New York Times Promotes Claims that “Random Gun Violence” is Up

New York Times Promotes Claims that “Random Gun Violence” is Up IMG NRA-ILA

U.S.A.-(– On October 26, 2022, the New York Times published an article focusing on allegations of increased violence after the state of Texas moved to Constitutional Carry in September of 2021.

The author, David Goodman, is fairly careful in his allegations, which consist of one incident where an innocent 9-year-old was killed during a defensive shooting and anecdotes from city sheriffs, police leaders, and district attorneys.

However, many read only the headline and a few lines after that. The headline implies large problems with permitless (Constitutional) carry. The first incident is an extremely rare occurrence: the death of an innocent during a justified shooting.

Consider the headline and sub-headline from the article. From

The headline: Texas Goes Permitless on Guns, and Police Face an Armed Public

Most Second Amendment supporters and, indeed, most police believe this is a good and proper thing. Why, in the United States, would police believe they would face an unarmed public?

The sub-headline: A new law allowing people to carry handguns without a license has led to more spontaneous shootings, many in law enforcement say.

There is no data to support this, only anecdotes by authority figures in places that are traditionally anti-Second Amendment. In the body of the article, after the emotional mention of the shooting of the 9-year-old girl in Houston, is this explanation of anecdotes apparently collected by the reporter.

From the article:

The shooting was part of what many sheriffs, police leaders and district attorneys in urban areas of Texas say has been an increase in people carrying weapons and in spur-of-the-moment gunfire in the year since the state began allowing most adults 21 or over to carry a handgun without a license.

At the same time, mainly in rural counties, other sheriffs said they had seen little change, and proponents of gun rights said more people lawfully carrying guns could be part of why shootings have declined in some parts of the state.

Is there any real data in this report? Yes, one datum. The one incident where a man, in a justified defensive situation, shot and killed an innocent 9-year-old girl in error.  It seems the reporter received considerably mixed messages when he asked people if they had seen any change. Predictably, people in areas where the assumption is “guns are bad” claimed they noticed a change predicted by the prevailing political thought in those areas. People in areas where the right to bear arms is valued by the political class did not see any such change.

Many left-leaning outlets take their views from the New York Times. The Crime Report took the New York Times article and embellished it a bit.  From

Headline: Random Gun Violence Up in Cities After Texas Drops Permits

From the article:

While rural areas of the state are reporting little change in terms of shootings, sheriffs, police leaders and district attorneys in urban areas of Texas are reporting a rise in random gunfire and people carrying weapons since the state began allowing most adults 21 or over to carry a handgun without a license, reports J. David Goodman for the New York Times.

After restoring Constitutional Carry, where permits are not required, it is rational that more people would carry weapons. What else would be expected?

The anecdotal reports of rising “random gunfire” do not indicate a rise in unjustified injuries or deaths in any statistical sense. From the New York Times article:

In the border town of Eagle Pass, drunken arguments have flared into shootings. In El Paso, revelers who legally bring their guns to parties have opened fire to stop fights. In and around Houston, prosecutors have received a growing stream of cases involving guns brandished or fired over parking spots, bad driving, loud music and love triangles.

This is the usual unfounded prediction from those who think “guns are bad.”

Notice one of the incidents involved armed people stopping a violent confrontation.  This is very weak sauce to build a case for violating fundamental, enumerated, Constitutional rights.

Those who wish to see the population disarmed consist of many sub-groups. Many of them simply use the sophomoric argument, “if there were no guns, no one would be hurt with guns”. It is as silly and simplistic as it sounds.

We cannot eliminate guns. Attempting to eliminate guns does not reduce suicides or murders.

For a century, Progressives have worked hard to make sophomoric logic into law based on their disdain for the common man.

Reality has reversed the situation. The common man now disdains the Progressive ruling class.

The data, so far, indicates little or no change in murder or suicide rates with the restoration of Constitutional Carry.

I expect arrests for merely exercising Second Amendment rights will measurably decrease. Perhaps an enterprising researcher will work to measure that metric.

