While he started with some wonderfully logical points, the writer broke down and relied only upon some misinformation, miscategorizations, and inaccuracies at the end. Had he stayed the course he could have made a compelling argument for his viewpoints.
The descent into typical talking points and arguments against the 2nd amendment instead of the same analysis he brought to the first few paragraphs.
In the beginning there was a coherent and emotionless argument analysed. In the end, an emotional rant without any supporting facts, all opinion.
The Author should differentiate between facts and fictions and opinions. "Assault Rifle" is a term coined by the media, not an actual description of the weapons used in recent shootings. Also, no "Automatic" weapons were used, nor are any weapons used in these actually military weapons- rather they are simply hunting caliber semi automatic weapons that are modified to LOOK like a military weapon.
If proponents of gun control would simply admit this portion of the debate ahead of time and stop using inflammatory and pejorative sentences and words designed to frighten readers/listeners genuinely honest debate can ensue about reasonable measures being taken to better equip society in limiting access by the mentally ill to weapons that can be used to harm multiple people in short time frames- which would include chemicals, explosives, and arson tools as well I would imagine, if the debate is to be genuine.
Stephen King is one of my favorite authors, and I immensely enjoyed this essay. His candor throughout was refreshing, and the narrator did a wonderful job of conveying King's signature delivery. Overall, it's a worthwhile listen on a very important subject. But only open-minded people need apply.
Say something about yourself!
It is good to hear an opinion expressed this clearly on suck a pivotal issue.
When he talks about pulling the novel Rage. I also enjoyed the rant about everyone just waiting to speak- not listening- priceless.
How uncompromising we Americans really are.
New grandpa. Married 35 great years. Drink Batch 19,Tsing Tao, and Bohemia. Read Card, King, Hobb, Sawyer, Sci-Fi, Historical Fiction.
King uses his talents at storytelling and facts to make his suggestions. He makes some good points, all of which you have heard before, only he does use several facts that back up his statements. King is a liberal and a gun owner. I am a conservative and not a gun owner for those who like to paint everyone with a wide brush.
Chances are he is not going to change anybody's mind in this divided country, but I appreciate the try and it was entertaining on top of everything else.
The narrator was excellent and added to the understanding of the essay.
At first I thought I was going to be annoyed, however King came out blazing with both guns so to speak! (no pun intended) He spoke of the ridiculousness of the left and the right. He spoke with undeniable truth, that people on both sides of the issue will deny as they normally do. However it is still truth!
People on both sides are already bashing him, but not me I commend him for his candor. I would recommend this to anyone on either side of the issue. A great listen with very good reasonable solutions. (and yes I too am a gun owner) (but king is right!) Facts are facts no matter how big of a temper tantrum someone throws! If you don't like what king has to say you are the exact person who needs to hear this!
Thank you Stephen King for voicing a true "middle of the road" approach to the gun control argument. Too many people are willing to take an either/or approach, when simple common sense could prevail. I too have one foot (partially) placed in the Red where I was raised, and the other planted in the Blue. I think I shall remain Purple from now on.
King writes a very persuasive argument that doesn't really steer to either the left or the right. A lot of factual information and hard common sense. He doesn't propose a simple solution, but does put forth realistic steps that could be taken. I can't say I disagree with his ideas or conclusion as it's presented, either. I'm not sure all of his figures are accurate (I'm referring to the Australian solution; not saying it's wrong, but I'd like to see more data studies to prove the correlation), but surely something to this effect needs to be done.
I think this is just one issue that needs to be addressed, however. This might very well help limit the lone crazed gunman scenarios we've been having, and we definitely do need to do something there. And I know it's another subject, but we also need to do something about the gun-based gang violence in this country, which accounts for a lot of the homicides going on. And none of these proposed solutions are going to affect that problem, unfortunately. We cannot just accept that those are part of our society any more than the lone gunman scenarios are.
Hoosier transplanted in Virginia Beach who is a fan of good books and travel.
Stephen King's assessment of this difficult subject was intelligent and balanced, in spite of his obvious passion on the subject.
This 47 minute essay may not change minds, but does ask us to pause and consider. That is what writers do. They ask us to think.
The narrator did a convincing job of reading Stephen King's words, in fact, I did not previously realize that it was not read by the author himself.
Although his position on gun control was evident, and it was clearly written soon after Sandy Hook, his understanding of and empathy for gun owners is obvious. He is a gun owner himself. This is a thoughtful and thought provoking essay.
Yes. Interesting and well written.
Stephen King because of his excellent writing.
Excellent voice acting.
All of it was excellent
Only heard the audio version
Only the ones who can tolerate listening to an alternate viewpoint.
A liberal's view on why the 2nd amendment should be repealed.
Overall an excellent perspective from a rational liberal (yes they actually do exist - LOL!). There is considerable foul language in this audio book but it is part of artistic nature of this essay. It is used for shock value to emphasize points the author is attempting to get across. Although I disagree with both his conclusions and selected use of data, the author makes some interesting points. There are a number of times throughout the essay where the author displays his ignorance on some basics of firearms. The clip/ magazine terminology is one. The intentionally inaccurate and derogatory of automatic weapons vs. semi-automatic.is another annoying thing. His focus only on "gun violence" vs "non-gun violence" grossly mis-characterizes the point on the argument of "culture of violence". There is more to violence than just firearms.
As the point of this review is to deal with the art vs. the facts, I will stop here and recommend that both blue bloods and red necks take 45 minutes and listen to Mr. King's thoughts on this topic.