Here are some of the most uninformed gun control tweets from social media I have come across, and why they’re all false.
U can STOP calling yourself "prolife" when all u ever do is cut food-aid/healthcare, execute inmates, block gun control, & send kids to war.
— #NotMyPresident (@nycjaneyvee) February 14, 2014
Consoled to see the US Bishops support gun control as a pro-life issue. When I said this after Newtown many objected http://t.co/Aj72g69rP4
— James Martin, SJ (@JamesMartinSJ) April 5, 2013
Myth #1: Gun control is pro-life.
Fact #1: How is it pro-life? You’re entitled to your own opinions, but not your own facts. The stats prove otherwise. There’s no correlation between more gun control and lower crime rates. In fact, it is always the opposite that holds true in any country: Higher gun ownership results in lower crime.
In fact, a Harvard study has concluded that gun bans do not decrease murder rates:
The Harvard study attempts to answer the question of whether or not banning firearms would reduce murders and suicides. Researchers looked at crime data from several European countries and found that countries with HIGHER gun ownership often had LOWER murder rates.
The study revealed several European countries with significant gun ownership, like Norway, Finland, Germany and France – had remarkably low murder rates. Contrast that with Luxembourg, “where handguns are totally banned and ownership of any kind of gun is minimal, had a murder rate nine times higher than Germany in 2002.
People keep tweeting at me how much they love abortions, higher taxes and gun control. Me too, guys, me too.
— Lucas Neff (@RealLucasNeff) November 5, 2014
And Lucas Neff, who Twitchy has made more famous than his own acting career, is one of those anti-gun advocates who will admit he loves abortions too. It’s disturbing he doesn’t even want to attempt to reduce abortions. But should we be surprised? This is coming from an anti-gun advocate, in which logic isn’t on their side.
The only purpose of a gun is to kill. The single purpose of creating a gun culture is to sell guns by the millions. #GunControl
— #ResistOften (@Rain95Mizz) March 30, 2014
Myth #2: The only purpose of a gun is to kill.
Fact #2: Hardly! Guns are used for self-defense, to reduce crime, as has been proven, target practice, hunting, and even those who want to create a gun collection. And what about cars, axes, baseball bats, knives, scissors, and spoons? All of these objects have been used to kill, but should we ban all of them? Absolutely not, because we know that 99% of owners are law-abiding citizens who use them for their correct purpose. And so is the case with a gun.
Despite the Harvard study, gun grabbers are now trying to use a bogus Stanford study, claiming that right to carry gun laws are being linked to an increase in crime.
— Stanford University (@Stanford) December 31, 2014
However, guess who co-authored this so-called research? John J. Donohue III, a Stanford law professor who is no stranger to supporting the anti-2nd Amendment agenda for years.
In 2003, the Buckeye Firearms Association “published a Capital University professor David Mayer’s response to a letter to the Columbus Dispatch editor from anti-gun extremist John J. Donohue III, and wondered aloud of the Dispatch would have the courage to print it.”
Here are the first two paragraphs of Mayer’s response:
The recent letter by Stanford law professor John Donohue (June 7) nicely illustrates the propensity of gun-control advocates to play games with statistics and to engage in ad hominem attacks. In this case, Professor Donohue unfairly attacks economist John Lott, whose research has helped dispell the myths about guns that anti-gun fanatics continue to propogate.
Professor Donohue’s own study, which purports to show an increase in crime after concealed-carry laws are enacted, is itself “fatally flawed,” to use his own terminology. John Lott’s new book, The Bias Against Guns, on pages 235-39 discusses the problems with the way Donohue and his co-author, Ian Ayres, have manipulated the statistics. As Lott shows, even Donohue’s and Ayres’ own results show that violent crime rates fall after right-to-carry laws are adopted.
The site, Crime Prevention Research Center, also responded to the so-called study from Donohue, pointing out how these anti-gun advocates have manipulated data to support their false claim that more guns equate to more crime.
Of course, what would a discussion on the 2nd Amendment be without Piers Morgan?
Remember, @Walmart won't stock Kinder Surprise chocolate eggs because they're a health hazard – but stocks vast walls of assault rifles.
— Piers Morgan (@piersmorgan) December 31, 2014
On New Year’s Eve, he just had to tweet about dangerous ‘assault rifles’ being in stock.
Myth #3: Nobody should own an ‘assault rifle’.
Fact #3: What is an ‘assault rifle’?? There’s no such thing because it was an invented term from anti-gun advocates to make the gun sound scarier. These folks don’t realize that an overwhelming majority of gun crime is used by handguns.
So there you have it for some of the craziest tweets on guns. These talking points they use aren’t new, but it is so important that we have the facts to respond to their false claims. There’s a reason more Americans support the right to bear arms: Because there’s more good that comes from guns than the evil that comes from it used by criminals. We can never sit back and take the 2nd Amendment for granted because there are individuals from every generation that continue to try taking our guns away, and it is up to us to stand up, stay informed and never show apathy.