May 2, 2013
I know Ann Coulter is a polarizing figure but here's a really interesting article worth reading if you're following the gun control debate. It concerns the validity or lack thereof of some of the firearms statistics and data, specifically those from author of "More Guns, Less Crime", John Lott.
It's popular among gun control advocates to claim that he or his work has been discredited. But they're a little light on supporting data, as is usual when they're trotting out their favorite statistics, polls and the like.
And how about this for professional courtesy? "In 1997, a computer crash led to the loss of Lott’s underlying data. Fortunately, he had previously sent this data to his critics – professors Dan Black, Dan Nagin and Jens Ludwig. When Lott asked if they would mind returning it to him to restore his files, they refused. (One former critic, Carlisle Moody, conducted his own analysis of Lott’s data and became a believer. He has since co-authored papers with Lott.)" Despicable, don't you think? Can you imagine receiving such an insult after extending the courtesy of sharing decades worth of data with opponents in the interest of transparency?
Below is the punchline. Read the rest of the article for a much more complete picture.
"Suffice it to say that of the 177 separate analyses run by all these critics, only seven show a statistically significant increase in crime after the passage of concealed-carry laws, while 90 of their own results show a statistically significant drop in crime – and 80 show no difference.
“Discredited” in liberal lingo means, “Ignore this study; it didn’t come out well for us.” "
http://www.wnd.com/2013/05/americas-most-feared-economist/
No comments:
Post a Comment