Help me answer this fellow

[mikerault]

He posted on my blog in answer to a piece I wrote about Gun Control and its negative side:

http://newtrajectory.blogspot.com/2011/01/important-data-trends-nra-doesnt-want.html

Thanks for any help!

Here is my blog entry:

http://mikerault.blogspot.com/search?q=gun+control

 

[riverwalker76]

I don't know.

However ... I would tell that Laci character to pull her lip over her head and swallow.

 

[Brian Pfleuger]

If you think he's wrong, you need to dig into the numbers he's using and prove it. If the numbers are right, they're right. You can't argue against correct information. You'd need to argue why they're not relevant or something.

 

[DogoDon]

All you need is to debunk the LCAV state gun law rankings, since that is the linchpin of the whole argument that "laxer gun laws = more gun deaths". And the NRA has clearly debunked those rankings.

Look here. It should give you what you need.

In short, the rankings are hogwash.

DD

 

[mikerault]

Thanks everyone! I am already using Lott's data.

 

[DiscoRacing]

Some of the comments there were more interesting than the figure itself...

... the kind of reading material I need when I go huntin

(case I have nothin to wipe with)

 

[mikerault]

On another forum one of the posters stated that they use CDC data in their work all the time. They checked the site and couldn't fine the data, so they checked with CDC themselves who stated they do not have that data broken out that way, obviously there has been some sort of manipulation to the data. I have asked the OP to show his data manipulation methodologies.

 

[700cdl]

The FBI web site has some very good fact based statistics that show an average 38% reduced violent crime in states that allow open carry. Lots of other long term stats on the effects of gun control v.s. fewer restrictions can be found on their web site. My percentage may be not be right on the nose, but I think its close for the open carry if memory serves me well. I like to refrence official studies such as this, because they are from a source that is usually considered trust worthy in the eyes of the anti-gun population.

 

[ipscchef]

I have tried to post a reply to the "Data" on the first link you provided. I am still waiting for approvel.
What I said was that the data they used was patently false, and that if anyone wanted to have an honest debate on the subject needed to read the "Unified Crime Report", put out by the Justice Department, I believe that is what it is still called. It is a massive compilation of all incedence reports by I believe every LE agency in the US for a given year. I have not looked it up in quite some time, but one stat that does stick in my mind is that about two million violent crimes are prevented by citizens with legal firearms in any given year. In addition, 5 to 7 times as many violent felons are killed by Law Abiding Citizens than by LEO's every year.

 

[ipscchef]

More BS from 700CDL

700CDL,
Again, you have posted what I consider BS. I have just spent the better part of an hour on the FBI website and I cannot for the life of me find the stats that you quote. This should be an easy one for you, or anyone else for that matter, to tell me where I might find that information. This is what I consider a critical lie on your part. You have posted something that another person here might use without checking the source themselves. Although this would be a mistake on their part, nonetheless, they may be caught in a bad position because they believed you. Refencing fact based studies is something we all would welcome, as long as they really exist.
You have chosen to ignore my calls for you to prove yourself, until now your postings have been very nebulous. But now you state something that can be proven or disproven. You have posted something that is not true. This does not violate any of the stated rules on this forum, but that alone does not make it acceptable.
Show us all just exactly where on the FBI website that it shows your figures.
You have been able to get away with your lies until now, but I believe you have cornered yourself with this latest lie.
Please, prove me wrong, answer in some way, other than hiding behind your keyboard. The statistics are either on the site, or they are not.If they are not, then you have been caught in a lie that you cannot hide from.
So, what will it be? I am waiting.

William Henderson

 

[Buzzcook]

I am already using Lott's data.

First thins first. Do not use Lott. He is completely unreliable. If the person you're conversing with bothers to do the research, your credibility will suffer.

Since this is his article you have to find errors in his argument. Don't present your own argument. That keeps you on the offensive.

Probably the best theme to use in a statistical argument is to insist that your opponent prove causation. The saying goes "correlation is not causation".
eg states that went for McCain over Obama have a higher correlation with violent death. That doesn't mean that voting for McCain causes violent death.
http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/11/01/the-geography-of-gun-deaths-/69354/

The odds are that your opponent is simply parroting some other writer. If he has links, look for the original author. Frequently a web poster tend to edit the original source to bolster his argument. You might be able to find that with this guy.
If he is using an academic source, that source will have qualifiers instead of outright assertions regarding that data. Use those qualifiers against your opponent.

Finally, it is a mistake to think you have to make the anti- gun control argument. Just as there is correlation between gun laws and gun violence, there is even stronger correlation between violence and poverty, education, race, and a host of other statistics. You could instead propose alternative solutions to gun violence that would be more effective than your opponent.
For example, Coral Springs, Fla. and Orlando, Fla. have similar gun control laws, yet Coral Springs has a lower incidence of violent crime. Instead of indulging in regulations that have doubtful efficacy, perhaps we should find those positive characteristics of cities such as Coral Springs, Fla. and apply them to cities such as Orlando, Fla.
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0921299.html

Then make the argument for your exemplar cities and those more effective efforts that you choose. It boils down to "you might put out a house fire with a garden hose, but why not use the fire dept. instead.

BTW, the District of Columbia has one of the highest incidence of violent death and went overwhelmingly for Obama.