Typical Mother Jones Hypocrisy About Mass Shootings: They Just Don’t Get It


If you’re not familiar with the magazine Mother Jones, let me save you some time by summing up their viewpoints: if it is a left-wing political stereotype, then they support it without exception, as far as I can tell. And that means that they hate private ownership of guns.

Unlike what rational and sensible people try to do when they are making a point, Mother Jones can’t seem to get their story straight about what motivates mass shootings. On the one hand, they want to say that mass shootings are often hate crimes (and imply that they usually are hate crimes), but, on the other hand, they say that they can’t tell how many mass shootings are actually hate crimes. Kara Voght, writing for Mother Jones, quotes Shannon Watts of Moms Demand Action who said,

People are fed up with the hateful violence in this country, and the gun violence that is plaguing it.

Of course, this was brought up as a lead in to a discussion of a few mass shootings which actually were targeted towards specific ethnic groups. But, then, Voght goes on to say,


There isn’t a lot of data on how much gun violence is motivated by hate.

In other words, Voght, writing for Mother Jones, is saying, “Mass shootings are typically (probably mostly) hate crimes, but we don’t have any way of knowing if this is really true.”

Typical hypocrisy to promote an agenda without evidence to back their position in an effort to get people reacting emotionally instead of actually thinking through what happened.

Of course, if confronted on this, Voght would say, “But we presented the other side of the argument!” What Voght wouldn’t tell you is that it is the very last paragraph of the article and doesn’t explain the thinking behind the pro-gun argument. That last paragraph is,

Before departing for campaign events in the Midwest, President Donald Trump told reporters that gun laws had “very little to do” with the attack on Tree of Life, and suggested that the shooter, who shot four police officers, might have been stopped by an armed guard.

Voght is implying the four police officers should have been able to stop an active shooter, so an armed guard wouldn’t have made a difference.

What Voght isn’t telling you is that the four police officers who were wounded in stopping that shooter arrived on the scene as he was leaving the building. In other words, he had already killed people before they had even gotten there.

Are we seriously supposed to believe that police officers are somehow going to be able to prevent murder when they can’t be everywhere at once?

It’s typical anti-gunner faulty logic and hypocrisy. Mother Jones needs a dose of the truth instead of continuing to be delusional.



  1. How can you determine a “Hate Crime”? Shooters have many reasons for shooting. Some who were not killed by the first responders, police officers, said they heard voices telling them to go out and kill. I do believe there was a mind control on some of these shooters. So where did the mind control come from? Lets research that and we may find a very interesting culprit.

    • Mary – since virtually all ‘mass’ shooters either are or have recently come off of psychotropic drugs, that might be a likely ‘culprit’ – find out what and why the shooters are being told by their counselors and perhaps a reason might become more apparent.

    • Personal opinion: I think all mass shootings are hate crimes. A few are hate directed at a specific group but most are because the person committing the crime is filled with hate and killing is the way they release that hate.

  2. These mass shooters want to be shot down in cold blood. Get killed, please stay away from me.

  3. In answer to your question, “YES!” We are expected to believe everything that Mother Jones says. (after all, would your mother lie to you?) By the same token, we aren’t supposed to require that whatever we are told, should make sense, or be attributable to a trustworthy source. The salient difference between what we read or hear here, and what they read or heard back in the old USSR, was that skepticism, in Uncle Joe’s backyard, either bought you a ticket to the land of eternally frozen piroshki, or the opportunity to find out if you really do hear the bullet that kills you. But, in the overall, Mother Jones’ intentions are as pure as the driven snow. So, be nice to her……………….or else.

  4. Cops simply cannot be everywhere all of the time. By all accounts the ‘best’ response time known was at the newspaper in Annapolis – on scene in less than ONE minute – and yet the shooter was already done with his killing and wounding. The only ‘response’ time that is truly effective is an armed individual who is actually on site, and even then they can only respond after the shooter makes their first moves. Hoplophobes will never understand nor acknowledge that simple fact.

  5. idiots- dumber than a rock Look ay England they took all guns from private parties AND STILL crime rate is UP and increasing daily

  6. I find the use of the description “Hate Crime” odious and ridiculous. A crime is a crime. You can put lipstick on a pig but that changes nothing. I also find discrimination in sentencing completely unconstitutional. Murder is murder and should be treated equally by the courts. Liberals, quit making excuses for criminals and quit dispensing un equal justice, that is also a crime.

  7. Well if you have some one screaming Allah akbar and either shooting, knifing, bombing or running over people that arent muslim, you can call that a hate crime or just terrorist attack. When you look at the data and see that over 95% of the mass shootings are due to some one that is on a mind or mood altering drug, you can look at the reason why these folks have access to firearms in the first place. When the HIPAA laws went in to effect that took away the ability to put these people on the do not sell list on the background checks. Again the democrats where all for passing that law so we can see where the root cause falls back to. For people who think we have a gun violence problem just know we are number 11 in the world by population and firearms. You have Finland as number 1 and the UK and Australia are ahead of us as well. Wait arent they suppose to be gun free for the most part?

Comments are closed.