The Dishonest NY Times And Guns
The Market Ticker - Commentary on The Capital Markets
Logging in or registering will improve your experience here
Main Navigation
Display list of topics
Sarah's Resources You Should See
Sarah's Blog Buy Sarah's Pictures
Full-Text Search & Archives
Legal Disclaimer

The content on this site is provided without any warranty, express or implied. All opinions expressed on this site are those of the author and may contain errors or omissions.


The author may have a position in any company or security mentioned herein. Actions you undertake as a consequence of any analysis, opinion or advertisement on this site are your sole responsibility.

Market charts, when present, used with permission of TD Ameritrade/ThinkOrSwim Inc. Neither TD Ameritrade or ThinkOrSwim have reviewed, approved or disapproved any content herein.

The Market Ticker content may be sent unmodified to lawmakers via print or electronic means or excerpted online for non-commercial purposes provided full attribution is given and the original article source is linked to. Please contact Karl Denninger for reprint permission in other media, to republish full articles, or for any commercial use (which includes any site where advertising is displayed.)

Submissions or tips on matters of economic or political interest may be sent "over the transom" to The Editor at any time. To be considered for publication your submission must include full and correct contact information and be related to an economic or political matter of the day. All submissions become the property of The Market Ticker.

Considering sending spam? Read this first.

2018-03-06 09:40 by Karl Denninger
in 2ndAmendment , 2596 references Ignore this thread
The Dishonest NY Times And Guns
[Comments enabled]

This is the sort of article that should lead to a flat-out boycott and destruction of this "newspaper".

Specifically, they speak of Mexico, which has extremely stringent gun laws -- and only one legal gun store.  They make this out to be better than the United States, but intentionally fail to state the obvious: Their murder rate is 17.03 per 100,000 people (in 2016) or roughly three times that of the United States and roughly double the gun homicide rate even though the US has six times more guns per-person than Mexico does.

In other words the number of guns owned and the ease of acquiring them has nothing to do with the gun homicide rate nor with the murder rate overall.

What does?

Are you completely dense?

The "war on drugs."

Mexico has a monstrous war on drugs and the drug war is responsible for an enormous percentage of the homicides in the country exactly as is the case here in the United States.

In fact all violent crime, including homicide, has fallen precipitously in the United States -- by about half -- since 1991.  I know, you don't believe Mises -- so go look it up for yourself using the FBI Data, which I assume you do trust, right?

At the same time the number of privately-owned firearms has gone up dramatically in the United States.  Obviously more guns do not mean more crime (much less more murders) or the murder rate wouldn't have fallen by half over the period of time that the number of guns has skyrocketed.

But it has.

These are facts folks.  Never mind that the specific weapons in question with regard to Parkland -- so-called "assault rifles" (which are nothing of the sort; an assault rifle is capable of select-fire, and these are not) are really just defined as guns that someone thinks look scary.  Well, I assure you that if you're staring down the business end of a gun all guns look damn scary.

The facts on those rifles are even more-clear - - there are several million - - estimates are about 3 million, in fact - - AR-pattern rifles in the United States in law-abiding civilian hands.  I also note, for the record, that "AR" does not mean "assault rifle" -- it means Armalite Rifle, as it's a brand -- that is the company Armalite was the one that came up with the civilian, legal, auto-loading rifle fitting this description and pattern.

About 1,000 people, out of 13,000 gun homicides a year, are killed with rifles of all descriptions.  Roughly 100, more or less, are murdered with Armalite Rifle style weapons.

The NY Times and others are arguing for banning something because fewer than 0.0033% of them are criminally misused; all of the rest are owned and used for perfectly-legal purposes by law-abiding Americans.  This is equivalent to arguing for the banning of ownership of pick-up trucks because a religious nut used one to murder people in New York, which I remind you did happen just last year.

