I can appreciate the arguments and scientific research compiled to prove the editors' claims, this article certainly is motivated to help readers reach a particular conclusion on the gun control debate and does not provide any evidence or arguments that would support the other side. This is great research, but ultimately I would have preferred an article that addressed more seriously the other side's claims that gun rights are vitally important to protecting our democracy from authoritarianism. I'm not personally taking a side on this issue, but this article is definitely one-sided and is not meant to convince anyone who doesn't already support tighter gun control legislation.

Content is biased against gun ownership and biased for restrictions on gun possession. Uvalde is the latest rallying cry to force vulnerable policy makers into unconstitutional restrictions on citizens rights. Today, Justice Thomas released his framework that gun restrictions may not shift a burden to the citizen to prove their need to bear arms and makes clear to state level legislative bodies to first acknowledge individual rights to bear arms. It is a good day for gun rights, but when rights are abused, they may be revoked. I recommend for future content to look at reckless people rather than inanimate objects as the source of suffering.