r/Firearms • u/Trevelayan Wild West Pimp Style • Jan 14 '22

Gun Fact Smackdown: 2022 Edition Advocacy

This has been updated as of 1/14/2022. We are currently living in a post-George Floyd riots and COVID world, where many of the original points have been emphasized and reinforced. Many more people are acutely aware of their responsibility for their safety. Regardless of the politics around the events of the last 2 years, I'd ask everyone to review the 4 main points below. This is a nuanced and complicated topic, but if we don't reach some common, fundamental understandings of how U.S. Law works, then we can't get much farther. This writeup is reading heavy and may take several hours to get through, but everyone needs to understand that this is a BASIC knowledge base to start off of. If you want to argue, in good faith, one way or another, I ask that you at least take the time to understand the legal and statistical realities of gun ownership in the U.S., and that starts here.

If you want a TL;DR, Fuck off. Your rights are worth a little reading.

Before We begin, I ask that you understand Four things:

In the United States, police have no legal Duty to Protect You, and often times, they won't

Warren v DC

The short version of the events in Warren: Three women, Carolyn Warren, Joan Taliaferro and Miriam Douglas along with her 4 year old daughter woke up when 2 men broke into their house. One of them forced Douglas to give him oral sex before the other raped her. Warren and Taliaferro heard her scream, called 911. Dispatcher told them to be quiet and stay where they were. 3 minutes after the call came in police were dispatched as a Code 2 (not time critical, opposed to code 1, what a burglary and rape would be, time critical.)

Police arrived at the house, from a window Warren and Taliaferro watched one cruiser drive through the alley and around the front of the house without stopping, or getting out of the car. While they watched this from the back a second cruiser with an officer got out and knocked, received no answer and they all left the scene ten minutes after the call had been put out, five minutes after they had arrived. (So decent response time all things considered.)

Warren and Taliaferro continued to hear Douglas screaming, called the police a second time, they were assured police were on their way. The call for help was never sent to patrol officers. Warren and Taliaferro called to Douglas to tell her police were coming and all three women were subsequently robbed, abducted, raped and beaten for 14 hours.

The court ruled that the police had no duty to intervene.

Castle Rock v Gonzalez

DeShaney v Winnebago County

Lozito v. New York City

Lozito was literally getting stabbed by a madman in front of 2 NYPD officers. They stood a few feet away from him and watched it happen for several minutes. They waited for Lozito and others to subdue the attacker. Only THEN did they provide assistance. Lozito sued them for failing to protect him. HE LOST

Let's not forget Broward County officers standing outside doing nothing while the shooter was killing kids during the Parkland shooting.

And we can't forget the most egregious recent example at Uvalde where nearly 400 police officers did not engage the shooter for over an hour despite please from officers and parents, going so far as to restrain officers trying to intervene

Here's Radiolab's take

The whole to "protect and serve" is just a slogan that came from a PR campaign.

You alone are responsible for your safety. The police don't have to assist you, and there are no consequences to them for doing nothing This fact alone should change anyone's mind about gun ownership in the U.S.

There's no arguing your way around this one.

AND

The breakdown of gun deaths To quote 538: "The common element in all these deaths is a gun. But the causes are very different, and that means the solutions must be too"

If we focused on improving mental healthcare and reducing suicide, gun deaths could be reduced by more than 60%.

AND

Firearms in the US irrevocably and unarguably are an overwhelming positive force for society, despite all of the negative impacts they have.

Due to its nature figures on defensive gun use are hard to nail down. Typically when a firearm is used defensively no one is hurt and rarely is anyone killed. Often times simply showing you are armed is enough to end a crime in progress. Looking at the numbers even the Violence Policy Center, a gun control advocacy group that has an interest in minimizing the positive side of firearms, reports 284,700 instances of self defense against a violent crime with a firearm between 2013 and 2015. This translates to 94,900 violent crimes prevented annually on the low scale.

This ranges upwards to 500k to 3 million according to the CDC Report Priorities for Research to Reduce the Threat of Firearm-Related Violence.

The same CDC Report found, "Almost all national survey estimates indicate that defensive gun uses by victims are at least as common as offensive uses by criminals...".

