CLAIM:
Support for Common Sense Gun Legislation Increases When the Public Knows the Facts. And then they recommend the following organizations
- Giffords
- Everytown for Gun Safety
- TheTrace.org
- Gun Violence Archive
- Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Violence Research
REBUTTAL:
Based on independent assessments and fact-checking, these sources have a track record of presenting misleading, exaggerated, or cherry-picked data to support their advocacy for gun control. Here’s why these sources lack full credibility:
1. Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence
🔹 Bias & Misleading Data:
- Rated Left-biased by Media Bias/Fact Check.
- Their legal arguments often misrepresent Supreme Court rulings on gun rights (e.g., Heller v. D.C.).
- Regularly misuse statistics to exaggerate gun violence trends (e.g., counting 18- and 19-year-olds as “children” in gun death stats).
🔹 Example of Misleading Information:
- Giffords claimed “Looser gun laws cause higher homicide rates”, yet FBI Uniform Crime Reports do not show a direct correlation.
- Texas, Utah, and Vermont (pro-gun states) have lower violent crime rates than restrictive states like Maryland, Illinois, and California.
2. Everytown for Gun Safety
🔹 Factual Issues & Exaggerations:
- Rated “Questionable Source” by Media Bias/Fact Check.
- Known for exaggerating school shooting incidents by including accidental discharges, self-defense cases, and non-student-related incidents.
- Frequently inflates mass shooting numbers by counting domestic disputes and gang violence incidents as “mass shootings”.
🔹 Example of False Claims:
- In 2018, PolitiFact debunked Everytown’s school shooting claim, which falsely included incidents like a BB gun breaking a school bus window.
- Their “gun violence archive” includes suicides to inflate firearm-related death counts.
3. The Trace
🔹 Funded by Gun Control Lobbyists:
- Funded by Michael Bloomberg, who also finances Everytown for Gun Safety.
- Presents itself as an “independent newsroom,” yet exclusively supports gun control narratives.
- Does not publish research challenging gun control policies or highlighting defensive gun use.
🔹 Example of Misleading Reports:
- A 2021 report claimed rising gun sales led to increased crime, but FBI data showed no direct link between lawful gun ownership and crime rates.
4. Gun Violence Archive (GVA)
🔹 Data Manipulation Issues:
- GVA has no direct access to law enforcement databases and relies on media reports, leading to duplicated and misclassified incidents.
- Mislabels self-defense cases and police shootings as “gun violence”.
- Inflates numbers by counting suicides as part of “gun violence”, which distorts homicide statistics.
🔹 Example of Misleading Data:
- GVA claimed over 600 mass shootings in 2022, but over 70% were gang-related or domestic disputes—not random public attacks.
5. Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Violence Research
🔹 Heavily Biased & Funded by Gun Control Advocacy Groups:
- Funded by Bloomberg’s public health initiatives, leading to pre-determined pro-gun-control conclusions.
- Selectively publishes only studies supporting gun control while ignoring counter-evidence.
🔹 Example of Cherry-Picked Research:
- A study linked concealed carry laws to increased homicides, but ignored defensive gun use and crime deterrence data.
- Their research omitted FBI data showing that states with higher CCW rates often have lower violent crime rates.
Conclusion: These Sources Push a Political Narrative, Not Neutral Research
- Proven history of misrepresenting statistics (e.g., including suicides in “gun violence” stats).
- Cherry-pick data that supports gun control while ignoring defensive gun use and declining crime rates in pro-gun states.
- Financially backed by Bloomberg & anti-gun organizations, making them advocacy groups, not objective researchers.