See School Bullying, Zero-tolerance, and denying guns to the 'mentally ill'.

  • Notorious UGCC||

    I suppose it's *possible* that extra background checks would have stopped a guy who seems to have passed the background checks to be a government health inspector. It's *possible* that once baffled in their attempts to get guns from a licensed dealer, these guys would have shrugged and tried butter knives instead.

    But it would be nice to check the facts before making such assumptions.

  • Adans smith||

    Eliminate the war on drugs and the numbers will drop further. BTW,many of the number for 'mass shootings' many in the media are using are drug gang killings. No word from progs or Obama on 'common sense' drug law reform.

  • In League with the Dark Ones||

    57% of mass shootings in Everytown's and Shooting Tracker's database are men with a history of domestic violence killing their estranged girlfriend/wife/ex-wife and their children plus, sometimes, the estranged girlfriend's/wife's/ex-wife's new boyfriend/husband and often themselves. Most of these shootings take place in the estranged couple's former shared home or the estranged girlfriend's/wife's/ex-wife's new home.

  • pronomian||

    No no no, it's all tied to climate change, people take drugs because the planet is burning up, people get in gangs because the planet is getting hot, people become terrorist because the ice caps are melting. See? It's all related.

  • Notorious UGCC||

    This headline reinforces my belief in the existence...of JournoList 2.0.

    If you'll pardon the mixed metaphor, this retarded "why are you praying when you could be disarming people" meme sounds like something cooked up in an echo chamber filled with left-wing media types.

    It has the hallmarks of their special method of Making Friends and Influencing People.

    Never mind that it might rub some people the wrong way. These people aren't represented in JournoList discussions and won't interrupt the circle-jerk of congratulations for the genius who concocted the meme.

    There was obviously no-one to say, "wait, isn't it possible that some people might think we're being hostile to people of faith?"

  • Azathoth!!||

    There is no Journolist 2.0. The Journolist never went away. They didn't even kick Weigel out.

    They no longer have a need to hide--because they can simply kill the story.

    Here, we still talk about that very real< conspiracy, as we talk about the also real climategate conspiracy(but even that factual occurrence is denied on this site by some already)--in the rest of the world none of this happened. Benghazi, Fast and Furious, the VA scandal, the IRS scandal--these ARE already fake.

    Republicans are responsible for every hare-brained Obama scheme.

    We have always been at war with.....

  • Gray Ghost||

    Aza's right. I haven't seen Citizen Nothing around here for awhile, but IIRC, he's in the journalism biz and I remember him being absolutely irate at what people like Weigel and Ezra Klein did with Journolist. According to him, participating in such a thing, back in the day would have been absolutely terminal for your career as a journalist. Now? Shit, Klein got his own column at the Post out of it, didn't he?

    It really kills whatever residual faith you had in the media to figure out that their slants are due to incompetence, like you had thought, (see the Gell-Mann Effect as related by Michael Crichton) but are due to active malevolence and coordination.

  • Gray Ghost||

    And I meant "aren't due to incompetence" above.

  • Harun||

    Benghazi had layers and layers, and if you just looked at one, it was kinda small.

    But recently its comes out that Team Obama wanted no bad news to spoil 2012's narrative...and we see it with ISIS intel, and now with this incident...downplay, claim success, etc. Osama bin Ladin's intel stash was locked away because it had "bad news."

    I'm actually leaning to Benghazi being a bigger scandal than I previously thought.

    ...and these people are idiots. They believed Americans wouldn't understand if more terrorism were happening. Instead they wanted to blame a video, blame free speech.

  • Kevin Sorbos Manful Locks||

    Guys, I posted "We need to DO something NOW!" on facebook.

    If politicians took action like me instead of spouting platitudes, there would be zero murders in this country!!1

  • Ken Shultz||

    So, the way people have expressed condolences for thousands of years is now a micro-aggression?

    I wonder if blacks and Latinos are supposed to apologize for wishing people condolences the way they've always done--or maybe like racism, when they express condolences that way, it isn't a micro-aggression because they haven't been central to the power structure for hundreds of years like white, Christians have.