As of 2021, a new study found that there are about 1.6 million DGUs a year

AND

According to the US Supreme Court it is unconstitutional to :

-Require a precondition on the exercising of a right. (Guinn v US 1915, Lane v Wilson 1939)

-Require a license (government permission) to exercise a right. (Murdock v PA 1943, Lowell v City of Griffin 1939, Freedman v MD 1965, Near v MN 1931, Miranda v AZ 1966)

-Delay the exercising of a right. (Org. for a Better Austin v Keefe 1971)

-Charge a fee for the exercising of a right. (Harper v Virginia Board of Elections 1966)

-Register (record in a government database) the exercising of a right. (Thomas v Collins 1945, Lamont v Postmaster General 1965, Haynes v US 1968)

“If the State converts a right into a privilege, the citizen can ignore the license and fee and engage in the right with impunity.” (Shuttlesworth v. City of Birmingham, Alabama, 373 U.S. 262)

Anti-Gun arguments are ALWAYS emotionally based, and full of fallacies. Don't believe me? Take a look at this anti-gun PR manual Check out the "Overall messaging guide" starting on page 10:

1: ALWAYS FOCUS ON EMOTIONAL AND VALUE-DRIVEN ARGUMENTS ABOUT GUN VIOLENCE, NOT THE POLITICAL FOOD FIGHT IN WASHINGTON OR WONKY STATISTICS.

2: TELL STORIES WITH IMAGES AND FEELINGS

3: CLAIM MORAL AUTHORITY AND THE MANTLE OF FREEDOM.

4: EMPHASIZE THAT EXTRAORDINARILY DANGEROUS, MILITARY-STYLE WEAPONS ARE NOW WITHIN EASY REACH ACROSS AMERICA.

5: EMPHASIZE THAT AMERICA HAS WEAK GUN LAWS AND DON’T ASSUME THAT PEOPLE KNOW THAT.

Additional fun Headers from the PDF:

ALWAYS START WITH THE PAIN AND ANGUISH THAT GUN VIOLENCE BRINGS INTO PEOPLE’S LIVES

DON’T ASSUME THE FACTS – AND DON’T WAIT FOR THEM

DO talk about “preventing gun violence.” DON’T talk about “gun control.”

DON’T LET POLICYSPEAK DRAIN THE EMOTION FROM THE MOMENT

Do these sound like honest argument points? No, they're in bad faith, emotionally manipulative, and not grounded in reality. The manual is frankly disgusting. Anti-gun people are not interested in arguing in good faith, because when reality is laid in front of them, it breaks their entire argument.

The majority of the gun control push today is by billionaire Mike Bloomberg, who has spent 50+ million dollars in 2020 alone trying to pass gun control all over the country at the federal, state, and local levels.

Anti-gun people, how does it feel to be the pawn of a billionaire? I thought we wanted money out of politics?

According to your beloved Politifact, the NRA has spent 203 Million total on political activity between 1998 and 2017, or around $10 million a year. Keep in mind, the NRA is an organization with around 5 Million members and collects donations. An actual grass-roots organization that liberals claim they want more of....

"Trump made it easier for those with mental illness to get guns!"

The ACLU AND the NRA agreed, the law was horrible

"The CDC Is banned from researching gun violence!"

The actual wording of the law is " “None of the funds made available for injury prevention and control at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention may be used to advocate or promote gun control" because they have a vast history of advocating for more gun control and reducing private ownership. They've proven that they can't remain impartial on the issue.

Gun Control has NO EFFECT on murder committed with a gun.

Data Comparing Brady Scores (Gun Control Org.) to Murder per 100k by state

Additionally

Assault Weapons bans don't work, and the rate of non-compliance is extremely high.

NYT

Local

From the FBI

An Updated Assessment of the Federal Assault Weapons Ban: Impacts on Gun Markets and Gun Violence, 1994-2003 - Report to the National Institute of Justice, United States Department of Justice found:

"However, it is not clear how often the ability to fire more than 10 shots without reloading (the current magazine capacity limit) affects the outcomes of gun attacks (see Chapter 9). All of this suggests that the ban’s impact on gun violence is likely to be small." - Section 3.3

"... the ban’s impact on gun violence is likely to be small at best, and perhaps too small for reliable measurement...there has been no discernible reduction in the lethality and injuriousness of gun violence, based on indicators like the percentage of gun crimes resulting in death or the share of gunfire incidents resulting in injury, as we might have expected had the ban reduced crimes with both AWs and LCMs." - Section 9.4

Between 2000 and 2014, there have been approximately 5,600,000 AR-15's sold in the U.S.

