In a digital age with an overwhelming amount of information, it is imperative that those who absorb said information know how to think critically about it. There are more news outlets than ever before "now that anyone with a computer can claim to be 'doing journalism'" (Kovach and Rosenstiel 16), posing as authoritative voices while acting as spokespeople for corporate interests and political allegiances. Examples of this are evident in the arrival of hobbyists like Morgan Richmond who trade context for confirmation bias and entrepreneurs like Adam Nicoloff and Terry Littlepage trading truth for profit. Knowing who or what to trust has become an increasingly difficult proposition. News literacy is the tool we can use to gauge trustworthiness, giving us guidelines with which we are free to decide what information to accept and which to reject. Without it, we would be overwhelmed by information, more prone to cognitive dissonance, governed by falsehoods, opinions and "alternative facts," without the agency to challenge them.
The issue of gun control is one that demands this kind of literacy. In the aftermath of recent mass shootings like those in Parkland, Las Vegas, and San Bruno, the debate over gun control has once again taken center stage in the national spotlight. This essay explores how gun regulations are a necessity to reduce school shootings while exploring the concepts of news literacy. Those concepts will be used to examine the available data on firearm-related fatalities and how it supports regulations. It will also analyze the strength, weaknesses and journalistic merit of various forms of media reporting on the issue. There are shortcomings in the data available: it is limited and can be outdated, as well as lacking in real-world examples of how these regulations would impact school shootings, offering mostly inferences and hypotheticals. Roadblocks such as the Dickey and Tiahrt Amendments have cut off funding for research and restrict private researchers, local law enforcement agencies and the public from the data (Linskey). However, the data that is observable offers a compelling link between gun control and a reduction in gun-related homicides that makes the hypotheticals worth exploring as potential solutions.
The data from a recent JAMA Internal Medicine study, as featured in Sean Gregory and Chris Wilson's writing for Time, stands out. It found a correlation between states with "strong firearms laws ... such as background checks for all private sales and restrictions on multiple purchases, were associated with lower rates of gun homicides" (Gregory and Wilson). Gregory and Wilson also provide data from two other studies that support this correlation. A 2014 study in the Journal of Urban Health found a link between the 2007 repeal of permit-to-purchase handgun laws in Missouri and a 25% increase in firearms homicide rates (Gregory and Wilson). A 2017 National Bureau of Economic Research working paper found a similar increase. It estimated that a decade "after the adoption of right-to-carry laws, violent crime is 13% to 15% higher than it would have been without those policies" (Gregory and Wilson).
Gregory and Wilson also provide data on Gun Violence Restraining Orders, which would temporarily remove guns from individuals who demonstrate warning signs and have gained traction as a solution following the incident in Parkland. The law has support from conservatives who have expressed concern over laws that they fear would infringe on 2nd amendment rights. It would also address the FBI’s failure to act on warning signs demonstrated by Parkland shooter Nikolas Cruz (French). The statistics "suggests that these orders save lives" (Gregory and Wilson). A 2017 study found that every 10 to 20 gun seizures in Connecticut prevented a suicide and a California law has issued 20 restarting orders since December.
Robert Gebelhoff's opinion piece for the Washington Post also cites the same Connecticut data, providing “estimates that the law averted 72 suicide attempts through 2013 from being fatal." Gebelhoff's writing also provides an example of data specific to school shootings, with a July 2004 study by the United States Secret Service and United States Department of Education indicating that 68 percent of them "are perpetrated by shooters who obtain a gun from their homes or the homes of relatives" (Gebelhoff). With this in mind, the data presented becomes more pertinent to the discussion of school shootings. Gebelhoff argues that setting age limits on all guns may prove effective in offsetting the ease of obtaining guns. A 2012 survey of inmates published by The BMJ suggests that "a minimum age requirement of 21 could have prohibited gun possession in 17 percent of cases in which people legally owned a gun and used it to commit a crime" (Gebelhoff).
These pieces come from well renowned, long-standing, award-winning journalistic institutions, which provides a good starting point for reliable news. That is not to say this is a fool-proof method, as these institutions may have their Millers and Blairs to undermine their legacies, so any article must stand up evaluation using IMVAIN. Multiple sources are used to illustrate the effectiveness of gun control across several cities and years. The sources corroborate one another and when put together with other articles, further corroborating other writing on gun control. The authors are independent of these sources and use them to verify their claims and support their headline, rather than make assertions. The sources are authoritative, ranging from researchers and in epidemiology, criminology, law and society and even the United States Secret Service and Department of Education. Finally, the sources are named, with the institutions behind the studies identified, often with links provided (Gebelhoff's piece excels in this aspect, while Gregory and Wilson's has room for improvement, with some specifics unclear without independently researching the studies).