  • Azathoth!!||

    Shouldn't someone be packing Nick's desk up by now? The Jacket is clearly done with this host, he's rummaging through his cored out cerebrum and he's only got enough left for boilerplate leftism.

    Can't someone change his diaper and wheel him over to the Huffpo? He's a leftist genius level, let's not allow the Jacket to eat until he's a Sanders voter.

  • BigT||

    "Obama isn't correct even if he meant the frequency of fatalities or attacks. Many European countries actually have higher rates of death from public shootings that resulted in four or more murders. It's simply a matter of adjusting for America's much larger population.

    Let's look at mass public shootings from 2009 to the middle of June this year. To compare fairly with American shootings, I excluded attacks that might be better classified as struggles over sovereignty. For instance, I did not count the 22 people killed in the Macedonian town of Kumanovo last month.
    Norway had the highest annual death rate, with two mass public shooting fatalities per million people. Macedonia had a rate of 0.38, Serbia 0.28, Slovakia 0.20, Finland 0.14, Belgium 0.14 and the Czech Republic 0.13. The U.S. comes in eighth with 0.095 mass public shooting fatalities per million people. Austria and Switzerland are close behind."

    http://news.investors.com/ibd-.....uently.htm

  • Abu Nudnik||

    If God exists, why would He fix our problems? To keep us infantile? I've never understood this idea.

  • simplybe||

    With all the crap that our government stirs up around the world we as citizens should demand that every citizen over 18 be supplied with a M16 and 40 cal pistol for protection. Our government wreaks havoc into the lives of people around the world then wants to leave it own citizens helpless to defend ourselves.

  • Ken Shultz||

    "And it does prove that the writers of newspaper headlines about "cowards who could truly end gun scourge " aren't really looking at exactly the sorts of policies that have massively reduced the carnage that's rarer now in America than it used to."

    I bolded "cowards" because it should be noted that they're using the word in a bizarre way.

    How can the people who refuse to sell their rights short in exchange for promises of security be "cowards"?

    The people who are eager to sell our rights short in exchange for promises of security are cowards. People whose primary motivation is fear and will sell themselves and their principles short out of fear--that's the definition of a coward.

    People who can't be frightened into selling their Second Amendment rights short are, by definition, not cowards.

  • steedamike||

    I imagine that the 'cowards' are just simply wilting under NRA pressure, and there can't be any other possibility that anyone could make a legitimate moral argument to defend 2A.

  • Knarf Yenrab!||

    They've been hard-selling the idea that politicians who aren't wholly opposed to RKBA rights are in the pocket of special interests like the NRA and the gun lobby, which they're trying to sell as some shadowy group with huge sums of money flowing into politicians' pockets. That gun companies are a modest industry at best and the NRA is the largest civil rights lobby in the world conveniently escapes them.

    The reality that millions of gun owners have learned from the disarmament of Europe and Australia and are highly organized and vocal in their defense of civil rights probably isn't as palatable to them as their The People vs. Corporations shtick, which is why they keep trying to sell this transparent nonsense.

  • Think It Through||

    If you weren't a coward, you'd be able to face danger without a gun. Like Chuck Norris. Use your fists! HE'S not a coward.

  • Swiss Servator||

    O! just finished a prepared uh and um filled statement - first thing he did was offer "thoughts and prayers" - HA!

  • steedamike||

    It's OK, like Ken said, it's only offensive if a white Christian/conservative male says such things.

  • lap83||

    Obama prays to Gaia, so it's ok

  • ||

    The thing that infuriates me is the assumption that politicians CAN fix the problem, but because it isn't fixed, that must mean they just WON'T solve it. Since when have politicians actually be able to fix problems? How come the US hasn't been able to keep drugs out of the country? I guess they just don't really want to. How come politicians couldn't stop the Troubles in Ireland? I guess they just didn't want to. How come Austria has the second highest violent crime rate in Europe? I guess they just don't want to fix it. How come East Asia has so many stabbings? I guess they don't care about fixing that. Ad infinitum et nauseam.

