[Sergeant Bob]

The most disturbing charge, first raised by retired University of California, Santa Barbara professor Otis Dudley Duncan and pursued by Australian computer programmer Tim Lambert, is that Lott fabricated a study claiming that 98 percent of defensive gun uses involved mere brandishing, as opposed to shooting.

When Lott cited the statistic peripherally on page three of his book, he attributed it to "national surveys." In the second edition, he changed the citation to "a national survey that I conducted." He has also incorrectly attributed the figure to newspaper polls and Florida State University criminologist Gary Kleck.

Last fall, Northwestern University law professor James Lindgren volunteered to investigate the claimed existence of Lott's 1997 telephone survey of 2,424 people. "I thought it would be exceedingly simple to establish" that the research had been done, Lindgren wrote in his report.

It was not simple. Lott claims to have lost all of his data due to a computer crash. He financed the survey himself and kept no financial records. He has forgotten the names of the students who allegedly helped with the survey and who supposedly dialed thousands of survey respondents long-distance from their own dorm rooms using survey software Lott can't identify or produce.
__________________________
It appears he faked the survey in addition to the "Mary Rosh" character. How much you want to bet his upcoming book bombs?
Read the whole article here (http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=30873)

[Bahadur]

Very, very disturbing indeed.

[Waitone]

If the reality is the same as the reports, it is indeed disturbing.

This episode once again demonstrates the danger of hitching one's wagon to a horse.

[Jim March]

Right, that's Lambert's site. Lambert is one of the most rabid uber-grabbers out there.

What this is about, for anybody not following the links, is Lott's very modest survey he did on "chase-offs", trying to sort out how many times people "use" a gun defensively with no shots fired, no police reports, etc. The grabbers don't believe these even happen, we know they comprise over 90% of all defensive gun use but proving it is a proverbial bitch.

Fortunately, here's what's going on that Lambert won't tell you:

1) One of the people Lott surveyed has come forward and said that yes, he really was surveyed. (Lott lost a lot of data on the survey in a disk crash.)

2) Lott didn't use this survey as the core of his work, because he knew it was still pretty unscientific. It therefore only got a small mention in the book.

3) Police departments usually track when officers "clear leather" versus how many times they fire. The resulting "chase-off/surrender stats" broadly match Lott's survey numbers.

Now, Lott DID tell another fib. He went running around the Internet in the guise of a female "student of Lott at Yale" praising and defending his work. While laughable, it's not in the same class as Bell-liar's crap at all.

[Frohickey]

Last I read, from Clayton Cramer's website, is that John Lott redid his survey this past year, and it had the same conclusions as the previous one that he did that was lost in a computer disk crash.

[Justin]

Exsqueeze me?
Computer crash?
I'm sorry, but when you're talking about a major endeavor like that, it seems like one would be inclined to make backup copies.
After all, it's not like blank CD's are expensive.
Or Zip disks.
or Dat Tapes
or spare hard drives...

etc.
:uhoh:

[Frohickey]

This was a little bit of time ago, when John Lott Jr. was still in a university teaching... I think.

Hindsight is 20/20. You can bet that Mr. Lott has multiple backups of his new survey.

[BenW]

While recognizing that the anti-gunners are riding a vengence wagon due to the "Arming America" debacle, parts of this are still disturbing. I don't hold losing data to a disk crash in much higher esteem than losing it to "a flood." Even as a dimwit grad student, I had copies of my thesis and all relevant research stored on three different hard drives, backup tapes, and floppies, not to mention hardcopies. I can't imagine why someone doing serious research would only store data in one vulnerable place.

The only saving grace is the repeatability of the data. And it would be great if another second amendment scholar would independently repeat the survey as well.

[mjustice]

While even I must admit tha losing it in a disk crash is kinda fishy, it was not data the supported his central argument in the book. It was more a "and then some" statement in the beginning of his book.

If he was able to do the study again and show similar results, then I don't see what the big freakin deal is. This is not morally equivalent to Bellisiles making up data.

MJ

[Frohickey]

BenW...