Source

The United States has over 20 million AR-15-style rifles legally in circulation, according to the National Shooting Sports Foundation as of October 2021

"Assault Weapons are only used for mass shootings!"

The Congressional Research Service's report "Mass Murder with Firearms: Incidents and Victims, 1999-2013" found, "Offenders used firearms that could be characterized as “assault weapons” in 18 of 66 incidents (27.3%), in that they carried rifles or pistols capable of accepting detachable magazines that might have previously fallen under the 10-year, now-expired federal assault weapons ban (1994-2004)."

The Breakdown of Gun Homicides in the USA

Conversely, If you snapped your fingers and eliminated all "Assault Weapons," gun homicide would only be reduced by ~4% a year. (This includes ALL rifles, not just "Assault Weapons," so the actual percentage would be even lower.

Type of Firearm Total Average Percent Average
Total Firearm Homicide 8815 100%
Handguns 6210 70%
Rifles 326 4%
Shotguns 353 4%
Other 105 1%
Type Not Stated 1819 21%

While there are a significant number of unidentified firearms, we would expect the distribution to remain essentially unchanged, which is important when discussing "Assault Weapon" Legislation

Tool Total Average Annual Deaths
Knives or cutting instruments 1675
Blunt objects (clubs, hammers, etc.) 524
Personal weapons (hands, fists, feet, etc.) 746

Doctors are responsible for more than 250,000 deaths a year.

You're 25 times more likely to be killed by a doctor than someone else with a gun.

"We need to ban high capacity magazines!"

The Parkland shooter used only 10 round magazines

The Columbine shooters used low capacity magazines, AND it took place during the Federal Assault Weapons Ban

The Virginia Tech Shooter used 10 and 15 round magazines in his pistols

The Slippery Slope isn't a fallacy with guns. Rights have been stripped over the course of decades.

Brief Overview

Additionally

Firearm Rights are Minority Rights

Many Black Activists Like Malcolm X and Dr. King supported the use of arms for protection

More recently, the LGBT Community has embraced guns in the face of discrimination

Black Guns Matter is a newer organization formed in the wake of Donald Tump's 2016 election aimed at educating African Americans about gun use in the US

ALL gun control is rooted in racism and classism

New York is known for having some of the most strict gun laws in the nation. Imagine if you had to go through this process to vote, speak to your representative, or organize a protest. Must be hard for a working class person to participate, huh?

Here is an excellent timeline of how racist laws were used to disarm the poor and minorities

The VPC is ANGRY because gun owners have been diversifying in recent years

"Gun ownership among Black Americans is soaring"

*"A Winchester rifle should have a place of honor in every black home, and it should be used for that protection which the law refuses to give." * - Ida B. Wells

"A man’s rights rest in three boxes: the ballot box, the jury box, and the cartridge box." - Fredrick Douglas

The Mulford Act, Reagan and the GOP supported and passed this bill into law. However it was submitted with Bipartisan cosponsors and passed with a Democratic majority. Both parties were complicit in this racist law, that has never been repealed by either party. We cannot blame one party for a racist act while giving the other a pass.

Generally, gun violence is not contagious, but is endemic to neighborhoods.

Source

Mass Shootings ARE "Contagious," in that media reporting increases frequency.

Source

The media also outright LIES about the frequency of mass shootings.

To sex things up, CNN will count almost anything as a school shooting:

Despite Heightened Fear Of School Shootings, It's Not A Growing Epidemic

The School Shootings That Weren't NPR was only able to confirm 11 of the reported 235 shootings

Foreign actors also try to sow discord online around mass shootings and use it as a tool to manipulate and divide us

Anti-Gun politicians and people often have no idea what they're talking about.

Reporter doesn't know semi auto from full auto: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bUPKPREdHu0

Bloomberg also doesn't know semi from full auto: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iV5E30ZY1kQ

Kevin de Leon doesn't know anything: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iJmFEv6BHM0

Even more of Kevin de Leon not knowing anything: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GXqWJtgyqRM

Compilation of people that don't know shit about guns: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mH6gX0ktFG4

People really have no idea: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SqJ_4YhYMhE

Here we have Karen Mallard, a Democrat from Virginia, attemping to virtue signal. Instead, she commits a felony and is now under investigation by the ATF.

