{"id":80250,"date":"2018-06-30T08:12:18","date_gmt":"2018-06-30T12:12:18","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/valorguardians.com\/blog\/?p=80250"},"modified":"2018-06-30T08:17:42","modified_gmt":"2018-06-30T12:17:42","slug":"andrea-mitchell-gunsplaining","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.azuse.cloud\/?p=80250","title":{"rendered":"Andrea Mitchell Gunsplaining"},"content":{"rendered":"

A few weeks ago, we were lectured by the media<\/a> about trying to be too specific in regards to the discussion of guns in American society. They called it “gunsplaining”. <\/p>\n

Gunsplaining, though, is always done in bad faith. Like mansplaining, it\u2019s less about adding to the discourse than smothering it \u2014 with self-appointed authority, and often the thinnest of connection to any real fact. <\/p><\/blockquote>\n

We were too picky about the difference between a clip and a magazine. We were too eager to point and laugh about the “thing in the back that goes up” and “full semi-automatic” <\/p>\n

So, the media has taken the lead in explaining to us ignorant folks about guns;<\/p>\n

\n

.@PeteWilliamsNBC<\/a> on the weapon used in the newsroom shooting: a shotgun is like a backwards funnel, you don\u2019t have to have direct aim to hurt a lot of people. It was purchased legally. #AMR<\/a><\/p>\n

— Andrea Mitchell (@mitchellreports) June 29, 2018<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n