Sunday morning, a shooter opened fire at the West Freeway Church of Christ in the Fort Worth, Texas, suburb of White Settlement, killing two people. Two members of the church security team quickly took aim at the shooter, with one of them subduing him. The shooter ultimately died of his injuries.
The man who took the shooter down is, by all accounts, a hero. Well, by all accounts except maybe the Expert’s. The Washington Examiner’s Jerry Dunleavy combed through some of Tom Nichols’ greatest hits for a look at how America’s Expert would feel about all this:
— JERRY DUNLEAVY (@JerryDunleavy) December 30, 2019
— JERRY DUNLEAVY (@JerryDunleavy) December 30, 2019
Statistically, if you think you're carrying to stop another church massacre, it's stupid.
— Tom Nichols (@RadioFreeTom) November 17, 2017
If you have reasons to carry, fine by me. "Because there was a shooting in a church in Texas" is not a rational reason.
— Tom Nichols (@RadioFreeTom) November 6, 2017
If you think you are genuinely in danger from a future mass shooting in a church, you're on my turf of "too dumb to understand math"
— Tom Nichols (@RadioFreeTom) November 6, 2017
There’s plenty more where that came from (you can see Dunleavy’s timeline if you’re interested), but you get the idea. Needless to say, Nichols doesn’t appreciate how poorly his tweets have aged, and he definitely doesn’t appreciate Dunleavy pointing that out:
As you see, @JerryDunleavy believes that a shooting in a church means that my piece about not carrying guns to church is wrong. Jerry is the kind of person I wrote a book about, the sort who buys travel insurance at the airport because he saw a news report about a plane crash. /1 https://t.co/YySrkNCb8R
— Tom Nichols (@RadioFreeTom) December 30, 2019
This is because people who believe that low-probability events are more common than they are latch on to every example of a low-probability event as proof. It's called "confirmation bias." It';s dumb, but very human. /2
— Tom Nichols (@RadioFreeTom) December 30, 2019
Jerry's the guy who sees a plane go down and says: "See. Should've driven. Or taken that insurance thing they sell at the gate." So it goes.
For those of you who'd like to read the piece from the @latimes, it's here:https://t.co/FM2M0fcNF5
/3x
— Tom Nichols (@RadioFreeTom) December 30, 2019
So True Conservative™. Much Expert™.
What?
— Stephen Miller (@redsteeze) December 30, 2019
Tom what are you doing
— Lyndsey Fifield (@lyndseyfifield) December 30, 2019
I don’t think he even knows…
— mwarner95 (@mwarner95) December 30, 2019
He’s just winging it at this point. Throw BS at the wall and hope it sticks.
So your argument is that it is "dumb" to react to low-probability events like mass shootings by carrying guns to church as a form of protection, but spot on to react to those same exact events by making it harder for law-abiding citizens to get guns?
Makes perfect sense. https://t.co/t2J3XRc0t9 pic.twitter.com/E6oEPx0erF
— (((AG))) (@AGHamilton29) December 30, 2019
The people carrying a gun quite literally stopped a massacre and this isn’t the first time. You have no case. Sit this one out Tom.
— ??? ? (@infobee) December 30, 2019
He can’t.
From a person who attends shul regularly, I believe your piece is divorced from reality. Houses of worship are soft targets, and if we learn nothing from recent events, guns can possibly save you from other guns, machetes, and the like. https://t.co/RWwrYPajtX
— Erielle Davidson (@politicalelle) December 30, 2019
The obvious flaw here is that people who pay for travel insurance are trading money for protection from a low-probability event.
Carrying a gun responsibly costs you nothing. And as we saw today, it can save many lives if a rare event like a mass shooting occurs.
Take the L. https://t.co/SAidL2M925
— James Hasson (@JamesHasson20) December 30, 2019
People choose contingent protection not because they have an irrational and "stupid" sense of statistics. To believe that, you have to construct a caricature, which is what you've done to make your case: the terrified, mouth breather. 1/
— Bryan S. Myrick (@BryanMyrick) December 30, 2019
In fact, most are knowingly mitigating an unlikely event that nevertheless has a very high penalty. They know that in the unlikely event that the hell happens, they can't plead to the math gods and Tom Nichols to restore the odds of the new scenario back to their favor. 2/end
— Bryan S. Myrick (@BryanMyrick) December 30, 2019
Exactly.
No matter your faith, never let anyone shame you for wanting to be able to defend your house of worship. https://t.co/JudoBQhxw8
— JERRY DUNLEAVY (@JerryDunleavy) December 30, 2019
And remember, don't fly. Planes crash. Be in control on that next trip across country, and drive. Much safer. https://t.co/3I6hhaFImp
— Tom Nichols (@RadioFreeTom) December 30, 2019
Tom’s used to not looking great. What’s sad is that he apparently doesn’t mind making a complete ass of himself.
“As you see, my piece advocating for doing the exact opposite thing that saved dozens of lives was really cool and righteous and I’m totally not owned yet again”
— Adam Trahan (@AdamTrahan) December 30, 2019
Tom, just take the L. That’s all that’s left at this point.
— Sean Agnew (@seanagnew) December 30, 2019
Expertise is dead. It just died. RIP. https://t.co/YpMmRDEIdu
— David Edward ? (@_David_Edward) December 30, 2019
***
Related: