This article is depressingly flawed from its very premise. The author is upset that Teen Vogue is, in their view, being too one-sided on the topic of gun reform. So in response, she…wrote another obstinately one-sided and painfully partisan op-ed, using misleading statistical practices and embracing intellectual dishonesty.
It’s nonsense like this that just perpetuates the same stubbornly binary perspectives that lead to “one-sided” arguments being printed in Teen Vogue in the first place. Two diametrically opposed opinions do not constitute a “conversation.” They create a conflict. The author of this NRA article doesn’t even address the content of the original op-ed that made her so upset; she just wanted to assert her stubborn opinion and have it heard and respected.
If the author actually interested in finding a solution to gun violence and the country’s polarized opinions on all things firearm-related, she would employ empathy and seek common ground by addressing the “opposition’s” specific points and concerns, and offering an alternative perspective on them without disregarding the original perspective as ridiculous or irreconcilable.
Instead, the author here has only one point: she likes guns. Okay, cool. Fine. You do you. But there’s more to the actual conversation than “guns are the best ever!” vs “all guns are evil and should be gathered up and melted down.” Reality does not function in that kind of overly-simplistic binary, not unless you’re a radical who’s more concerned with power than actual community or safety — you know, like the NRA. This is just their desperate attempt to appeal to the Teen Vogue crowd through their typical tactics of pettiness, fear-mongering, and obstinance.