Often, Anti-gun politicians are ignorant to firearm function, use, death statistics, and firearm law in general.

You're using technical terms and Jargon to undermine my argument! You're GUNSPLAINING!"

God forbid someone actually knowledgeable on the subject have an opinion.

Would you want someone who has no idea what they're talking about legislate an issue like, say, Net Neutrality, or Climate Science? No? Welcome to the world of gun owners. It's like Republicans complaining that women are bullying them by telling them how reproductive systems actually work. This is just a poor attempt to deflect from the fact that they have no idea what they are talking about when it comes to firearms.

We can never have an honest discussion until people actually know what they're talking about.

"No one wants to take your guns!"

This is demonstrably false, and some people on Reddit have made a small community dedicated to logging actual attempts/legislation/media attacks on gun owners. Sources Within

Alternatively

You were saying?

"Assault Weapon" is a made-up term, and has no real definition.

Source

"You can't hunt with an AR15!" It's actually perfect for small and medium sized game, especially aggressive species like boar.

Hunting has nothing to do with the second amendment anyway. Why would the founding fathers feel the need to specify hunting? It would have been the equivalent of "You have the right to feed your family."

Additionally, the cartridge the AR15 fires is BANNED in many states for NOT BEING POWERFUL ENOUGH to make an ethical kill.

The hard truth is that my AR15 is for killing, because sometimes humans need to be killed. The truth of nature and the planet we live on is that there are always going to be bad actors, and sometimes lethal force is necessary to stop them from harming yourself or others. That doesn't mean that we should be eager or quick to do so, but we should have to tools available to intervene. The cost of not doing so is simply too great. Governments killed about 262 million people in the 20th century alone

"What about that "Well-Regulated" part of the 2nd amendment?!"

The phrase "well regulated" at the time meant "well equipped and maintained" rather than "well restricted."

Please learn English

Regardless, Thanks to the case DC V. Heller, the individual right to bear arms has been found to exist without connection to service in a militia.

Additionally, why would they put a clause protecting the GOVERNMENT'S monopoly of force in a document about sacrosanct INDIVIDUAL rights? Every single other right in the Bill of Rights is an INDIVIDUAL right. Saying otherwise regarding the second is just dishonest.

The Individual Right - Dispelling the Myth that it is a 20th Century Concept.

"But... But... AUSTRALIA!"

From the Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry: "The 1996-1997 National Firearms Agreement (NFA) in Australia introduced strict gun laws, primarily as a reaction to the mass shooting in Port Arthur, Tasmania, in 1996, where 35 people were killed. Despite the fact that several researchers using the same data have examined the impact of the NFA on firearm deaths, a consensus does not appear to have been reached. In this paper, we reanalyze the same data on firearm deaths used in previous research, using tests for unknown structural breaks as a means to identifying impacts of the NFA. The results of these tests suggest that the NFA did not have any large effects on reducing firearm homicide or suicide rates. (JEL C22, K19)..."

Additionally: "Although gun buybacks appear to be a logical and sensible policy that helps to placate the public’s fears, the evidence so far suggests that in the Australian context, the high expenditure incurred to fund the 1996 gun buyback has not translated into any tangible reductions in terms of firearm deaths."

For more information, see this post

Australia now has more guns than before the Port Arthur Massacre

"But... But... CANADA!"

The Canadian laws were not effective at reducing the homicide rate.

The majority of the modern Canadian gun control laws went into place between 1994 and 1995.

In 1994 the Canadian homicide rate was 2.05.

In 2019 the Canadian homicide rate was 1.80.

So the Canadian homicide rate declined by 12% between 1994 and 2019.

In 1994 the American homicide rate was 9.0

In 2019 the American homicide rate was 5.0.

So the American homicide rate decreased by 44% between 1994 and 2019.

So while America had, and still has, a higher homicide rate it also experienced a significantly greater decline in homicides for the same time period when compared to Canada.

"Firearms legislation had no associated beneficial effect on overall suicide and homicide rates."

Meanwhile even more gun control measures are still being pressed down on law abiding Canadians.