In addition about 90 Americans a year are murdered while traveling in Mexico, or about the same number of people killed with Armalite-style rifles (and about the same number murdered in mass-shootings annually too.)  Yet only about 25-30 million Americans visit Mexico a year which means on a per-person basis it's 10 times more dangerous to go to Mexico than it is to go to school, a mall or other place where mass shooting occur (which basically every American does.)  Is anyone seriously considering destroying Mexico for this outrage?  Or shall we talk about the number of illegal invaders that murder Americans every year -- also far more than 100.  May I remind you that the Democrats -- and the "David Hogg" crowd -- are all for those illegal invaders being here, even though they're here illegally, and even though they are responsible for about 22% of all homicides.  Were we to send all of them home every one of those homicides would not happen.

To put numbers on this that amounts to about 4,000 murders a year or some 40 times the number of people killed in mass-shootings.  David Hogg supports the policies that cause every one of those 4,000 murders.  He's a liar and a fraud -- period.

This is not about "common sense" or any other sort of sense.  It is a purely political witch-hunt, promoted with knowing lies and intended to destroy both Constitutional protection of the right to self-defense and your inherent right to life (2nd Amendment) along with the right to not have private property taken or otherwise compromised without compensation and due process of law (5th Amendment.)

In short the argument put forward by the NY Times and others is in fact about the advancement of the intentional destruction of America as a Constitutional Republic.  Such advocacy and intentional falsehoods, along with any attempt to implement same through government demand or even through private enterprise coercion must not stand.

If you believe in America you have a duty to boycott and legally destroy all businesses that take such a position along with legally destroying the political and economic future of any politician or other public employee, whether federal, state or local, along with any "spokesperson" and everyone that benefits from their activity who adopts any such position in any way, shape or form.

To not do so is to flush the Constitution of the United States and indeed our very nation's foundation as a Constitutional Republic down the toilet of history.

Go to responses (registration required to post)

User: Not logged on
Login Register Top Blog Top Blog Topics FAQ
User Info The Dishonest NY Times And Guns in forum [Market-Ticker]
Posts: 148
Incept: 2017-06-26

Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
A really well written article full of good (and factual) points.

As a native New Yorker I can say that the NYT has been the enemy of Liberty (and most especially the Second Amendment) for many decades.

Kiss the bump stocks goodbye. And anybody who is not yet 21 you better buy what you can now. And while you're at it join the NRA or GOA or both.. if you value your gun rights.

In fact, as a long term investment it's not a bad idea to start quietly building a gun collection. Trump won't be around for ever to completely hold back the upcoming massive gun grab....

Yeah, it's only a matter of time. And don't bank on Trump not being a BIG part of the GRAB...
Posts: 109739
Incept: 2007-08-26

East Tennessee Eastern Time
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
Two wildly differing yet very strong ideologies, when forced together and especially when law enforcement and government are on the the side of one, rarely ends well.

VERY apropos ad beneath this article:


It's justifiably immoral to deal morally with an immoral entity.

Festina lente.
Posts: 773
Incept: 2009-07-04

Retired in NC Mountains
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
Maybe it is just me, but the MSM seems to have gone bat-**** crazy pulling out all the stops to turn the USA into a Socialist/Totalitarian country they want control of. You would think with the Internet and people's ability to fact check their lies is would slow them down.

I learned at the end of the Vietnam War the press was leftist and liars because of all my friends returning and telling an entirely different story and my dad being a Libertarian advising me to not believe the MSM. I never trusted them from then on. I liked Reagan because he figured out how to get around them by having a live national broadcast. Once he was gone they refused to broadcast any more when Bush Sr. tried it.

What I failed to grasp was the degree our kids were being brainwashed at school (I never had kids). Now the under 30s actually think Socialism is a good thing and they believe the MSM completely.

With all that being said I am getting the feeling things are speeding up to some type of national crisis. I use to think I would be about to die when things went south (I am 64 now), but the discourse is accelerating and we still have the financial day of reckoning closer than ever. I now believe I will see it all come apart because of stories like this one that flat out lies about checkable facts and 50% of the population will believe the NYT

In all of history, no government became more honest, less corrupt, or respected its citizens' rights more as it grew in size. E.L. 2016
Posts: 5322
Incept: 2010-06-25

Peoples' Republik of Maryland
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
Modern American citizens are so easily duped. They believe the emotional, devoid-of-logic ramblings of the left.

