Posted on 02/05/2011 9:49:18 AM PST by JohnRLott
Since the tragedy in Tucson, the New York Times has started an all-out campaign for gun control, with a relentless number of pieces -- news, editorials, and op-eds. In its advocacy, even the news stories are heavily biased by selectively quoting only academics who support pro-gun control positions. These seemingly unbiased sources are then contrasted with opposing views from clearly biased people on the other side, such as an NRA spokesman or a right-wing politician. The implied conclusion: scientific evidence favors gun control, but self-interest stands in the way.
Take two recent news stories by Michael Luo (here and here). He quotes seven academics who agreed with the New York Times position, but no one on the other side was even interviewed. Talk about misrepresenting academic opinion. The overwhelming majority of studies actually supports the claim that more guns mean less crime. Among peer-reviewed studies in academic journals, criminologists and economists studying right-to-carry laws have produced 18 national studies showing that these laws reduce violent crime, 10 indicate no discernible effect and none finds a bad effect from the law. One would never guess that 294 academics from institutions as diverse as Harvard, Stanford, Northwestern, the University of Pennsylvania, and UCLA released an open letter to Congress during 1999 warning that new gun laws were “ill advised.”
A frequent claim in these recent New York Times articles has been that more guns mean more gun deaths (see also here). . .
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
You can tell a Commie easy. They’re the ones who use vowels and consonants in their posts.
Why do you think Bloomberg sent agents to Ariozona and publicly stated that they bought guns there illegally.
He is buying the New York times loyalty for his next campaign run.
Judge not that ye be not judged!
He who lives by the sword dies by the sword.
I like my 3 year old's idea better. She thinks that bullets should be made out of rainbows and cotton candy. In fact, right after I start some threads on the revolt in Egypt and partial birth abortion I'm going to start a thread on that idea so that folks can discuss the merits of her suggestion.
If you are unable to admit that you understand & enjoy Chris Rock, you are part of the problem.
Maybe not the flamin’ front end of the problem, but part and parcel of the under’lie’in’ support system.
Please do some work on yourself, do it for the rest of us!
You are like, when a homeless person comes up, oooh gaaawd, please find someplace to take a shower!!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wESrtAdYdn0&feature=related
Nazi. Go salute your beloved swastika, you Hitler worshiping brownshirt. Einz zwei drie feir
I’m still lookin’, but everything I see speaks conserative. I like raw and rough humor. I agree with Gen. Patton; a real gentleman should be able to cuss for three minutes straight without repeating himself.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EXJJFT9GZwY&NR
Why .... why.... why, I never!
What is a Mennonite anyway? Is it one who uses that underarm deodorant stick? Couldn't be me, I don't use deodorant.
Good one...
Conservatives don’t live in New Jersey. Even the most right leaning people there are far to the left of Conservatives in free states.
“If you are unable to admit that you understand & enjoy Chris Rock, you are part of the problem.”
Guess I’m part of the problem. He’s a no talent foul mouthed actor wanna be.
I am ABLE to admit that I DO NOT understand nor enjoy that joke. Does that make me part of the problem? You lost me.
For a joke to be funny there needs to be some grain of truth behind it. It is obvious Chris Rock has never given a second thought to the issues concerning gun control or the manufacture and sale of ammunition or the rights protected by the 2nd amemendment.
A couple of articles in the Times point to a University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine survey claiming that those who carry guns are far likelier to get shot—and killed—than those who are unarmed. This fails to ask why people carry guns in the first place.
When people who should know better confuse correlation and causation I begin to suspect their objectivity.
It essentially found that people who live in crappy neighborhoods fear crime, and get guns, but still suffer more crime than people who live in good neighborhoods. The conclusion the gun grabbers draw from this is akin to believing that buying a gun will relocate you to a dangerous neighborhood.
The NYT only has two criteria for printing something. The first is “Will it help the agenda we’re trying to push?” The second is “Can we get away with it?” Note that “Is it true?” is not in the criteria. All of the NYT stories for the next twenty years are already written. They just wait for an event to occur so they can strap their agenda laden article to it.
well, in one of his routines,(which he no longer performs) he got it right.
What makes Chris Rock so hilarious is that his commentary not only rings true but hits upon feelings and thoughts most of us have but are often afraid to express in today’s “politically correct” atmosphere. Chris Rock is a very intelligent comedian that shows you a vision of the world we tend to hide or ignore. All of Rock’s material is solid and most of it is intelligent and thought-provoking. If you can have an open mind you can enjoy his message.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n8BtHZWGB8c&feature=related
The population of England increased steadly in the 19th Century. World banana production increased steadly in the 19th Century. Therefore, if you wish to increase the population of England, grow more bananas.
“If you can have an open mind you can enjoy his message.”
Ah so if you don’t like Chris Rock then you are close minded intolerant, bitter, and probably a redneck.
You are quite a piece of work.
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.