[seoaeu]

> dishonestly claims that link was related to the claim about crime rates — when it clearly wasn’t.

I’m sorry for assuming that the final sentence of the comment and only citation was related to the rest of it

[zmgsabst]

I accept your apology for making a bad assumption that ignored the actual text of my post and which assumed bad faith on my part, since that link supported the nearby text which described data from that report.

[seoaeu]

No, I assumed you were engaging in good faith when you mentioned rifles. Instead you were responding to strawman argument no one made about how banning rifles (but not pistols) wouldn’t work.