Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
how about this .....a thug or crazed person is coming at you with bad intentions. Would you rather be...
A- Banned from owning a firearm for protection while you wait for 911 to come save you?
B- Have a firearm for protection while you wait for 911 to come save you?
And yet, this study STILL can't explain why gun-control utopias like New Jersey, New York, Chicago, Los Angeles, have more gun crime than "the wild west" places like Florida, Texas, Arizona, etc. Nice try though.
Yep, and if a criminal meets a sudden end the tax payers save a lot of money.
how about this .....a thug or crazed person is coming at you with bad intentions. Would you rather be...
A- Banned from owning a firearm for protection while you wait for 911 to come save you?
B- Have a firearm for protection while you wait for 911 to come save you?
duh
C. We could get the bottom mass shooters do it and solve the problems
Cool, so I take it you have no substantive rebuttal on the study then. I thought so. I don't expect any conservative to have one.
They are adjusting the raw data for crime and other factors.
Quote:
In their analysis, the team also controlled for a range of factors that could affect the homicide rate, including poverty, unemployment, violent crime, incarceration, gender and race.
Translation is high crime areas will be scored lower and low crime areas that are going to have a high rate of legal gun ownership will be scored higher. That's besides the fact they are using suicide rates to determine gun ownership.
There is reasons to adjust raw data but if the intention of this study is to show crime statistics by gun ownership I'm not sure how you can justify adjusting data based on crime itself. That defeats the purpose doesn't it?
Yeah, yeah..... Nothing new here. Just rehashing the same debate we've been having for decades.
Fact is, none of it matters, not even a stitch.
We have a Right to keep and bear arms, for better or worse. Until that changes by amendment or repeal, it really doesn't matter who comes up with what study, or what those studies might conclude ( or who paid for those conclusions )
"Study" is not Peer Reviewed Research based on Scientific Method
Yet another long winded "study' that ignores the obvious.....
Criminals use guns to break laws (The Fact)
So lets create more laws to stop Criminals (The Fallacy)
When Harvard can produce a "study" that addresses that simple fact, then we might have something. Yet there is none as always. This is another example of an "opinion" article where there was a pre-determined outcome, then they simply picked facts to support it.
Case Closed.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
"Study" is not Peer Reviewed Research based on Scientific Method