Shifting focus, we can look at gun control from the perspective of smaller, local news and move from pieces that rely on the expertise of others as evidence to original, investigative journalism. Austin Jenkins' investigation for KING 5 News in 2016 found a lack of an appropriate prosecution of nearly 4,00 background check denials in Washington. The following year, a "lie and try law" passed led to 300 referrals to local police out of 1,700 background check denials, including one attempted purchase of an AR-15 (Jenkins). Jenkins' efforts and the subsequent publishing of his work displays the press as part of "the Fourth Estate," embodying another of Kovach and Rosenstiel's fundamental principles of journalism as "an independent monitor of power" (171). We find Jenkins serving "the public’s need for information concerning public welfare," (Kovach and Rosenstiel 172) in this case, the shortcoming of local authorities and its impact on firearms landing in the hands of felons.
In contrast, Ken Paxton's opinion piece for The Hill falls apart under the same kinds of evaluation. Paxton writes in a way that attempts to pass assertion as fact. One example, "teachers and students feel — and in fact are — safer coming into work" (Paxton). While Paxton might say "in fact," he is speaking on behalf of a group that he is not a part of while offering no sourcing as to how he would know this information. He also argues that the only sensible gun control in schools is arming teachers, stating "Texas has already proven the effectiveness of school marshals" (Paxton). He uses Texas as a measure of all school marshals without source, a departure from the multiple sourcing that made the previous pieces hold up when evaluated using IMVAIN. This statement also ignores relevant news stories about a teacher at Seaside High School in California who had accidentally discharged his weapon and injured a student a month earlier (Larson). Another teacher at Stoneman Douglas would leave his loaded gun in a beach bathroom a little less than three weeks later after Paxton’s piece was published, allowing a homeless man to obtain it and discharge it into a wall (Chappell). This disregard brings to mind Brent Cunningham's writing on objectivity and demonstrates Paxton’s lack of it: "Objectivity is seeing the world as it is, not how you wish it were.”
What is dangerous about The Hill's publication of Paxton's writing is its reach, with a print circulation of above 24,000, being read by "Congressional offices, the White House, political pundits, association executives, lobbyists and corporate leaders" (Perks). While it claims "non-partisan coverage of all factors in legislative decisions," (Perks), there are clear signs that Paxon's writing has an allegiance. Paxton is a registered Republican, but beyond that, he offers one source when brushing off debates on semi-automatic weapons because "a private citizen heroically stopped the fleeing shooter of the First Baptist Church in Sutherland Springs using an AR-15." The source is The Blaze , the conservative network founded by Glenn Beck, who once suggested: "Obama 'will slowly and surely take away your gun'" (Avalon 121). He also curiously tags his article with "Donald Trump," before even "Gun Violence." These signs seem to suggest Paxton being closer to a wingnut. That said, the issue alone is not Paxton's political affiliation, as "being impartial or neutral is not a core principle of journalism" (Kovach and Rosenstiel 140).
Paxton is the Texas Attorney General. With this information, we know that Paxton cannot be independent. His position gives him the power to issue legal opinions that directly affect the state’s gun legislation that he's arguing as effective, seen in churches (Barragán) and universities (Watkins and Collier). "Journalists must maintain an independence from those they cover" (Kovach and Rosenstiel 142). Paxton violates this principle of journalism. The Hill has published something that is not verifiable as true or accurate and is not independent but to the White House, whose current administration threatens journalism. While Paxton headline suggests "Look to Texas for a Proven Template to Combat School Shootings," his lack of journalistic reliability suggests we look elsewhere.
While the GVROs and try and lie laws mentioned earlier have done well to offer gun reform options that are supported on both sides, the decision to arm teachers has not been as well received as Paxton's writing suggests. The students of Parkland expressed renewed ire for the decision through social media in the wake of news that the NRA would not allow firearms or other weapons at Vice President Mike Pence convention speech, which is consistent with gun regulations at the White House, Mar-a-Lago, and the US Capitol Building. The Secret Service will be responsible for the event's security. Survivor Matt Deitsch criticized the move, stating that "to make the VP safe there aren’t any weapons around" (Selinger). Fred Guttenberg, the father of slain Parkland student Jamie, echoed Deitsch's sentiment: "We should want everyone to have weapons when we are in public. But when they put on a convention, the weapons are a concern? I thought giving [sic] everyone a gun was to enhance safety" (Selinger). Many saw the move as a double standard; a disregard for the safety of Parkland students by arming staff while confirming that the very presence of guns presents a danger.
