Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


One of the more annoying features of the gun control debate is the frequent mockery from gun rights folks toward anyone who doesn’t have a deep technical understanding of how firearms operate. After all, how much do you need to know to figure out whether you think dangerous weapons ought to be regulated more than they are now? And yet, occasionally I have to admit that I sympathize with the gun folks a little bit. Here’s a fragment from Hardball yesterday:

CHRIS CILLIZZA: ….You mention in the ammunition used in this shooting was one of these high-round ammunitions…..Chuck is right, the president, I think….he has to do something. The question is, does he do something around these high-round ammunition holders?….Eventually — OK, let’s say assault weapons or let’s say these high-caliber — these high-pack rounds — if they do that, what will they do next….

Seriously? “High-round ammunitions”? Followed by “high-round ammunition holders”? And then by “high-caliber/high-pack rounds”? I don’t even care about this stuff much, and even so I was rolling my eyes listening to this. No one expects every talking head to be a deep expert on the taxonomy of firearms, but this is a common topic of political discussion and has been for decades. Anyone who talks about it should have at least a nodding familiarity with the basics of guns. I assume that Cillizza was trying to talk about high-capacity magazines—though his later mention of “high-caliber” makes me wonder—and knowing that this is what they’re called is about the equivalent of knowing that it takes 60 votes to break a filibuster. You really mark yourself as a dolt if you don’t even know that much.

So maybe some lefty magazine should do all us peacenik lefties a favor and write a really short, punchy guide to the basics of guns. There are probably no more than about a dozen terms you’d need to know to get yourself through a cocktail party without too much embarrassment. Let’s make a list:

  • Automatic
  • Semi-automatic
  • Machine gun
  • Shotgun
  • Clip/magazine
  • Caliber
  • Assault weapon
  • Bolt action
  • Chamber
  • Bullet/round/cartridge
  • __________ (placeholder for other terms that could use a brief explanation)

Hey! Wait a second! I work for a lefty magazine. Maybe we should do it! How about it, Adam?

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate