Explore The NRA Universe Of Websites

APPEARS IN News

“F” Stands for Fail: Politifact Flip-Flops to Advocate Anti-Gun Narrative

Friday, October 9, 2015

“F” Stands for Fail: Politifact Flip-Flops to Advocate Anti-Gun Narrative

As we’ve reported here, here, and here, one of the more favored, yet discredited, claims made by gun control advocates is that 40% of firearm transfers take place without a background check.  Mark Kelly, of Americans for Responsible Solutions, is particularly attached to this deception, bringing it up once again in the wake of the recent shooting at Umpqua Community College in Roseburg, OR last week. 

Fact checkers have routinely pointed out numerous problems with the 40% statistic, with the Washington Post’s Glenn Kessler giving Obama “Three Pinocchios” when the President cited the bogus claim back in 2013. 

Unfortunately, it now appears that even the fact checkers need fact checkers.  Last Sunday, Linda Qui, writing for Politifact, addressed the issue in response to Kelly’s appearance on CNN on the same day in which he invoked the 40% claim.  She rightly points out all the reasons why the 40% claim has been repeatedly rebuked by fact checking organizations in the past, including Politifact itself.

The claim is based on a 1994 survey of only 251 people who told researchers they were gun owners.  As anyone who’s ever read a survey or poll knows, a sample size of 251 is insufficient to draw conclusions about the broader population under study.  You cannot reliably measure anything about the American people with only 251 respondents in a survey.  The researchers then asked of these 251 respondents how they came to have their firearms and whether or not a background check had been conducted.

Even if the sample size was sufficiently large to represent the broader population, there are obvious problems with this methodology.  It doesn’t take a statistician to know that of the 251 respondents, the researchers didn’t actually verify whether or not they were actual firearm owners.  Further, the researchers also relied on the memory of respondents to accurately describe the circumstances of how and when their firearms came into their possession.   Problems with reliability of this information are obvious and abound.  Many respondents likely couldn’t remember the exact details the researchers were asking about.

That anyone would rely on a statistic derived from this house of cards is chilling, given that the infringement of constitutional rights is what they’re advocating for.

More broadly, even if the base (albeit severe) methodological deficiencies are ignored, it’s important to recall that the survey was conducted in 1994 and the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) wasn’t operational at the national level until 1998.  In other words, even if the 40% claim was based on a reliable methodology, which it isn’t, responses in 1994 tell us nothing about firearm transfer taking place today.
 
But even after recognizing these problems, Qui shifts from fact checker to advocate about half way through her article.  She turns from an explanation of why the 40% claim is bogus to an exploration of all the reasons why it is the “best estimate” available.  A litany of anti-gun advocates and researchers are quoted as essentially saying, “we don’t have anything else, so this is good enough.”  For Qui, this somehow equates to bolstering the bogus claim’s veracity.

She closes her “fact check” with the “ruling”:


Kelly said, "We sell 40 percent of our guns without a background check."


The figure he’s citing comes from a 21-year-old survey with a small sample size before a key gun law took effect. Even its authors say they’re not sure if it holds true today.


Still, there are few credible alternative statistics because of a two-decade dearth of gun violence research funding. 


We rate his claim Half True.


This is truly bizarre.  Remarkably, this is in direct contradiction to a “fact check” done by the same organization mere months ago. 

Politifact’s Sean Gorman says on April 28, 2015 the 40% claim is “mostly false.”

Politifact’s Linda Qui says on October 4, 2015 the 40% claim is “half true.”

When Politifact decided to make this turn towards advocacy is unknown and anyone’s guess.  While they may lament the “fact” that the public’s view of the media continues to diminish, it is obvious what’s driving this loss of credibility
.

IN THIS ARTICLE
40% Myth PolitiFact
TRENDING NOW
Kentucky: Committee to Consider Firearm Seizures Without Due Process

Friday, November 15, 2019

Kentucky: Committee to Consider Firearm Seizures Without Due Process

On Friday, November 22nd, the Kentucky state Interim Joint Committee on Judiciary will consider so called “red-flag laws.” Though no legislation has been introduced, such laws usually allow for Second Amendment rights to be suspended ...

Joe Biden and His Gift for Gaffes

News  

Monday, November 18, 2019

Joe Biden and His Gift for Gaffes

When the Democrats who are seeking their party’s nomination to run against Donald Trump in 2020 start talking about guns, anyone who supports our right to keep and bear arms knows to be concerned. Of ...

Sanders Burns the 2020 Democratic Primary Gun Control Agenda

News  

Monday, November 18, 2019

Sanders Burns the 2020 Democratic Primary Gun Control Agenda

As anti-gun as the 2020 Democratic presidential contenders have exposed themselves to be, much of the field still gives lip-service to the Second Amendment and the Constitution. Take for instance Joe Biden. The leading candidate’s campaign has said that ...

No Protection for the Law that Protects the Firearm Industry: Supreme Court Passes on PLCAA Case

News  

Monday, November 18, 2019

No Protection for the Law that Protects the Firearm Industry: Supreme Court Passes on PLCAA Case

A law designed to protect the firearm industry from frivolous litigation is now in jeopardy thanks to inaction by the U.S. Supreme Court, which earlier this month passed on a petition to review a case ...

Trading Freedom for Safety

News  

Monday, November 18, 2019

Trading Freedom for Safety

“[N]othing is more important than ensuring that our fellow students feel safe,” explained the editors of The Daily Northwestern, the campus newspaper at Northwestern University. The statement was part of a lengthy apology published by the editors, ...

California: City of Carson Pushing Another Unconstitutional Resolution Targeting Lawful Gun Owners

Monday, November 18, 2019

California: City of Carson Pushing Another Unconstitutional Resolution Targeting Lawful Gun Owners

Tomorrow, November 19 at 5pm PST, the Carson City Council will be considering Resolution 19-186, which mirrors the failed attempt from September.  

Guide To The Interstate Transportation Of Firearms

Gun Laws  

Thursday, January 1, 2015

Guide To The Interstate Transportation Of Firearms

CAUTION: Federal and state firearms laws are subject to frequent change. This summary is not to be considered as legal advice or a restatement of law.

Nevada: Gov. Sisolak Signs Anti-Gun Bill

Friday, June 14, 2019

Nevada: Gov. Sisolak Signs Anti-Gun Bill

Ignoring the constitutional rights of law-abiding Nevadans, on June 14th, Governor Steve Sisolak signed omnibus anti-gun Assembly Bill 291 into law.  Your NRA would like to thank the many lawmakers who stood with our members and ...

A New Candidate for Confiscator-in-Chief

News  

Monday, November 11, 2019

A New Candidate for Confiscator-in-Chief

Former Texas Congressman Robert Francis O’Rourke abandoned his run for President last week, once again leaving a void for the most strident anti-gun candidate seeking the Democrat nomination. Even before declaring his candidacy for President, ...

Strong Firearms Preemption Laws are More Important Than Ever

News  

Gun Laws  

Monday, November 11, 2019

Strong Firearms Preemption Laws are More Important Than Ever

Photo Courtesy of Jeremy Tremp In recent weeks, gun owners have been given two prime examples of just how important strong firearms preemption laws are to the vibrant exercise of Second Amendment rights. On October ...

MORE TRENDING +
LESS TRENDING -

More Like This From Around The NRA

NRA ILA

Established in 1975, the Institute for Legislative Action (ILA) is the "lobbying" arm of the National Rifle Association of America. ILA is responsible for preserving the right of all law-abiding individuals in the legislative, political, and legal arenas, to purchase, possess and use firearms for legitimate purposes as guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.