And now. I'm still feeling blunt, so: I have seen a lot of argument about this topic recently, and I have seen some reasonable, thoughtful arguments behind the opinion that less gun regulation is better, arguments that contain facts and logic. But nearly everything I see on the topic from you is just a reiteration of your opinion. You avoid anything that might challenge that opinion using generalities, red herrings, and, when those aren't readily available, the simple strategy of "duck and cover."
I don't think who King donates to has a damn thing to do with your refusal to read this essay. I think you're afraid that it might make you think. That it might make you question your stance. That your extreme beliefs are based upon such a foundation of clay and sand that the second you start examining them, they'll crumple. If that's the case, then maybe they could stand to be examined.