http://professional.wsj.com/article...178156938.html?mod=WSJPRO_hps_MIDDLEForthNews
The writer makes many good points and a few points that made me raise my eyebrows but they were reasoned points. Overall a good article in my opinion. Your particular mileage may vary.
I think he gets off to a pretty bad start when he says the NRA has been screaming its head off since Sandy Hook. The screaming I hear is from gun control advocates like Dianne Feinstein, Piers Morgan, Barack Obama, Bill Clinton, and the hypocritical Hollywood left.
His saying that the NRA doesn't speak for the country's 100 million gun owners because there are only four million NRA members is like me saying Obama isn't president of a country of 315 million people because only 60 million people voted for him.
I also find it difficult to believe that 1/3 people in the US own a gun, considering that nearly 25% of that 315 million is under the age of 18, and over half of the population is female. Yes, I know women own guns too, but certainly not a high percentage of them. But I digress...
When we have to debate obviously false statements like that, and the even more idiotic "There are the tens of thousands of shootings every year by people who aren't criminals until they pick up a gun," we run out of time to go to our state capitol and debate the merits of restricting magazine capacity and draconian registration requirements and fees.
He argues that the NRA is somehow wrong in its belief that stand together or hand separately philosophy, that supporting an undefined "wider community of gun owners" is akin to all gun owners sharing responsibility for the negative results of irresponsible gun use. The leap in logic is most likely too great for him to explain in a small article. Maybe the book he's selling is going to be big enough for him to do a better job.
He also does a pretty bad job of explaining how the NRA's numerous training and safety programs are not enough, and that they need to promote people acting badly with guns if they want to keep further gun control regulations from being passed.
If he made any resonable points in the article, they might have been buried in the falsehoods and unsupportable, illogical statements in which he surrounded them. Oh, yeah, when was it socially acceptable to smoke inside another person's house without permission, or to make lascivious comments about underage girls?