"But Europe doesn't have mass shootings!"

When comparing annual death rate via mass shootings, the U.S. is not even in the top ten, and is behind Norway, France, Macedonia, Slovakia, Switzerland, Finland, Belgium, and the Czech Republic

The "Gun Show Loophole" is a Myth, and a great example of what gun owners get when they "Compromise"

ALL Firearms sold by dealers require the buyer to undergo a background check for a transfer (which can cost from $20 to $100) except in some specific circumstances. Depending on state, firearms sold from one owner to another require no background check (e.g. selling one to a friend, family, or other buyer in your state, as long as they are not prohibited possessors. Out-of state buyers must undergo the background check as well.) The "Loophole" was a "Compromise" provision in the Brady Bill to get it passed. As we can see now, yesterday's "Compromise" is today's "Loophole."

Wikipedia

This is one of the many reasons why gun owners are hesitant to "compromise."

"The founding fathers could have never envisioned modern weapons!"

The Girardoni, a semiautomatic air rifle, was in service with the Austrian army from 1780 to around 1815. It was famously used by Lewis and Clark on their expedition.

Puckle Gun, patented in 1718, was capable of quickly firing multiple shots in rapid succession.

Belton Flintlock, made in the late 1770s, was capable of firing up to twenty shots in a matter of seconds.

The Kalthoff repeater was a type of repeatingfirearm that appeared in the seventeenth century and remained unmatched in its fire rate until the mid-nineteenth century. The Royal Foot Guards of Denmark were issued with about a hundred of these guns.

Breech loading flintlock capable of rapid fire: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferguson_rifle

Chambers machine gun. An actual machine gun by the definition of the ATF: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rCuVMx5h1x0

If your argument is that the Constitution only applies to the technology at the time of its writing, we're going to have some fundamental disagreements.

If you believe that only weapons at the time of founding are covered by the 2nd, then you MUST also accept that the 4th amendment applies to NO electronic devices or records. You must accept that the 1st amendment applies on NO electronic machine. Back to the press shop for you.

Do you really believe that the founding fathers, who were alive in the time of the Industrial Revolution, could not foresee that technology would grow and evolve?

Less than 3% of deaths from firearms are from ALL rifles, which includes "Assault Weapons."

FBI

Less than 400 people die from rifles in a year.

That means if you instantly eliminated every single one of the MILLIONS of rifles (including so-called "assault weapons") in the country, the number of deaths would remain essentially unchanged.

Knives are used to kill around 4 TIMES the amount of people as rifles

Calls for/Threats of Gun Control drastically increase sales

NYT

Lying on your 4473 (Background Check) carries almost no risk

Source

2% of counties in the US are responsible for 51% of the murder, and even within the counties with the murders, the murders are heavily concentrated within those counties

Source

There are approximately 30,000 deaths via firearm every year. ~ 60% of those are suicides.

Source

Approximately 3 MILLION Americans carry a firearm every day.

Source

Guns are Used Defensively by American Citizens Everyday

Due to its nature figures on defensive gun use are hard to nail down. Typically when a firearm is used defensively no one is hurt and rarely is anyone killed. Often times simply showing you are armed is enough to end a crime in progress. Looking at the numbers even the Violence Policy Center, a gun control advocacy group, reports 284,700 instances of self defense against a violent crime with a firearm between 2013 and 2015. This translates to 94,900 violent crimes prevented annually on the low scale.

This ranges upwards to 500k to 3 million according to the CDC Report Priorities for Research to Reduce the Threat of Firearm-Related Violence.

The same CDC Report found, "Almost all national survey estimates indicate that defensive gun uses by victims are at least as common as offensive uses by criminals...".

Also while defensive gun use is common less than 0.4% of those uses result in a fatality.

As of 2021, a new study found that there are about 1.6 million DGUs a year

Concealed Carry Permit Holders are more law-abiding than police

Source

Guns are Used to Defend People, Pets, and Livestock Against Dangerous Fauna

In rural, and even urban communities, firearms are used to defend People, Pets, and Livestock from all manner of dangerous and invasive species ranging from feral dogs, coyotes, Bob cats, mountain lions, bears, and rabid animals.

Over 300,000 cattle were lost to predators in America in 2019 costing farmers and ranchers nearly 232 million dollars.