  • Knarf Yenrab!||

    These people have been selling their hokum for generations, and a little thing like basic reason isn't about to stop them when they know they're right and especially when they've convinced themselves of the moral superiority of their position.

    They also don't have a shred of economic intuition, which is why they think in terms of problems and solutions as though the problem of murdering psychos has a simple legislative answer. It never occurs to them that banning guns might lead mass shooters to turn into bombers or increase body counts dramatically when the nutcase economizes, to say nothing of how gun control would increase the vulnerability of women, the elderly, and the disabled.

  • Knarf Yenrab!||

    more-open policies

    That's some big-league modifier hyphenation, Dr. G.

  • CE||

    People have already forgotten the Million Man March. Violence is way down since then.

  • pronomian||

    That was a sexist march, what about women? Trangenders? Why was it only a man march?

  • the other Jim||

    I think part of the reason for the assholery behind the "God isn't fixing this," prayer-mocking trend is that the people making these snide comments are so secular that they do not know and cannot imagine any genuinely religious people. So they assume that saying something like "my prayers are with the victims" is just a cynical, empty gesture, or at best, really stupid and misguided, because to THEM prayer and religion mean nothing. They might themselves sometimes mouth these types of comments, in certain social settings, but if they do, they know they're faking it, and figure everyone else is, too.

    Basically, they're cynical assholes who live in a very small bubble of like-minded assholes, and they project their mean-spirited nature onto everyone outside the bubble. (I say all this as an agnostic.)

  • Alan@.4||

    Might the "meaningless platitudes" The News refers to possibly be found in The Bill of Rights, part of The U.S. Constitution, which also confers on The News the right to print the drivel is usually produces? I wonder. By the way, if The News's "gun cover" is half-right, it's half wrong too.

  • MarioSmario||

    What I find even more offensive is the media which is all too quick to jump to conclusions before any facts are out, post eye-catching headlines and pictorials and op-ed-like stories making sweeping generalizations about the average American as a gun-toting maniac, and then when the truth finally comes out, which all too often counters their anti-American narrative, slinks away like nothing happened and the story is never covered again--unless the killers end up on the cover of Rolling Stone. What kind of a mature, intelligent society produces a media that operates that way. These same media types live under unbridled liberty and freedom of expression, yet they have a religious-like odd zeal for socialism.

    Maybe the time has come to do background checks for journalists. Yes, they're protected by the Constitution too must like gun owners, even mentioned by name, but who cares, right? Apparently, the Constitution doesn't mean a hill of beans--but protecting the reputations of special interest groups, even those who come armed, is far more important than supporting rights for the average American which the left wing snobs still think are gun-toting pickup-driving rednecks. Disarm them, and then you have your revolution. If we're to be concerned for the common good, I'll match my common good against the Left's. Keep the 2nd amendment intact, and start licensing journalists.

  • Michael Murray||

    Why is this a debate about religion? One cult is much like another. The main difference is which cult YOU believe in and how far you are willing to go to make ME a believer. For some progressives part of the catechism of their cult is the holy grail of gun control (now camouflaged as "common sense gun safety rules"). You might as well study how many angels can dance on the head of a pin (Federal money may be available for that).
    Gun control, just like murder, robbery, and rape control will only work for THOSE WHO ARE WILLING TO FOLLOW THE LAWS!
    This fact (like the statistics above) are only difficult to grasp for those who have an excess amount of Kool-Aid in their diet.

  • Akira||

    "This fact (like the statistics above) are only difficult to grasp for those who have an excess amount of Kool-Aid in their diet."

    Racist!!1

  • day2knight56||

    I suppose that it would be too much to ask that authors at "Reason" be able to, you know, actually reason and not conflate causation and correlation.

  • Undercover Libertarian||

    As a devoutly religious person and a libertarian I dislike how god always gets knocked around it these things. God gave us free will and we are held responsible for our own actions so blame no one but the person who did the act. Actually it was that religious belief on free will and personal responsibility that made me become a libertarian

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online