Posted on 07/11/2015 6:01:01 PM PDT by PROCON
A high-profile shooting, like the June 17 crime that left dead nine members of a historically black church in Charleston, South Carolina, is typically followed by calls for greater gun control, along with counter arguments that the best way to stop gun crimes is with more guns.
"The one thing that would have at least ameliorated the horrible situation in Charleston would have been that if somebody in that prayer meeting had a conceal carry or there had been either an off-duty policeman or an on-duty policeman, somebody with the legal authority to carry a firearm and could have stopped the shooter," presidential candidate Mike Huckabee said in a Fox News interview on June 19.
A new study, however, throws cold water on the idea that a well-armed populace deters criminals or prevents murders. Instead, higher ownership of guns in a state is linked to more firearm robberies, more firearm assaults and more homicide in general. [5 Milestones in Gun Control History]
(Excerpt) Read more at msn.com ...
Michael Bellesisles was his name, I think. He claimed to have studied a group of probate court records that ultimately turned out to have been mythical. He resigned rather than face an investigation, had to return his Bancroft Prize and award money, and was last reported teaching at a community college in the northeast.
Ironically, he wasn’t brought down by the NRA or “gun lobby”...he was exposed by his fellow historians, who had expressed great interest in working with these new-found source documents for their own purposes, and grew suspicious when his sketchy references to their origin and location turned up empty every time.
A bunch of gated community with security patrol Marxist who never lived as adults in the real world say....
Thanks, I remember it all now.
he had claimed to have proven that colonial era American almost never owned guns. He was trying to show that the second amendment was not about Americans being armed.
“Outcome-based”, “confirmation-biased”, they designed a study that would give them precisely the findings they desired. It isn’t hard to do - one must simply cast off any pretense of objectivity.
This is how dhimmicrats do “science”.
What he doesn’t tell you, is he considers someone defending themselves with a gun as a violent gun crime too.
They should check out Guns Save Lives daily feed. One of the many problems with this study is there are no records of the number of times people just had to brandish a gun to chase away a would-be attacker.
Do you mean he was intellectually dishonest like Martin Luther King, Jr. was with his dissertation?
If the SHTF, what is this Harvard professor going to do?
Call the cops.
Why?
Because they have guns.
Yet this genius cannot put 2 and 2 together.
Collectively, maybe it’s true. But to one individual, only their own unique personal battle matters.
In the study, the Lynn Russell data point would be one where the gun did NOT deter the crime. The criminal was undeterred.
I really like how these political agenda LIBs pump out worthless “studies” that reach their preconceived notions and that support their malignant politics. How much tax-payer money was wasted on this fool’s grant?
One of the most telling things about Martin Luther King Jr. is that his FBI records appear to be permanently sealed.
Will they be released in a hundred years? I doubt it.
The fact that this “study” was done by a pediatician at Harvard’s medical school says it all.
The disarmists no long look to criminological studies or economic studies because most of what they want in “gun control” was discredited by criminologists and economist decades ago.
They have had to go to the medical profession to find people that are willing to ignore enough evidence to publish this sort of non-sense.
It doesn’t hurt that Bloomberg is throwing millions at the medical profession to churn out this stuff.
IMHO, there is a high likelihood that the study is flawed.
...the number of times all a person had to do was brandish a gun...
See post #17
Nice!
That did it for me :-)
As soon as I saw the word “ameliorated” in the first sentence I knew that the author of this article was a “heavy thinker—little doer” and what would follow would be an article based upon his wonderful ability to figure out how he got lint in his navel and little else.
You can just bet big words mean little common sense or the ability to rationalize and analyze...only parrot what what you are told.
“Just the sound of that 870 loading diffused the situation.”
As one of my buddies likes to say:”Sounds like the gates of Hell slamming shut.”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.