For anyone that wants to discover the truth, this post is a great starting point. But alas, most modern American citizens wouldn't recognize the truth even if it smacked them upside the head like a clue-by-four.

Molon Labe
Where is Henry Bowman when you need him?
How many are willing to pledge this? We mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our Sacred Honor
Posts: 1147
Incept: 2010-03-10

Ventura County, California
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
Maybe it is just me, but the MSM seems to have gone bat-**** crazy pulling out all the stops to turn the USA into a Socialist/Totalitarian country they want control of.

When you consider the corporate consolidation that has gone on with the ownership of the mass media over the past few decades, the end result is not surprising.

This country is run by an amalgamation of corporate skim rackets, its kind of like the Camorra in Italy, but they wear nicer suits and have a softer touch. And this same mob owns most of the media, which they use to frame their exploits in a positive light. The media is nothing more than a 24/7 conduit used for social engineering to minimize any torches and pitchforks attitudes.

Our "representatives" in Congress? They are all bought and paid for by the same mob.

"If you don't have borders... if you don't have laws... you don't have a country."
Posts: 288
Incept: 2008-02-23

Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
A female friend posted this Forbes article on FB this morning.

Advisories released last month by the U.S. State Department tell Americans not to set foot in five Mexican states Sinaloa, Colima, Michoacan, Guerrero and Tamaulipas because of violent crime. Traveling to those states is as dangerous, according to the State Department's safety ratings, as traveling to Afghanistan, Syria and Iraq. And Americans with plans to go to 11 other Mexican states should reconsider, the agency says.

Most recent State Department data may also cause travelers to pause before booking a trip to Mexico. In 2016, according to my analysis of the data, more Americans were reported killed by homicide in Mexico than the combined total of Americans killed by homicide in every other country abroad.

As you might guess it didn't take the trolls long to start accusing her of racism. Facts just don't seem to matter anymore.
Posts: 273
Incept: 2011-06-12

Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
For another example of the leftist lunacy in regards to firearms: several years ago here in MD, the school marm mentality of those in power, made it illegal to buy a modern M-1A made by Springfield yet left it legal to buy an M1 Garand, the "greatest battle implement ever devised" (per Patton). They essentially perform in a similar manner, albeit with slight differences between the .30-06 & .308 Win cartridges. Personally I prefer weapons with wood vs the plastic Mattel guns.

I believe in only one thing: liberty; but I do not believe in liberty enough to want to force it upon anyone. ~ H.L. Mencken
Posts: 5953
Incept: 2007-10-08

Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
Maybe it is because one of them uses a clip and the other does not? LOL
Posts: 5
Incept: 2018-01-29

Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List

Krzelune, when you refer to a clip you mean removable box magazine. That is no doubt why they banned the M1A. The Garand uses a clip to insert a group of rounds from the top. It is awkward and therefore allowed. Now that the M1A is chambered in 6.5 Creedmore I added it to my wish list.

The gun control people are getting more knowledgeable. They are really working up to a full ban of any semi-automatic rife. And pistol too.

I also want to buy a M1 Carbine .30 caliber. And a Browning BAR MK3 DBM (detacable box magazine), now that they have made the rifle with a DBM.

All these are for fun shooting for me and all would be banned under a new assault rife ban even though they are not by definition assault rifles and none have the features of an adjustable stock and pistol grip. The two WWII rifles may come with a flash suppressor depending on model. A flash suppressor alone will ban the rifle. And by the time they get around to the actual wording in the legislation they will ban threaded barrels.
Posts: 3733
Incept: 2008-07-07

Vancouver, WA
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
Judging by how quickly lower receivers sell out... There's far more than 3 million out there.

"The Constitution is the IDE. The 2nd Amendment is the debugger."
Login Register Top Blog Top Blog Topics FAQ