In response to:

Tilting the Newtown 'Conversation'

Macroman Wrote: Dec 21, 2012 6:54 AM
"...with pundits hysterical, naive or both." And also almost always ignorant of the facts pertaining to the issue, such as the difference between automatic and semi-automatic guns, high-powered hunting rifles versus low-powered "assault weapons," studies showing that concealed weapons laws reduce crime, studies showing that banning guns increases the probability of gun violence at those locations, the experiences of other countries with more restrictive gun laws than ours, etc., etc. The so-called pundits usually are not at all learned or expert (which is what pundit means) in anything but rather are clueless ignoramuses best described as windbags.
rhinegarten Wrote: Dec 21, 2012 7:30 AM
On the other hand, it's hard for me to believe that they are not willingly ignorant, especially when it comes to the subject of firearms. It also leads me to believe that they aren't very well versed on other subjects. Their opinions, as far as I'm concerned, are pretty much worthless.
It's too hard to try and make sense of a senseless event. Adam Lanza's merciless slaughter in Connecticut has forced everyone with a microphone to insist we have a "national conversation" about why this happens.

But this urgent need to talk is not an excuse for a reckless discussion. Sadly, that is where we're headed, with pundits hysterical, naive or both.

Predictably most in the media went straight to the Left's Alpha and Omega: blaming excessive "access" to guns. It was also an excuse to open fire on the National Rifle Association. For example, author Joyce Carol Oates...

Sunday, May 19 | 06:32 AM ET
Sunday, May 19 | 06:32 AM ET
Sunday, May 19 | 06:32 AM ET
Sunday, May 19 | 06:32 AM ET