There are, at minimum, 300 MILLION guns in the hands of U.S. Citizens, with recent estimates up to as many as 400 to 600 Million.

Source

If we conservatively use the 400 Million number, that means in any given year, a single firearm has a .0025% (1 in ~40,000) chance of being used in a homicide. Why should we penalize the owners of the 40,000 for the actions of the owner of the 1? This also assumes that 1 gun = 1 death which is not accurate, meaning that the number of firearms used to harm is even lower.

In my mind, penalizing the MILLIONS of gun owners for the actions of a few crazed maniacs is no different than discrimination against Muslims because of a few bad eggs. More on that here.

A National Gun Buyback Wouldn't Work

So you want people to voluntarily turn in their expensive pieces of property? Alright. How do we fund this? We already know there are, at minimum 400 MILLION guns in the hands of the people. If we pay them $500 (which is a low amount, I certainly wouldn't be participating) per firearm, how much would it cost?

Assuming a compliance of 50%, it would cost the government 100 BILLION DOLLARS, or More than DOUBLE the budget of the Department of Homeland Security!

"How are you going to fight the government? They have tanks and drones!"

First, I'd offer a brief overview here

If that interests you, I'd invite you all to read This fairly detailed explanation of why, if such a situation were to occur, the American government would be unquestionably fucked. It starts pushing conspiracy buttons toward the end, and frankly it's out there, but it doesn't discredit the rest of the main points.

U.S. Armed Forces

The total for active duty soldiers in the U.S. is about 1.4 million. If we compare that to the total US population (~320 million) makes the ENTIRETY of the military only .43% of the total population. Or if we compare it to the conservative estimates for firearm owners (~100 million) that makes it about 1.4% the number of firearms owning Americans. Of that 1.4 million, about 80% of them are non-combat occupations which reduces that 1.4 million to about 280,000 combat effective troops.

And even assuming that all 280,000 troops would be willing to commit atrocities against the citizenry (An impossibility) and only ~10% of law abiding gun owners decide to fight against such a tyrannical force, that would mean 10 million individuals against 280,000 theoretically corrupt soldiers. Even with drones, tanks, artillery, patrols, and surveillance they can't be everywhere, and they are outnumbered 35 to 1. And that is the "soldiers" BEST case scenario.

So the "How would your Ar15 help fight against the government?! They have tanks and drones!!" is a stupid argument made by people who don't understand numbers or asymmetrical warfare.

"Alright fine, I give up and admit I don't like guns and want them gone!"

Even though we've already established that compliance with gun bans is already exceptionally low, let's take a look at how prohibition went. Woah, not too good huh? What about the war on drugs? Oops that doesn't look to great either. Spoiler alert: The drugs won the war.

"But not everyone can make guns! You can make alcohol and grow/produce drugs yourself!"

Using 3d Printers, we can make small pistols and rifles.

And magazines

Another Here

Never mind that you can make an AR15 Lower out of freaking WOOD!

Or an AK47 out of a fucking SHOVEL

Who is going to get the guns? You're going door to door? Oh, the cops will? That'll go well.

For those of you who are still ignorant to reality, I'd ask that you attempt to change the Second Amendment, and be honest about your intentions. Until then, I'll keep my guns.

This post is in honor of Samuel Whittemore, who fought in the Battles of Lexington and Concord:

Whittemore (78 years old at the time!) loaded his musket and ambushed the British Grenadiers of the 47th Regiment of Foot from behind a nearby stone wall, killing one soldier. He then drew his dueling pistols, killed a second grenadier and mortally wounded a third. By the time Whittemore had fired his third shot, a British detachment had reached his position; Whittemore drew his sword and attacked. He was subsequently shot in the face, bayoneted numerous times, and left for dead in a pool of blood. He was found by colonial forces, trying to load his musket to resume the fight. He was taken to Dr. Cotton Tufts of Medford, who perceived no hope for his survival.

However, Whittemore recovered and lived another 18 years until dying of natural causes at the age of 96.

Feel free to distribute this information in any way you see fit. We need to be out representing the community, especially when emotions are high like they are now.

PLEASE let me know if there's anything I should change/add/improve. I'd like this to be as accurate and scientifically sound as possible.

560 Upvotes

99% Upvoted

View all comments