Web Site Takes Fresh Look at Gun Control

GunLies.com ^ | March 17, 2002 | John Woodman

[john in missouri]

A Missouri man has founded a new web site, www.GunLies.com, designed to take 'a fresh look' at gun control issues. During its first few days online, GunLies.com received several hundred of visitors, from across the United States but especially from Missouri.

"www.gunlies.com sucks," proclaimed one visitor who obviously didn't like what he found there. "I'll have to admit, though, that gunlies.com is at least honest about itself. The website name says it all... gun lies."

But another visitor, a retired federal law enforcement officer, wrote: "You are doing a wonderful service to the people of Missouri and the country by presenting an unbiased evaluation of claims made by both sides of the gun control issue."

GunLies.com began when the founder, John Woodman, began to look carefully at the claims made by both sides of America's gun control debate. "There seemed to be so much smoke and mirrors that you could almost despair of arriving at the truth," Woodman says. "Certainly for anyone who's not willing to spend dozens of hours, at a minimum, sorting through the various claims and counter-claims, it's very hard to arrive at the truth. And as I dug through a lot of this information, trying to figure out what 'held water' and what didn't, I thought, 'I ought to share this with others.'"

If there was any one defining moment that led to that decision, it was looking at a statistic on women and guns used to promote one side of the debate and thinking, "This statistic really supports the exact opposite conclusion," Woodman says.

"It's crazy the way some of these statistics are used. The amount of spin says to me that at least some of the players in this debate are really more interested in pushing their particular agenda than whether or not that agenda is right. And this happens on both sides."

So is the founder of GunLies.com completely neutral? "Of course not," he says. "I don't think anybody in this debate, or in any controversial debate for that matter, is ever quite neutral. I simply do my best to be honest and fair. But you'll see at the web site that I'm open about my current views."

"Having said that, I actually started out on one side, and because of my research, I've really moved to the other side of the aisle. I've always been fairly willing to change what I believe. I take in new facts, then try to choose the position that makes the most sense to me, based on all that I understand."

"If someone finds something on the site that's misleading or just plain wrong, and if you can convince me of that, then I'm willing to fix it," he adds.

[SW6906]

"Having said that, I actually started out on one side, and because of my research, I've really moved to the other side of the aisle. I've always been fairly willing to change what I believe. I take in new facts, then try to choose the position that makes the most sense to me, based on all that I understand."

The perfect definition of a moderate.

[SW6906]

Wait. Never mind that last post. It's too early and I'm only on my first cup of coffee. Now that I read it again, I realize it's not a case of what moderates do. The web site is not looking at polls or what is the popular position and then taking a side, it's truly looking at the issues and coming to an educated, informed conclusion - definitely NOT what a moderate does.

Ignore me, I need more coffee. Friends don't let friends post without cafeine....

[john in missouri]

OK, PistolPaknMama, Second Amendment Sisters is listed on the front page under Gun Rights Advocates.

I originally didn't list it there not because I haven't visited your web site, but because it isn't very heavy on info that could help a person decide which side of the gun control debate to come down on.

However, I count 2asisters as an important voice in that you speak for pro-gun women, counter to youknowwho.

hence, you are now listed!

John

[john in missouri]

PS - you may be at the bottom of the list of gun rights advocates, but you're still above youknowwho.... 8-)

[john in missouri]

OK, Bob, I've twiddled with it a bit but still haven't managed to replace it with something improved.

However... if you return to the site, you'll see that now you shouldn't often get the 'splash page' after your first visit.

John

[john in missouri]

> However... if you return to the site, you'll see that now > you shouldn't often get the 'splash page' after your > first visit. Actually, testing this now, I see that it doesn't work that well in practice. I'll try and replace this system with a cookie-based one.