TV News has also failed to cover the debate over gun control adequately. In the wake of the Parkland shooting, CNN and Vice News have favored roundtable debates amongst those on either side. Gun owners are featured arguing that an inch is a mile, and age restrictions and banning bump stocks are a precursor to which Glenn Beck fears - a mass roundup of all guns and infringement of second amendment rights. The problem with these debates is that they don't answer questions or provide data that back these claims up. By the nature of them being on TV and accessible to the public, they are entered into the arena as valid positions with equal weight. Kovach and Rosenstiel write that the journalism they attempt to describe "recognizes and applies principles that assist in assuring reliable, timely, proportional, comprehensive news to help citizens make sense of the world and their place in it" (292). Presenting both sides without sufficient data to back them both up may be proportional, but it doesn't help citizens make sense of the world as much as it runs the risk of distorting reality by providing fairness and balance without any real answers.
Using news literacy tools, we've determined the strengths and weaknesses writing of Gregory and Wilson, Gebelhoff, Jenkins, and Paxton. We've seen how journalistically reliable information holds up when scrutinized with IMVAIN and VIA and supports a thesis that argues gun control's effectiveness. We've seen the importance of investigative journalism and the press' power to inform us of government shortcomings and act as a catalyst for change. We've also seen the pitfalls of blindly trusting writing like Paxton's and TV news reporting. Without news literacy to guide our analysis, we would not see the violation of journalistic principles. We should strive to subject all news, on any topic, to this same scrutiny.
Works Cited
Avlon, John P. "Partisan Media: Polarizing for Profit." Wingnuts: Extremism in the Age of Obama . New York: Beast, 2014. 121. Print.
Barragán, James. "You Can Bring Your Guns to Church in Texas, AG Ken Paxton Says." Dallas News . The Dallas Morning News, Inc., 21 Dec. 2017. Web. 30 Apr. 2018.
Chappell, Bill. "Stoneman Douglas Teacher Is Arrested After Leaving Gun In Bathroom Stall." NPR . NPR, 12 Apr. 2018. Web. 30 Apr. 2018.
Cunningham, Brent. "Re-thinking Objectivity." Columbia Journalism Review . Columbia Journalism Review, Jul./Aug. 2003. Web. 30 Apr. 2018.
French, David. "A Gun-Control Measure Conservatives Should Consider." National Review . National Review, 19 Feb. 2018. Web. 30 Apr. 2018.
Gebelhoff, Robert. "This Is How We save Lives from Gun Violence." The Washington Post . WP Company, 23 Mar. 2018. Web. 24 Apr. 2018.
Gregory, Sean, and Chris Wilson. "6 Real Ways We Can Reduce Gun Violence in America." Time . Time, 22 Mar. 2018. Web. 24 Apr. 2018.
Kovach, Bill, and Tom Rosenstiel. "Monitor Power And Offer Voice To The Voiceless" The Elements of Journalism. New York: Three Rivers, 2014. 171-172. Print.
Kovach, Bill, and Tom Rosenstiel. “The Rights And Responsibilities Of Citizens." The Elements of Journalism. New York: Three Rivers, 2014. 292. Print.
Kovach, Bill, and Tom Rosenstiel. "What Is Journalism For?" The Elements of Journalism. New York: Three Rivers, 2014. 16. Print.
Kovach, Bill, and Tom Rosenstiel. “Independence from Faction" The Elements of Journalism. New York: Three Rivers, 2014. 140-142. Print.
Larson, Amy. "Seaside High Teacher Accidentally Fires Gun in Class, Students Injured." KSBW . KSBW, 17 Mar. 2018. Web. 30 Apr. 2018.
Linskey, Annie. "NRA Has Long History of Suppressing Data on Gun Violence." Boston Globe . The Boston Globe, 25 Mar. 2018. Web. 11 May 2018.
Paxton, Ken. "Look to Texas for a Proven Template to Combat School Shootings.” The Hill . Capitol Hill Publishing Corp., 24 Mar. 2018. Web. 29 Apr. 2018.
Perks, Ashley. "Who We Are." TheHill . The Hill, 30 Apr. 2018. Web. 17 May 2018.
