Perhaps I flew over the details, but my overall impression was that a guy who had been severely influenced by the anti hype took some steps to overcome that influence in his own mind.
He then wrote the article well (for the casual reader and anti-gunners) but not up to par for the veteran gun rights protectors and debaters who dice weak positions in their sleep.
(compliment definitely intended there)
I hope it did way more good than bad for a mixed audience.
As always, MHO goes for
.