Posted on 05/27/2017 9:24:01 AM PDT by rktman
I read with fascination this article that appeared in the Macon, Georgia Telegraph today, which I’m pleased to see is getting a fair amount of press on my favorite pro-Second Amendment sites. And by fascination, I really mean the sort of morbid, irresistible curiosity that compels one to stare at car accidents and other scenes of destruction, like The Kramer.
In it, breathless researchers from Boston University trumpet their newly launched State Firearm Law Database. The article is sure to appeal to the logic challenged, especially those who already suffer from full-blown hoplophobia. Michael Siegel and Molly Pahn propose to examine “gun violence”—a nonsensical term beloved by the civilian disarmament crowd, as I’ve previously explained—and how it may seem to be affected by different regulatory schemes in various states.
While I’m fairly sure I know what they hope to accomplish—career advancement and research funding from wealthy liberals like Michael Bloomberg—I’m not sure that they’re prepared for other experts to analyze their data and draw their own conclusions.
The data they supply thus far is simply a state-by-state catalog of gun control legislation. They misleadingly describe these as “gun safety laws”, but they are actually all restrictions on Americans’ Constitutionally enshrined right to keep and bear arms. For example, their database would characterize the passage of so-called Constitutional Carry laws as a reduction in “policies to reduce gun violence”, while I would describe such laws as enhancing personal and public safety.
(Excerpt) Read more at drgo.us ...
Its "School of Public Health" or whatever has some guy that's been playing loose with gun statistics for at least ten years.
Hey, why not? BU awarded MLK, Jr. his degree, even though he knowingly plagiarized in his doctoral thesis.
Interesting graph. What it really measures is how many cesspool like cities are present in each state.
John Edeen, MD from DRGO is a regular on lock and load radio, and he lurks in the chat room during the show.
It’s good to look at the US maps linked at the end of the article.
I'm sure someone will flame me for that. Have at it.
“Correlation does not necessarily prove causation. However...”
Maybe not,but it’s doing a damned good imitation! :-)
.
The graph suffers from selection bias.
They only consider murders committed with guns.
If total murders go up when guns are limited, nothing is gained, much is lost.
So the correct metric is total murders.
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.