A liberal New York Times columnist called for a full ban on semiautomatic rifles Wednesday, but made numerous inaccurate claims surrounding firearms, getting the basic terminology describing them, the process in purchasing them, and the history of the legislation regulating them wrong.
In the column headlined, "Sick of Massacres? Get Rid of the Guns," Gail Collins wrote that gunmen in various mass shootings across the U.S. in recent years using semiautomatic rifles was "a pattern," and therefore such weapons needed to be severely restricted or removed from society.
"Good Lord, just get rid of them … [it] does simplify things, doesn't it?" she wrote, after suggesting background check laws needed to be strengthened and that the sale of "semiautomatics" needed to be restricted to those with hunting licenses.
She went on to make a number of false claims and mischaracterizations to support her argument.
Fox News Digital spoke with The Reload's Stephen Gutowski, who offered his expertise on firearms to pick apart Collins' claims.
NY TIMES REPORT NOTES 'SEISMIC' HIT TO PUBLIC SCHOOLS IN WAKE OF PANDEMIC
Collins claimed the 18-year-old suspect in last week's shooting in Buffalo, New York, Payton Gendron, bought an "AR-15-style assault rifle with just a little more effort than it'd take to buy a burrito."
"The last time I bought a burrito I did not have to show a valid government-issued ID, fill out a questionnaire under threat of federal felony charges for lying, and have the FBI do a background check on me as is required when buying a gun from a licensed dealer (which happened in this case)," Gutowski told Fox News Digital.
"But, given her position on The New York Times editorial board, it's highly likely Collins has never actually gone through the process to buy a gun or, for that matter, bought her own burritos in years. Honestly, I'd be surprised if she knew bananas don't cost ten dollars," he added.
Collins also cited gun-control activist Ryan Busse, who claimed that needing a semiautomatic rifle to go hunting was "like arguing that you need a Formula One racecar to go shopping. She then falsely claimed that Congress banned all "semiautomatic rifles" in its 1994 federal "assault weapons" ban, despite the ban only applying to certain types of guns.
CALIFORNIA UNDER-21 GUN SALES BAN RULED UNCONSTITUTIONAL BY US APPEALS COURT
Gutowski explained that Collins's claim that "semiautomatic rifles" were banned was "not true," and that the law actually banned what it referred to as "assault weapons," "a nebulous term with a definition that varies from statute to statute."
"However, it is always limited to semiautomatic rifles with features such as a detachable magazine, flash suppressor, pistol grip, or telescoping stock. It is completely false to say all semiautomatic rifles were banned under the federal 'assault weapons' ban," he said.
Gutowski also criticized the terminology Collins used when making her arguments, noting that she was conflating the terms "assault rifle" and "semiautomatic rifle."
"Getting rid of assault rifles won’t solve the gun problem as long as people in many states are allowed to own pistols and carry them when they stroll about the town," Collins had written.
"Get rid of assault rifles. All assault rifles. Ban them. Hunters can work on becoming better shots. The gun industry can diversify — and maybe start marketing swords and medieval knight costumes at its trade shows. I know swords can do a lot of damage, but we live in an age when one victim at a time would definitely be progress," she later added.
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
Gutowski pointed out the specific difference between the terms amid his criticism.
"She clearly doesn't understand the term 'semiautomatic rifle,' which refers to any rifle capable of firing a round and reloading itself from a magazine during each pull of its trigger. She conflates that term with ‘assault rifle’ which refers to a rifle chambered for an intermediate-sized cartridge that is capable of both semiautomatic fire and automatic fire," he wrote.
Fox News reached out to The New York Times for comment but didn't receive a response by the time of publication.