The journalists who got it wrong about the Good Guy with a Gun

On Sunday, at a mall in Indiana, a mass shooter’s rampage was cut short after he was shot by a Good Guy with a Gun. Yet according to many on the progressive left, the Good Guy with a Gun doesn’t exist: he’s a myth. Therefore, in honor of the Good Samaritan in Indiana, Cockburn presents the top five articles that got it wrong about the Good Guy with a Gun.

Time‘s obligatory post-Uvalde anti-gun article

Time magazine posted a plain rebuttal to the Good Guy with a Gun argument after the Uvalde massacre. Time points out (fairly) all the “good guys with guns” who conveniently showed up at the last minute, i.e. the Uvalde police department and the Parkland security guard who hid when the shooting started. (But then doesn’t that prove that citizens need to be able to defend themselves?)

The obligatory “religious roots” blame-shift from the New York Times

It’s never a proper mainstream media article unless someone is talking about “religious roots” or “so-and-so religious extremism.” Sadly enough, this article only gets the number four spot. Cockburn would have put it higher, but they’re using paywalls to restrict his access, and there’s no way he’s paying to read the Times.

The Conversation suggests racism is responsible for the Good Guy with a Gun argument

In its own piece, The Conversation goes the extra mile. Not only do they examine of the origin of the phrase Good Guy with a Gun, they also accuse it of racism, diving into how pulp novels helped to shape the American consciousness around guns. The point? People so romanticized fiction that it led them to embrace it in real life. Sure, the days of gunslingers and gruff sure-shots are behind us, but if the criminals are still getting guns, don’t regular people need a chance too?

Psychology Today claims you just don’t need a gun to stop a bad guy

You also don’t need sneakers to run, but it sure helps. In this fun little takedown, Psychology Today claims, “[The Good Guy With a Gun claim] is clearly and demonstrably false. It can be refuted by a counterexample in which a bad guy with a gun was stopped by a good woman with a Bible, a Christian book, and the virtues of faith, hope, and love.”

The article refers to an instance in which a murderer surrendered after being encouraged by a woman he’d taken hostage to accept God into his life. While Psychology Today lacks any kind of statistical analysis, it has something better: statistical anomalies!

Vox’s article says, “A child can’t be a ‘good guy with a gun.” (Who was arguing they could?)

Vox thinks Republicans want kids to carry guns. They present (with a straight face) the hypothetical that children could have used guns to stop the Uvalde shooter. While Cockburn understands the need for responsible gun handling and training, the good people at Vox need to understand that elementary schools aren’t self-chaperoned. There are adults there too.

The article goes on to say, “It is an ideology embedded in the very idea of gun rights…a vision that armed citizens, and not the state, represent the ultimate guarantors of freedom and civil peace.”

Cockburn is pretty sure the Constitution guarantees that exact thing.