Failure of reading comprehension

It’s fairly frequent that some anti-gun bigot will read something I or someone else wrote and completely misunderstand what is being said. From the words of the Second Amendment to advertisements (fingerprint resistance is about rust prevention, not criminal use) they either deliberately or through lack of reading comprehension skills arrive at completely basely conclusions. Anytime they claim some scientific paper supports their conclusions I know I have to get my hands on the actual paper before I’ll have a clue as to what was actually written.

Even give the above I was still surprised at this post by Gun Control Canada. It is nothing but a complete copy of this opinion piece in The Star Phoenix which is totally pro-gun.

Yes. Apparently the anti-gun blog Gun Control Canada misread the (admittedly poorly worded) headline and copied the entire thing without reading and/or comprehending the editorial. Microsoft Office informs me the Flesch Reading Ease is 45.6 and the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level is 12.0 which I have to conclude is too difficult for the bigots at Gun Control Canada. Just for comparison this post has near equal scores of 47.2 and 11.8.

I am aware that there are those at and near the top of the food chain in the gun control hierarchy who are smart and are deliberate in their falsehoods and half-truths. But I’m convinced the vast majority of their followers have crap for brains. They are useful idiots as the communists used to refer to Soviet sympathizers in the west.


2 thoughts on “Failure of reading comprehension

  1. Poorly written or poorly typed?

    “In fact, is the firearms community was mistaken.”

    “Here we are, nearly 15 years later, and the Liberals’ vote still has to whipped.”

  2. Both porrly written and poorly typed. Then there is the basic argument, which I will call porrly framed. It centers on numbers, politics, and then culture, tradition and sport. It’s a pretty good answer to the question; “How far can you go in a pro gun piece without touching upon the basic principles?”

Comments are closed.