Seelinger, Lani. "The NRA Banned Guns For Mike Pence's Speech & Parkland Kids Are Highlighting The Irony." Bustle . Bustle, 29 Apr. 2018. Web. 30 Apr. 2018.
Watkins, Matthew, and Kiah Collier. "Paxton: Universities Can't Ban Guns in Dorms." The Texas Tribune . Texas Tribune, 21 Dec. 2015. Web. 30 Apr. 2018.
The issue of gun control is one that demands this kind of literacy. In the aftermath of recent mass shootings like those in Parkland, Las Vegas, and San Bruno, the debate over gun control has once again taken center stage in the national spotlight. This essay explores how gun regulations are a necessity to reduce school shootings while exploring the concepts of news literacy. Those concepts will be used to examine the available data on firearm-related fatalities and how it supports regulations. It will also analyze the strength, weaknesses and journalistic merit of various forms of media reporting on the issue. There are shortcomings in the data available: it is limited and can be outdated, as well as lacking in real-world examples of how these regulations would impact school shootings, offering mostly inferences and hypotheticals. Roadblocks such as the Dickey and Tiahrt Amendments have cut off funding for research and restrict private researchers, local law enforcement agencies and the public from the data (Linskey). However, the data that is observable offers a compelling link between gun control and a reduction in gun-related homicides that makes the hypotheticals worth exploring as potential solutions.
The data from a recent JAMA Internal Medicine study, as featured in Sean Gregory and Chris Wilson's writing for Time, stands out. It found a correlation between states with "strong firearms laws ... such as background checks for all private sales and restrictions on multiple purchases, were associated with lower rates of gun homicides" (Gregory and Wilson). Gregory and Wilson also provide data from two other studies that support this correlation. A 2014 study in the Journal of Urban Health found a link between the 2007 repeal of permit-to-purchase handgun laws in Missouri and a 25% increase in firearms homicide rates (Gregory and Wilson). A 2017 National Bureau of Economic Research working paper found a similar increase. It estimated that a decade "after the adoption of right-to-carry laws, violent crime is 13% to 15% higher than it would have been without those policies" (Gregory and Wilson).
Gregory and Wilson also provide data on Gun Violence Restraining Orders, which would temporarily remove guns from individuals who demonstrate warning signs and have gained traction as a solution following the incident in Parkland. The law has support from conservatives who have expressed concern over laws that they fear would infringe on 2nd amendment rights. It would also address the FBI’s failure to act on warning signs demonstrated by Parkland shooter Nikolas Cruz (French). The statistics "suggests that these orders save lives" (Gregory and Wilson). A 2017 study found that every 10 to 20 gun seizures in Connecticut prevented a suicide and a California law has issued 20 restarting orders since December.
Robert Gebelhoff's opinion piece for the Washington Post also cites the same Connecticut data, providing “estimates that the law averted 72 suicide attempts through 2013 from being fatal." Gebelhoff's writing also provides an example of data specific to school shootings, with a July 2004 study by the United States Secret Service and United States Department of Education indicating that 68 percent of them "are perpetrated by shooters who obtain a gun from their homes or the homes of relatives" (Gebelhoff). With this in mind, the data presented becomes more pertinent to the discussion of school shootings. Gebelhoff argues that setting age limits on all guns may prove effective in offsetting the ease of obtaining guns. A 2012 survey of inmates published by The BMJ suggests that "a minimum age requirement of 21 could have prohibited gun possession in 17 percent of cases in which people legally owned a gun and used it to commit a crime" (Gebelhoff).
These pieces come from well renowned, long-standing, award-winning journalistic institutions, which provides a good starting point for reliable news. That is not to say this is a fool-proof method, as these institutions may have their Millers and Blairs to undermine their legacies, so any article must stand up evaluation using IMVAIN. Multiple sources are used to illustrate the effectiveness of gun control across several cities and years. The sources corroborate one another and when put together with other articles, further corroborating other writing on gun control. The authors are independent of these sources and use them to verify their claims and support their headline, rather than make assertions. The sources are authoritative, ranging from researchers and in epidemiology, criminology, law and society and even the United States Secret Service and Department of Education. Finally, the sources are named, with the institutions behind the studies identified, often with links provided (Gebelhoff's piece excels in this aspect, while Gregory and Wilson's has room for improvement, with some specifics unclear without independently researching the studies).
