Journalist calls out political hacks for misleading gun data

[darin]

http://mynorthwest.com/992/2561751/AntiGun-Agenda


"People hospitalized with a firearm injury are 30 times more likely to return to the hospital with another firearm injury than people hospitalized for other reasons. And they're 11 times more likely to die from gun violence within the next five years, according to a study commissioned by the Seattle City Council."

That sounds scary. It sounds shocking, and it's supposed to. It's meant to scare you into action...

Now City Councilmember Tim Burgess sent out a press release about these results and this is what he said:


"The evidence shows gun violence begets gun violence. If you are harmed by a gun, you are much more likely to be harmed again or to harm others," said Burgess. "It is unfortunate that the National Rifle Association has blocked this type of research at the national level because it provides valuable information for policymakers and the public."


Now to me, that quote just reeks of the City Council spending $150,000 to make a political point. This was not about the NRA. The research didn't look into the NRA. That just reeks of some sort of agenda.

[darin]

Very much worth listening to the audio - adds a lot to the story.

[jimnyc]

I read this last night as a guest. I love how they toss the NRA in there to try and sway people against them when they had jack shit to do with anything, especially what they accused them of. And obviously they took statistics and then made their little story around them. But the bottom line IS the stats - which they didn't want to point out, because it was so low.

I have a gun that never leaves it's cabinet. These people act like I'm a "gun nut" because I own one. Yet they spend every waking minute trying to find a way to disarm me, even if it means lying or doing illegal things. I think the nut label is on the wrong people.

[Trigg]

Now if all journalists did their job and actually looked at the data before regurgitating what politicians say.



We're talking about criminals here, but The Times writes "people." The takeaway from the study then isn't "people" are more likely to die or be injured, not the average person, it's not as Councilmember Burgess would say, "violence begets violence," it's criminals with guns end up getting themselves killed. Criminals. That's kind of an important takeaway, right?
We're spending $150,000 to find out that criminals who use guns on each other, they end up dying. Yes. I kind of believe that. And the rate at which they're killed doesn't actually surprise me because that is what happens to bad guys with guns who act irresponsibly with guns, they end up shooting each other. That's what happens.