No source citations. Author pulling "facts" out of his....
I'm just going to give ONE example of his lies -- hiding behind the typical Liberal "journalist's" "according to a source" nonsense. He words the "fact" in a certain way. The author hopes it'll be taken by readers as he's stated it, not as the source presented it.
Blair:
We also have a lot of guns in the islands. A recent Hawaii Legislative Reference Bureau study roughly estimated that “there were 2 million guns on the islands,
which have a population of just 1.4 million,” Vice reported in August.
The article he linked (an AP piece), has the HEADLINE: "Study: Number of registered guns in Hawaii
unknown"
Within that same article, they stated:
"The state attorney general’s office counted nearly 450,000 new firearm registrations from 2007 to 2017, according to the study. The office “cautiously” estimated that Hawaii has about 2 million privately owned guns.
“Police departments’ firearm registration records date back to at least the 1920s, and it would be a
monumental task of limited practical value to determine which persons and firearms still exist in Hawaii,”
the office said the report.
Hence, the TRUTH is, nobody knows how many guns physically exist in Hawaii. The TRUTH is, the estimates are based on registrations going back many decades. The TRUTH is the number could be magnitudes smaller, since they don't have a count of the number of NEW registrations versus multiple registrations on the same gun. The TRUTH is, there are lots of unregistered guns here, including legally owned (pre-1994) and illegally.
To put out that number of 2 million guns, or any number, is 100% dishonest. "The office “cautiously” estimated that Hawaii has about 2 million privately owned guns." So, instead of saying "we don't know," he's providing a number he hopes (knows) makes his next point:
That explains in part why there are often so many bills introduced at the Legislature each year regarding weapons.
Rather than breaking down and discussing WHY he concluded "that explains the large number of bills regarding weapons," he leaves the reader to connect the dots.
Again, a dishonest tactic to preset unconnected facts and non-facts so the reader agrees with the author's conclusions. This is no different than presenting "rate of gun deaths" in Hawaii with "relative strictness of gun laws in Hawaii" and saying one causes the other with no evidence to that effect.
One could just as easily explain the large number of gun bills in this particular year by saying we've seen an increase in the frequency (not necessarily the raw number) of NEWS REPORTS of gun-related crimes this past year. Doesn't mean the stat is on the rise, just that the public perception it may be rising has become a problem for officials.
So, yeah, that's just one instance of where the author cherry-picked a few sources to validate his unsupportable conclusion so he might influence the reader.
Propaganda.