Shifting focus, we can look at gun control from the perspective of smaller, local news and move from pieces that rely on the expertise of others as evidence to original, investigative journalism. Austin Jenkins' investigation for KING 5 News in 2016 found a lack of an appropriate prosecution of nearly 4,00 background check denials in Washington. The following year, a "lie and try law" passed led to 300 referrals to local police out of 1,700 background check denials, including one attempted purchase of an AR-15 (Jenkins). Jenkins' efforts and the subsequent publishing of his work displays the press as part of "the Fourth Estate," embodying another of Kovach and Rosenstiel's fundamental principles of journalism as "an independent monitor of power" (171). We find Jenkins serving "the public’s need for information concerning public welfare," (Kovach and Rosenstiel 172) in this case, the shortcoming of local authorities and its impact on firearms landing in the hands of felons.
In contrast, Ken Paxton's opinion piece for The Hill falls apart under the same kinds of evaluation. Paxton writes in a way that attempts to pass assertion as fact. One example, "teachers and students feel — and in fact are — safer coming into work" (Paxton). While Paxton might say "in fact," he is speaking on behalf of a group that he is not a part of while offering no sourcing as to how he would know this information. He also argues that the only sensible gun control in schools is arming teachers, stating "Texas has already proven the effectiveness of school marshals" (Paxton). He uses Texas as a measure of all school marshals without source, a departure from the multiple sourcing that made the previous pieces hold up when evaluated using IMVAIN. This statement also ignores relevant news stories about a teacher at Seaside High School in California who had accidentally discharged his weapon and injured a student a month earlier (Larson). Another teacher at Stoneman Douglas would leave his loaded gun in a beach bathroom a little less than three weeks later after Paxton’s piece was published, allowing a homeless man to obtain it and discharge it into a wall (Chappell). This disregard brings to mind Brent Cunningham's writing on objectivity and demonstrates Paxton’s lack of it: "Objectivity is seeing the world as it is, not how you wish it were.”
What is dangerous about The Hill's publication of Paxton's writing is its reach, with a print circulation of above 24,000, being read by "Congressional offices, the White House, political pundits, association executives, lobbyists and corporate leaders" (Perks). While it claims "non-partisan coverage of all factors in legislative decisions," (Perks), there are clear signs that Paxon's writing has an allegiance. Paxton is a registered Republican, but beyond that, he offers one source when brushing off debates on semi-automatic weapons because "a private citizen heroically stopped the fleeing shooter of the First Baptist Church in Sutherland Springs using an AR-15." The source is The Blaze , the conservative network founded by Glenn Beck, who once suggested: "Obama 'will slowly and surely take away your gun'" (Avalon 121). He also curiously tags his article with "Donald Trump," before even "Gun Violence." These signs seem to suggest Paxton being closer to a wingnut. That said, the issue alone is not Paxton's political affiliation, as "being impartial or neutral is not a core principle of journalism" (Kovach and Rosenstiel 140).
Paxton is the Texas Attorney General. With this information, we know that Paxton cannot be independent. His position gives him the power to issue legal opinions that directly affect the state’s gun legislation that he's arguing as effective, seen in churches (Barragán) and universities (Watkins and Collier). "Journalists must maintain an independence from those they cover" (Kovach and Rosenstiel 142). Paxton violates this principle of journalism. The Hill has published something that is not verifiable as true or accurate and is not independent but to the White House, whose current administration threatens journalism. While Paxton headline suggests "Look to Texas for a Proven Template to Combat School Shootings," his lack of journalistic reliability suggests we look elsewhere.
While the GVROs and try and lie laws mentioned earlier have done well to offer gun reform options that are supported on both sides, the decision to arm teachers has not been as well received as Paxton's writing suggests. The students of Parkland expressed renewed ire for the decision through social media in the wake of news that the NRA would not allow firearms or other weapons at Vice President Mike Pence convention speech, which is consistent with gun regulations at the White House, Mar-a-Lago, and the US Capitol Building. The Secret Service will be responsible for the event's security. Survivor Matt Deitsch criticized the move, stating that "to make the VP safe there aren’t any weapons around" (Selinger). Fred Guttenberg, the father of slain Parkland student Jamie, echoed Deitsch's sentiment: "We should want everyone to have weapons when we are in public. But when they put on a convention, the weapons are a concern? I thought giving [sic] everyone a gun was to enhance safety" (Selinger). Many saw the move as a double standard; a disregard for the safety of Parkland students by arming staff while confirming that the very presence of guns presents a danger.
