PoliZette: The New York Times “dishonest” response to President Trump

Dr. John Lott was among the people interviewed by the PoliZette about the latest anti-self-defense editorial by the New York Times.  Their editorial was responding to President Trump’s Tweet: “Do you notice we are not having a gun debate right now? That’s because they used knives and a truck!”  The part of the PoliZette piece quoting Lott read as follows:

. . . “It’s hard to take The New York Times seriously on gun control,” said John Lott, president of the Crime Prevention Research Center, who noted that even European countries with strict anti-gun laws have been unable to protect themselves from radical Islamic terrorists with guns.

“You look at … all the mass public shootings that Europe has had — France already has those types of regulations [that President Obama wanted] on private transfers on guns … it didn’t stop their attack,” Lott told LifeZette.

“In one year, 2015, France had more deaths from mass public shootings … than the United States had in eight years during the Obama administration. They had a total of 532 casualties from mass public shootings in 2015,” said Lott. “Over the entire eight years of the Obama administration we had casualties from mass public shootings of 527.”

“So a country that’s less than one fifth of the population of the United States had more casualties in one year than the United States had in eight years,” Lott continued. “And France has a ban essentially on semi-automatic guns. The attacks that were done there were done with machine guns, automatic.”

Despite the facts, The Times’ editorial board would have its readers quake in fear over the fact that America’s lack of restrictions on private gun sales were “described in how-to detail in the propaganda magazine Rumiyah that ISIS publishes for potential terrorists.”

“There, readers are informed, entirely accurately, that in America identification requirements are virtually nonexistent for buying military-style weapons from private sellers online or at weekend gun shows where there is no federal jurisdiction,” it writes.

Of course, issues of Rumiyah have also extolled the benefits of knife and vehicular attacks — and The Times has yet to run a single op-ed or editorial calling for restrictions on either of those.

“It’s typical for The New York Times,” said Lott. “They don’t care … if they have anything right. They just care about whether it supports their political views or not.”