While I agree with you that losing some data that was referenced in passing in the book 'More Guns Less Crime', its not as bad as it is. You make it sound like this small accident is the foundation upon which the pro-2A/gun side rests on, which it does not. Sure, it throws up some doubt in the minds of the anti-2A/gun side, but that is a group that was never going to be convinced anyway. In the end, everyone is human, and humans make mistakes. Its what you do when you make a mistake that matters.

Dr. Lott redid his survey, and the results reflect the same conclusion as the prior survey that he lost. Losing the prior survey is done, history. Barring time travel, there is nothing you can do about it. Dr. Lott referenced it in passing, has redone the survey with similar results, thats all that he can do about it. Some enterprising person could redo Dr. Lott's survey, maybe you can do it, or convince another person to, but from Dr. Lott's side, he's done all he can do in this avenue. The only thing he can do is present the data, for everyone to see, which he has done previously.

"My dog ate my homework." "A flood destroyed my research notes." "A computer disk crash destroyed the survey results." Even if these unfortunate events happen, the homework/notes/results can be redone, which has since been done in Dr. Lott's survey. The same cannot be said of Dr. Bellesiles' work. And its not from the lack of trying by Clayton Cramer and others.

[BenW]

Well, I hardly think I'm making the survey sound like the foundation of the fight for the second amendment (hence the comment about antis and their vengence agenda). I happen to not have much sympathy for anyone who is doing research and doesn't backup their data and findings in some way. I also made it clear that luckily Lott's data and conclusions are repeatable, unlike Bellesiles'.

[Bartholomew Roberts]

1) One of the people Lott surveyed has come forward and said that yes, he really was surveyed. (Lott lost a lot of data on the survey in a disk crash.)

I bet Lambert will be telling you that because the one person to come forward just happens to be a hardcore RKBA supporter and former NRA Board of Directors member - what are the chances of getting one of those in your 3,000 random person survey?

You are right that the survey in question is basically irrelevant to Lott's argument. You could make the argument that the wording in the book is just a misquote of already proven studies; unfortunately, that isn't the argument Lott made and he doesn't have a lot of evidence to support the one he did make.

Last I read, from Clayton Cramer's website, is that John Lott redid his survey this past year, and it had the same conclusions as the previous one that he did that was lost in a computer disk crash.

I've seen Daniel Polsby's commentary on it and two things stuck out - first that the number was "somewhat" lower although neither Polsby or Lott would say how much until the new survey is released. Second, Polsby made it clear he wasn't endorsing the methodology.

[Waitone]

A point is being missed.

The pro-2 side has to do it cleaner and better than the other side. We will not be permitted human weaknesses. We pridefully claim we gather our positions from facts and logic. We also pridefully claim the other side stakes its position in emotion. As long as we claim historic validity, statistical clarity, clear logic we must be clean. Whether or not a disk crash is meaningful is irrelevant. It has the appearance of hypocracy.

Be prepared to be tarred with our own brush until independent research is published.

[Alan Smithiee]

in the past week alone I have had to deal with 7 local business that had computer problems WITH NO BACKUPS....

last year I had a Help Desk person bring me 2 computers that had 4 years of Post Secondary work on them. both drives were trashed from Viri. no backups.

it is more common not to back up than to back up.

I believe Lott on that statment. I've seen to much of it.

[XLMiguel]

)I've been in IT since 1970 (back when there was just a "1" and a "0") and I can tell you fershure, that the vast majority of people don't understand teh value of "save early, save often" until they get whacked, and some need more than one lesson to figure it out.

Just like a lot of people don't get fire extinguishers & smoke alarms until they have an 'incident', or don't see the need for a firearm until they've been threatened personally.

So, my brothers & sisters in arms, how many of YOU have backed-up your critical files in the last 30 days? (that was a rhetorical question, I've not intention of hijacking the thread:eek: ) Safety begins at home :cool:

[alan]

One hopes that "our" side hasn't fallen into the same sort of hole as did the anti's, with their unquestioning praise of Bellsiles.