Cherry picked and misleadingly presented statistics, or information in general for that matter, is epidemic. Often, even if the information is true, it’s importance or significance is misrepresented. It is to the point now that even the “fact checkers” have emerged as some of the most affective front line soldiers carrying out the assault of disinformation.
Don’t forget that we now live in a world where people argue seriously over weather 2+2 should be viewed as having only one legitimate answer. It speaks very loudly as to how corrupted the representation of even the most basic of information has become.
Then there are the ever-shifted meanings of the very words we use, or, the use of a word that implies much, but says nothing in particular, like “illicit”. It’s clearly used here to " illicit " the idea in the mind of the reader, that these are nefarious items, but one does not actually KNOW what the word is referring too.
One might want to go so far as to ask if the total number of " guns " sited in the article might possibly include BB guns, rubber band guns, or some other irrelevant category of “gun”. The epidemic of lying has gotten that bad.
Regardless, to Highlight how many guns may be in America, is to highlight an aspect of the subject that is not nearly as relevant, or important, as other aspects. It’s like highlighting the number of cars in America, when the vastly more important and impactful issues are things like texting while driving,
The key to success is correctly identifying what’s true and relevant, while a key to deception is to draw the eye away from the true and relevant, and get it drawn to some other “shiny object” that distracts the attention away from what really matters.
To me, the number of guns per capita in America is one such “shiny object” that draws the attention away to something that feels sensational and shocking, but that is easily manipulated to misrepresent the subject and is, in fact, not at the heart of the issues that are most relevant, or important.
Of uppermost importance to the issue of gun ownership in America, for example, is WHY we have the right to bear arms in the first place, and, the true affects, in proper context, of the loss of such a right, be it by overt removal, or affective nullification.
No one I have heard of is trying to ban cars, or driving, because of all the horrific tragedies resulting from drunk driving or texting, there the efforts focus on the bad behavior of the drivers, and not on vilifying cars or car owners in general. Since a person can only drive one car at a time, it little matters how many cars a driver owns when it comes to the tragedies, what matters is how they use it.
And in that light, perhaps it is msn who should be held up to due scrutiny for the way they wield the awesomely powerful, and arguably very dangerous ( when misused ) tool they employ every day .
Just imagine if, like the owner of a gun, msn were held legally liable for everything that resulted from shooting off of an article, all the way to the end point where the article came to a full and complete stop. In other words, what if they were held to the same standard gun owners were for any discharge of the power of the press?