Wherever you are with this stuff, don't accept articles like this as a valuable, or even harmless, contribution to the discourse. It is using the terrible Twitt

Wherever you are with this stuff, don't accept articles like this as a valuable, or even harmless, contribution to the discourse. It is using the terrible Twitter-based dark pattern of not actually taking a stand one way or the other, so that anybody can read the article and feel like they agree with it. Get angry, but you bring-your-own object for that anger. To demonstrate, four out of the five articles that are supposed to be "the other side" are non-editorial news articles citing crime statistics. The other one is hardly an argument to "not get angry." Whoever this person is, they spend too much time on Twitter and it really shows. Pushing and monetizing anger itself like this should be outright spotted for what it is: flame bait for clicks.