I have to take issue with some of the kudos being offered about the article today. While there wasn't any clearly false information in the article, it took until several paragraphs from the end before the author made the point that the things that define an "assault weapon" have absolutely no bearing on the lethality of the weapon. None the less, the author takes pains to point out in the opening paragraphs that "Military-syle rifles have been used to commit horrific acts of violence," thus helping to perpetuate the myth that the appearance of the weapons somehow contributes to the horror of the crimes they are used to commit.
I also didn't like to see a statement that "semi-automatic show up too often as the weapons of choice for gang members, drug dealers, and the mentally ill......" This statement came immediately after a piece describing a few characteristics of an "assault weapon", potentially conflating the idea that assault weapons and semi-automatic weapons are one in the same. Of course semi-automatic weapons show up in crimes. They are the most numerous type of weapon out there, and in fact few weapons used in crimes qualify as assault weapons. Most are semi-auto pistols, often obtained through illegal channels.
In my mind, the piece while not factually inaccurate, was certainly shaded in such a way that popular stereotypes are reinforced instead of dispelled.
