Posted on 04/19/2007 10:36:04 PM PDT by ForegoneAlternative
The Wall Street Journal
THE NUMBERS GUY
By CARL BIALIK
Gun-Policy Advocates On Both Sides of Issue Push Dubious Figures
April 20, 2007
[Various liberals, and Kleck, too, taken to task, then this…]
Another number that has emerged from the antigun-control camp ties multiple-victim public shootings to restrictions on carrying concealed weapons. John Lott Jr., visiting professor at SUNY, Binghamton, and University of Chicago economist William Landes counted references to multiple public shootings -- more than one killed or wounded at one time -- in the Lexis/Nexis news database for a 2000 book. They matched trends from 1977 to 1999 with right-to-carry laws, and found that when states allowed the carrying of concealed weapons, the rate of these attacks declined by 60%.
But another study, published in 2002 in the journal Homicide Studies, found "virtually no support for the hypothesis that the laws increase or reduce the number of mass public shootings." This later study counted only shootings with four or more murders, used FBI crime data to supplement news reports and, unlike the Lott-Landes work, included shootings that were byproducts of other crimes, such as gang murders.
Grant Duwe, a researcher on the later study, said the news-archive approach was likely incomplete, because the media don't always give publicity to multiple shootings.
Prof. Lott wrote in an email that he counted less-severe incidents to get enough data for statistically significant results. He justifies his exclusion of gang murders because gun usage by chronic criminals "would not be directly affected by the passage of right-to-carry laws."
That seems to be precisely the reason to include them for a full picture of the effect of these laws. [blablabla]
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
It’s been pretty well proven that where there is an abundance of guns, the crime rate is low. The media does not want it to be known, however.
There’s lies, damn lies and statistics. :)
So if gang members had to apply for CCL, they wouldn’t commit any murders?? Wow, those Wall Street Journal guys are smart!!!
Regardless of the numbers and what the stalinists in the media say, the fact still remains that if everyone at Virginia Tech on the day of the shooting had a loaded AK slung over their shoulders, 32 innocent people wouldn’t be dead.
Beat me to the punch. Couldn’t have said it better myself.
I can understand supplementing with FBI data, but then exclude shootings under four murders and include gang shootings? Talk about selective.
Gang shootings aren’t typical. Though states may have CC laws, the cities within those states where gangs predominately are usually ban carrying. Did the study exclude murders from those cities?
Alot of gang shootings are full auto, drive by, and with a gang mentality of revenging against all who fight back. Not so with an independent gunman. You can’t even legally shoot someone doing a drive by after they’ve stopped shooting and are driving off in most states. Seems like they’ve indcluded them to get the numbers they want.
***Regardless of the numbers and what the stalinists in the media say, the fact still remains that if everyone at Virginia Tech on the day of the shooting had a loaded AK slung over their shoulders, 32 innocent people wouldn’t be dead.***
This is why students in Israel are allowed to carry Uzis and M-16s to class. Remember Ma’alot?
Daaa-Yum!
I’m not even that attracted to blondes, but DAAA-yum!
bttt
BTTT!
The number of times crazed gunmen have attacked police stations, NRA conventions, military bases and firing ranges in America is too numerous to count.
But, but, I thought if the 2nd Amendment saves the life of JUST ONE CHILD it will be worth it? That's what the elite say about everything else!
Ask Mary Carpenter, she knows:
Mary Carpenter In Her Own Words about gun control:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K73pWPAYg0g
http://www.grnc.org/mary_carpenter_letter.htm
Mary Carpenter's letter to the North Carolina General Assembly:
All the gun laws you can imagine cannot change the heart of a killer and you know it.
Until man's heart is changed, we will be like sheep led to the slaughter without our weapons of defense.
May you stand before God and man as my two precious grandchildren's killer if you pass any more gun legislation that will make me a felon should I own a handgun or any other gun for that matter.
Yes, looking at the numbers can give different results depending on how you’re looking at them.
At one extreme, we see a great benefit.
At the other extreme, we see no benefit (neutral results).
Ergo, _at_worst_ there isn’t a problem, and _at_best_ they’re very beneficial.
So end the bans; no matter how you look at the numbers, prohibition isn’t helping.
In order to avoid unnecessary duplication, please use original headlines.
“This later study counted only shootings with four or more murders, used FBI crime data to supplement news reports and, unlike the Lott-Landes work, included shootings that were byproducts of other crimes, such as gang murders.”
IOW, they dishonestly designed their study to yield the result they wanted.
Got to remember the first law: all leftists lie all the time.
BUMP!
Yes, the gungrabbers never seem to mention that these mass murderers prefer "gun-free zones" for their heinous crimes.
That's exactly what a Senator Schumer or a Metzenbaum is trying to create: havens for those who would commit wholesale murder.
Rendering people defenseless does not make them safer: it makes them easier targets for those who would massacre them.
This has GOT to made into a poster or bumper sticker!
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.