State Senator: If There Are Freeloaders in the US, It's the Top 1...
Kamala Harris Thanks the Leadership of Joe Biden for the Ceasefire and Hostage...
CBS News Says Insurance Rates Are Skyrocketing Because of Climate Change
CNN's Jake Tapper Introduces Biden's Farewell Address With the 'Since the Civil War'...
Trump’s CIA Director Nominee Calls Out Adam Schiff for the Laptop Story
Backstabbing Besties: Jill Biden Mad Nancy Pelosi Choose Money and Power Over Friendship...
COPE and SEETHE: Antifascist Podcaster Is SO MAD About Pete Hegseth He Wants...
Adam Schiff Begs Pam Bondi to Stop Trump Making Fun of His ‘Watermelon...
CNN Poll: Biden Leaves Office With His Approval Rating at Its Lowest
Phase One of Hostage Release to Include TWO of THREE Cherished American Captives...
Try Locking Up the CRIMINALS Instead! Walgreens CEO Says Shoplifting Prevention Led to...
KJP Dismisses State Dept. Spox As 'Random Person' to Avoid Crediting Trump for...
California Dreamin': How the Left Destroyed Life in the Golden State
Karine Jean-Pierre Ends Tenure as Mouthpiece for the King of Lies
CRY HARDER, Chucky! Schumer Warns Trump's Energy Secretary Is a Fossil Fuel Executive...

'Oh, good GRIEF'! This WaPo opinion piece on 'gunsplaining' is 'BEYOND embarrassing'

You know, we were just saying to ourselves that what the gun control debate really needs is a defense of total ignorance on the subject matter. Thankfully, the Washington Post has given ex-Gawker employee Adam Weinstein a platform to do just that:

Advertisement

Oh, FFS.

This piece indeed deserves your derision.

Weinstein writes:

The phenomenon isn’t new, but in the weeks since the tragic shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Fla., a lot of gun-skeptical liberals are getting a taste of it for the first time: While debating the merits of various gun control proposals, Second Amendment enthusiasts often diminish, or outright dismiss their views if they use imprecise firearms terminology. Perhaps someone tweets about “assault-style” weapons, only to be told that there’s no such thing. Maybe they’re reprimanded that an AR-15 is neither an assault rifle nor “high-powered.” Or they say something about “machine guns” when they really mean semiautomatic rifles. Or they get sucked into an hours-long Facebook exchange over the difference between the terms clip and magazine.

Has this happened to you? If so, you’ve been gunsplained: harangued with the pedantry of the more-credible-than-thou firearms owner, admonished that your inferior knowledge of guns and their nomenclature puts an asterisk next to your opinion on gun control.

If only these adversaries were a little more honest, I’ve often thought, and more precise in their language on the subject, we could have a serious debate on the finer points of a gun violence policy, instead of a bad-faith propaganda race.

Gunsplaining, though, is always done in bad faith. Like mansplaining, it’s less about adding to the discourse than smothering it — with self-appointed authority, and often the thinnest of connection to any real fact.

Advertisement

Yep. Weinstein’s problem isn’t people talking out of their asses on guns; it’s people who know what they’re talking about making the ass-talkers look bad.

Just pathetic.

https://twitter.com/LDoren/status/971114497728483334

https://twitter.com/NoahCRothman/status/971119329621225472

Advertisement

No one remotely interested in serious debate should ever take a page from Weinstein’s book.

Advertisement

You’ll have to be content with just imagining. Because they’d never do it. Not in a million years.

Advertisement

Yep.

Almost like liberalism is driven by misinformation and ignorance. Fortunately, there are solutions to this problem:

https://twitter.com/Oil_Guns_Merica/status/971112770807713792

True story.

Do better, WaPo. We know you can.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Twitchy Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement