People decide how to vote based on information from a lot of sources, including conversations at work, w/family or w/friends. Some “well-known facts” are facts only because no one questions them. An example is that a gun works (1) for self-defense & (2) more often hurts bad guys. 1/5

6/12 I compared NRA’s stopping CDC peer-reviewed studies of gun violence as health risk to tobacco companies’ suppressing studies that showed mainstream smoke (MSM) harms its users. Inferences arise from spoliation of evidence & a reply was “That’s not spoliation!” 2/5

I never said that’s spoliation. I said that people need the info peer-reviewed studies can provide. In 1964, the year the Surgeon General released report that MSM causes cancer & other illnesses, about 42% of adults smoked. Today the percentage is 18. The NRA values ignorance. 3/5

The principle is the same: if someone wants to keep you ignorant about a “fact,” a valid inference is that it is not a fact. In our daily conversations, we need to presume guns are counter-productive in self-defense. After all, if they really worked, the NRA would want studies. 4/5

We should infer guns cause more harm than they prevent. I’m Mark Small: anti-gun, pro-choice, pro environment, pro-science, pro-separation of church & State GOP candidate for Indiana House Distr 86. I approve of this blog. Hell, I wrote it. 5/5