anyone want to debunk the debunkers?


PDA






atek3
June 16, 2004, 10:39 PM
http://www.bradycampaign.org/facts/research/?page=conctruth&menu=gvr

atek3

If you enjoyed reading about "anyone want to debunk the debunkers?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Art Eatman
June 16, 2004, 10:51 PM
Why bother? To them, their mantras are as religious icons...

Art

atek3
June 16, 2004, 11:27 PM
I don't want to cheerlead for Lott if his data and conclusions are wrong.

atek3

Stebalo
June 16, 2004, 11:46 PM
Statistics do not justify oppression of the citizenry and a forced removal of civil rights.

DMF
June 17, 2004, 12:10 AM
Why bother? To them, their mantras are as religious icons...Mr. Eatman,

Unfortunately that is true of both sides.

Ian
June 17, 2004, 12:13 AM
I notice that much of their argument is in the form of conparing how many carry states saw a rise in crime vs how many non-carry states saw a rise in crime. Without data on the amount of increase in each case, one cannot draw conclusions from this.

GunGeek
June 17, 2004, 12:28 AM
If I was to debunk it I may start out by pointing out there are 50 states in the USA. Somehow they only use 33 to make thier conclusions.... big red flag in my book.

Justin
June 17, 2004, 12:39 AM
Unfortunately that is true of both sides. With the main difference being that they are completely wrong, from their epistemology on up.

Treylis
June 17, 2004, 12:57 AM
My first response would be to say that I do not care whether or not it raises or lowers crime--that people have an unalienable human right to property and self-defense. Crime might very well go down if there was a shoot-on-sight curfew after midnight, but you won't see me clamoring for one.

Don't fight statistics with statistics--fight with ethics, with epistemology, with metaphysics.

Rotnguns
June 17, 2004, 02:06 AM
Need to compare oranges to oranges. Fact remains, violent crime fell in states after ccw was enacted in those same states. Claiming that violent crime would have decreased even faster if ccw states had no ccw is fallacious.

Can Brady bunch point to legally armed citizens causing all this extra crime in ccw states?

Foreign Devil
June 17, 2004, 07:41 AM
Can Brady bunch point to legally armed citizens causing all this extra crime in ccw states?

That's the heart of it right there. Of course they can't. Every time the occasional CCW holder commits a crime they blow it all out of proportion to give a skewed impression of them as a whole. It's BS, I could do the same with any group I wanted to smear.

Anyway I agree with the poster who said use ethical arguments instead of staitistical ones. Allowing warrantless searches might reduce crime but I wouldn't be for it.

Tom C.
June 17, 2004, 08:12 AM
I believe this is an example of "cherry picking" statistics to attempt to prove your point. The Brady Bunch carefully selected data that appear to support their case. Then they fake the rest.

Mr. Kook
June 17, 2004, 07:59 PM
It's funny to me how they compare states with CCW to states without, saying that though both have lower crime rates now, states that don't allow legal CCW had greater reductions in crime rates. The question you have to ask yourselves, that they didn't bother to answer is "how high was crime to begin with" and "how close to zero can you get." If I remember correctly the first states to allow CCW were states that already had laxer gun laws and lower crime rates to begin with.

There's a limit to how low crime rates can go. They don't bother to address that and choose to form their arguments instead of around the comparable crime rates from state to state, in the comparative drops over time.

Well of course states that have obnoxiously high crime rates are going to see a more significant drop than the rest of the country:banghead:

burbanite
June 17, 2004, 09:07 PM
I can never find the "Contact Us" button on any of their websites....??????

sch40
June 17, 2004, 09:58 PM
These are the things that got me:
They compare the rate of decrease from one state to another (what was the crime rate in those states before? after?).
They switch between "volent crime" and "crime."
They are very vague with their terminology and how they discriminate between "anti-CCW" and "pro-CCW" -- that is, they use phrases like "relaxed CCW laws." Some states (like Alaska) had what some people may consider "restrictive" CCW laws, then "relaxed" them later. Other may have had no CCW laws, but then passed "restrictive CCW laws" (which are better than none).

The lack of detail is dreadful. Can anyone find their actual data? GunGeek, where did you get the 33 states out of 50 info?

-sch40

If you enjoyed reading about "anyone want to debunk the debunkers?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!