About Dean Weingarten:

Dean Weingarten has been a peace officer, a military officer, was on the University of Wisconsin Pistol Team for four years, and was first certified to teach firearms safety in 1973. He taught the Arizona concealed carry course for fifteen years until the goal of Constitutional Carry was attained. He has degrees in meteorology and mining engineering, and retired from the Department of Defense after a 30 year career in Army Research, Development, Testing, and Evaluation.

Dean Weingarten

Notify of
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Green Mtn. Boy

Must push the Marxist agenda regardless of truth or facts.


The NYT has always pushed the Marxist/Communist line since before 1934. If you need names I have a few.


No such thing as ” gun violence ” just violent humans and lying reporters that push false narratives.


I don’t know…I left one of my safes open one night and all of the black fugly rifles went on a shooting spree in that room. Fortunately there were no human victims. Just lots of holes in the wall all over the place. I had to ask them all to calm down. They did and since I feed them on occasion they all climbed back into the safe with no more complaint.


so you got cabin fever shot up a room, wow must have been a long winter


Our local news stations in L.A. have started using the term “vehicle violence” to describe situations where these asshats doing “sideshows” on the streets hit one or more of the idiot spectators cheering them on.

The UK coined the term “knife violence” after the use of knives during crime spiked once guns were banned. And they still can’t see the ridiculousness of attributing the cause of the violence to the weapon, even though violent crime overall hasn’t changed, just the weapons involved.


LOL, The other day the governess was stating that the right does not believe the facts and that crime is actually down in ny and that republican states have more gun violence than any other states they just don’t report it. Immediately I thought how can that be when the left owns all the media? How they can sit there and lie to us straight faced is amazing to me. I can always tell because they get a gleam in their eye that says I am lying right now and I like it. Some like Shumer get a corner of… Read more »


Typical psychopathic behavior on the part of the “governess”. The problem is that psychopathic control freaks “rule” us.


want to rule us they want to live they stay off my land


A famous quote from a the Novel “Beyond This Horizon.” in 1942 by
Robert Anson Heinlein lAn armed society is a polite society manners are good when one may have to backup their actions with their life.”


He was someone who understood what a crime is.


Heinlein was right, as usual. I’ve read that in feudal Japan, Samurai were very careful not to touch anyone with their sword scabbard, because instant dueling was the result when they did.


I’ve never known any Americans that needed the 2A more than NYC residents. Fact is, one of the primary reasons the US2A was established in the first place was so future Americans like New Yorkers would not have to live under siege that way.

Last edited 3 months ago by Ledesma

Typical lying “news” reporter that likes to play “Let’s Pretend, the Game Children Play”.


Considering percentage vs absolute numbers, in a larger population one would expect to see greater absolute numbers of any phenomenon when the percentage of occurrences stays the same. It seems much more sensible to compare percentages of occurrence over time, which begs the question: is the percentage of “gun violence” greater or less than it has been historically?


According to in depth studies by scholars like John Lott…LESS. More guns = less crime.


more guns more people and less crime


I quit reading the NY Times, USA Today & many others when they started slanting the news a certain way. And not just giving the facts.


The NY Times can never be expected to give a fair analysis of guns in America. It’s a philistine, parochial publication, which, on the local level, endorses only Dem political candidates and hasn’t endorsed a GOP presidential candidate since Eisenhower, in 1956. The newspaper plays no part in my life, and I’m from New York.


There’s a lot of things that can be said about this “Worst and Most Destructive Presidency in American History’,
But there’s only ONE thing to be said that really Matters;
‘The Fix Begins in 5 Days”


The people who write and believe these articles ignore a very simple yet critical fact. The change in the law only changed the behavior of law abiding people. The bad actors were carrying guns illegally well before this change, but the ignorant hoplophobes seem to be laboring under the delusion that noone carried a gun before the change in the law.


I just tried going to go to that website and got a message that the site was unsafe. Loaded with scams, viruses,etc. How can a person check the validity of a story if the site is unsafe? Kinda like living in Chicago, you never know where to walk, drive, or ride a bike anymore.