TV News has also failed to cover the debate over gun control adequately. In the wake of the Parkland shooting, CNN and Vice News have favored roundtable debates amongst those on either side. Gun owners are featured arguing that an inch is a mile, and age restrictions and banning bump stocks are a precursor to which Glenn Beck fears - a mass roundup of all guns and infringement of second amendment rights. The problem with these debates is that they don't answer questions or provide data that back these claims up. By the nature of them being on TV and accessible to the public, they are entered into the arena as valid positions with equal weight. Kovach and Rosenstiel write that the journalism they attempt to describe "recognizes and applies principles that assist in assuring reliable, timely, proportional, comprehensive news to help citizens make sense of the world and their place in it" (292). Presenting both sides without sufficient data to back them both up may be proportional, but it doesn't help citizens make sense of the world as much as it runs the risk of distorting reality by providing fairness and balance without any real answers.
Using news literacy tools, we've determined the strengths and weaknesses writing of Gregory and Wilson, Gebelhoff, Jenkins, and Paxton. We've seen how journalistically reliable information holds up when scrutinized with IMVAIN and VIA and supports a thesis that argues gun control's effectiveness. We've seen the importance of investigative journalism and the press' power to inform us of government shortcomings and act as a catalyst for change. We've also seen the pitfalls of blindly trusting writing like Paxton's and TV news reporting. Without news literacy to guide our analysis, we would not see the violation of journalistic principles. We should strive to subject all news, on any topic, to this same scrutiny.
Works Cited
Avlon, John P. "Partisan Media: Polarizing for Profit." Wingnuts: Extremism in the Age of Obama . New York: Beast, 2014. 121. Print.
Barragán, James. "You Can Bring Your Guns to Church in Texas, AG Ken Paxton Says." Dallas News . The Dallas Morning News, Inc., 21 Dec. 2017. Web. 30 Apr. 2018.
Chappell, Bill. "Stoneman Douglas Teacher Is Arrested After Leaving Gun In Bathroom Stall." NPR . NPR, 12 Apr. 2018. Web. 30 Apr. 2018.
Cunningham, Brent. "Re-thinking Objectivity." Columbia Journalism Review . Columbia Journalism Review, Jul./Aug. 2003. Web. 30 Apr. 2018.
French, David. "A Gun-Control Measure Conservatives Should Consider." National Review . National Review, 19 Feb. 2018. Web. 30 Apr. 2018.
Gebelhoff, Robert. "This Is How We save Lives from Gun Violence." The Washington Post . WP Company, 23 Mar. 2018. Web. 24 Apr. 2018.
Gregory, Sean, and Chris Wilson. "6 Real Ways We Can Reduce Gun Violence in America." Time . Time, 22 Mar. 2018. Web. 24 Apr. 2018.
Kovach, Bill, and Tom Rosenstiel. "Monitor Power And Offer Voice To The Voiceless" The Elements of Journalism. New York: Three Rivers, 2014. 171-172. Print.
Kovach, Bill, and Tom Rosenstiel. “The Rights And Responsibilities Of Citizens." The Elements of Journalism. New York: Three Rivers, 2014. 292. Print.
Kovach, Bill, and Tom Rosenstiel. "What Is Journalism For?" The Elements of Journalism. New York: Three Rivers, 2014. 16. Print.
Kovach, Bill, and Tom Rosenstiel. “Independence from Faction" The Elements of Journalism. New York: Three Rivers, 2014. 140-142. Print.
Larson, Amy. "Seaside High Teacher Accidentally Fires Gun in Class, Students Injured." KSBW . KSBW, 17 Mar. 2018. Web. 30 Apr. 2018.
Linskey, Annie. "NRA Has Long History of Suppressing Data on Gun Violence." Boston Globe . The Boston Globe, 25 Mar. 2018. Web. 11 May 2018.
Paxton, Ken. "Look to Texas for a Proven Template to Combat School Shootings.” The Hill . Capitol Hill Publishing Corp., 24 Mar. 2018. Web. 29 Apr. 2018.
Perks, Ashley. "Who We Are." TheHill . The Hill, 30 Apr. 2018. Web. 17 May 2018.
Seelinger, Lani. "The NRA Banned Guns For Mike Pence's Speech & Parkland Kids Are Highlighting The Irony." Bustle . Bustle, 29 Apr. 2018. Web. 30 Apr. 2018.
Watkins, Matthew, and Kiah Collier. "Paxton: Universities Can't Ban Guns in Dorms." The Texas Tribune . Texas Tribune, 21 Dec. 2015. Web. 30 Apr. 2018.
Comments
Post a Comment