The Economist Goes all out Disarmist

Gun Watch ^ | 11 August, 2015 | Dean Weingarten

[marktwain]

The Economist is a worldwide read, widely respected publication base in England, with a circulation of about 1.5 million, half if that in the United States.   The publication has always had an elitist, progressive editorial stance.   They have been supportive of restricting access to firearms to all but the elite. 

The publication has also had a reputation for facts.  Ideology overcame fact finding in the August 1st edition, with an article titled "God, good guys and guns".

The article is simply an advocacy piece for draconian restrictions on guns.  It makes no attempt at fairness or balance.   It cites the widely discredited FBI "study" that even the study authors admit used "imperfect data".  It cites the rabidly disarmist Violence Policy Center.  It cites the Bloomberg funded Johns Hopkins Centre for Gun and Policy Research without mentioning the disarmist source of funding.

The article ignores John Lott, the NRA, or any statistics that disprove its blatantly biased "facts".  From The Economist:

This impulse to self-defence in kind is natural—but mistaken. A recent FBI study of 160 public mass murders (committed or attempted) with guns between 2000 and 2013 found most ended when the assailants fled or killed themselves. In 21 instances the attacker was restrained by unarmed people; in only one did the shooting stop after an intervention by a civilian armed with a gun (rather than by a security guard or policeman). The Violence Policy Centre, an advocacy group, points out that Americans who legally carry concealed weapons are far more likely to perpetrate mass shootings than prevent them; it counts 29 such events since 2007. And while gun-wielding bystanders rarely curtail killings, they may aim badly and confuse the cops.

At Gun Watch, I assembled a list of 22 incidents where armed defenders stopped attempted mass murders.   Ten of those incidents occurred during the FBI "study" period, but the authors only find one that was stopped by an armed citizen.  The authors accomplish this sleight of hand by ignoring half of the incidents, and ignoring important facts in the others.   The Clackamas mall incident is included, but no mention is made of the confrontation of the shooter by an armed man with a concealed carry permit.  The shooter committed suicide shortly after the confrontation.   The New Life Church incident, where the shooter was stopped by a church member with a concealed carry permit, is characterized as being stopped by "church security", though she was a volunteer and unpaid.  Off duty police officers, which are, after all armed citizens, stopped the attacks in the other two of the five incidents included.  Off duty officers are not allowed to carry guns in England.

The Economist author ignores critiques of the political studies she quotes, and ignores any studies that contradict her desired political outcome.  The claim is made that gun ownership in the United States is declining, based on survey results roundly critiqued as flawed, and in spite of considerable evidence to the contrary.  Gallup, for example, published contrary results.

Based in London, it is not hard to see the cultural biases that push the Economist toward promoting a disarmed public.  When you allow your prejudices to determine the facts allowed, it is not reporting.  It is advocacy.

It is sad to see the Economist as unable to overcome their prejudice.

Definition of  disarmist


©2015 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included.
Link to Gun Watch

[marktwain]

The English attempted to disarm us by force of Arms. Now they attempt to do so by force of propaganda.

[aynrandfreak]

Shut up and report on Economics!

[ChildOfThe60s]

The elitists are the elitists, Doesn’t matter in which western country they reside.

As the Thai say “Same same, but different”

[MarvinStinson]

The Economist is a tool of George Soros’ bosses.

[Gamecock]

They just had the below their FB feed.

Great comments on FB, especially from a few folks form Brazil chiming in on how the gun ban there has done nothing but leave criminals armed and the citizenry helpless.

[FlyingEagle]

It is illegal to carry a pocketknife in England. They take liberal idiocy to the stratospheric level.

It is ok for muslims to preach jihad in London and recruit for ISIS, but if you shoot someone who breaks into your house and assaults your family, you are going to jail.

[piytar]

The comments there shred this “journalism” aka leftist pap. Surprised this rag has not turned off commenting...

[Chickensoup]

The Economist and Business Insider are leftist rags.

Investor’s Business Daily has a balanced approach.

[SmokingJoe]

Was a subscriber for over 15 years going back to the 80’s when I lived n England. Haven’t even read it for at least 10 years. They stopped being useful or relevant long ago, when they took up with loony left crazies when Bush was in power, followed by actually endorsing Obama. They are about as relevant as Salon.com as far as I am concerned, which is equivalent to zero relevance in my book.

[Calpublican]

With the government we have right now,
The only way I sleep at night is the knowledge
That we can resort to armed resistance if
Needed.

[Navy Patriot]

I think I'll draw an offensive cartoon of Mohammed, and distribute it with the Economist's logo and office address.

[RedMDer]

S AVE O UR S ITE

Seriously, folks, we're just over halfway there and
still have a long way to go.

We truly do need your continuing support to keep FR on the air.

If you love using FR and think it's a worthwhile endeavor,
please help us keep it going by
making a donation today.

Thank you all very much!

God bless.
~ Jim.

We cannot exist
without you.

S AVE O UR S ITE

Seriously, folks, we're just over halfway there and
still have a long way to go.

We truly do need your continuing support to keep FR on the air.

If you love using FR and think it's a worthwhile endeavor,
please help us keep it going by
making a donation today.

Thank you all very much!

God bless.
~ Jim.

We cannot exist
without you.

[FlingWingFlyer]

“Widely respected” by who? Its commie lib readers?

[Ancesthntr]

Come and take them, f’ing Limie bastards!

Be careful, though, it didn’t work out too well the last 2 times, and Texas alone would kick your bloody arses worse than the whole country did back then.

[Red in Blue PA]

I actually subscribed to this magazine. In the first issue received, there was an article about the “dangers” of guns, quoting two groups. The Brady Campaign and someone from Bloomturd’s group. I immediately canceled and told them why.