Hacker News Reader

Comment by donw | Hacker News Reader

Both of the links you provided are to political action groups.

It's like linking either the NRA or Everytown/Moms Demand/March For Our Lives (they rebrand a lot) "studies" on gun control.

Both have very clear objectives, and are quite happy to twist -- or sometimes outright fabricate[1]! -- data and facts.

[1] https://massshootingtracker.org

View on HN

You didn't just write that the UN is a "political action group" and compared it to the NRA?

This is the group that put China as the chair of it's Human rights council.

Which arguably makes the NRA look reasonable in comparison.

If true, that is absolutely hilariously sad.

And what do you think the UN is then?

If you're going to dismiss one of the most comprehensive bodies of work on the subject (or, I'd guess any UN initiatives), you can provide your own sources?

> If you're going to dismiss one of the most comprehensive bodies of work on the subject.

Creationists have some of the most comprehensive bodies of work on evolution.

Doesn't mean that they are right.

The NRA is a political organization. I do not trust any data they collect, nor any studies they produce, because their job is to advocate for a specific set of policies.

Bloomberg's various anti-gun groups are political organizations. I do not trust any data they collect, nor any studies they produce, either.

For precisely the same reason.

Personally, I think that climate change is a huge problem.

But credibility is a scarce resource these days.

All organizations are not created equal. Do you really distrust the NRA and farming studies from the UN to the same extent? For me that sounds very black and white.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com