A couple of articles in the Times point to a University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine survey claiming that those who carry guns are far likelier to get shot—and killed—than those who are unarmed. This fails to ask why people carry guns in the first place.
When people who should know better confuse correlation and causation I begin to suspect their objectivity.
It essentially found that people who live in crappy neighborhoods fear crime, and get guns, but still suffer more crime than people who live in good neighborhoods. The conclusion the gun grabbers draw from this is akin to believing that buying a gun will relocate you to a dangerous neighborhood.
The NYT only has two criteria for printing something. The first is “Will it help the agenda we’re trying to push?” The second is “Can we get away with it?” Note that “Is it true?” is not in the criteria. All of the NYT stories for the next twenty years are already written. They just wait for an event to occur so they can strap their agenda laden article to it.
The population of England increased steadly in the 19th Century. World banana production increased steadly in the 19th Century. Therefore, if you wish to increase the population of England, grow more bananas.