MSNBC resurrects 20-year-old firearm study

Status
Not open for further replies.

Prophet

Member
Joined
Apr 7, 2008
Messages
453
Location
AK
http://tv.msnbc.com/2013/01/14/blackout-how-the-nra-suppressed-gun-violence-research/

Blackout: How the NRA suppressed gun violence research
Zachary Roth, @zackroth
6:00 am on 01/14/2013

In 1993, a group of researchers published a study that challenged the most basic assumptions of many gun owners: That owning a gun makes you safer.

The study, rigorously conducted by ten credentialed experts, and appearing in the prestigious New England Journal of Medicine, found instead that the reverse is true. “Although firearms are often kept in homes for personal protection, this study shows that the practice is counter-productive,” the authors wrote. “Our data indicate that keeping a gun in the home is independently associated with an increase in the risk of homicide in the home.”

The previous year, the same researchers had published a similar study finding the same link between gun ownership and suicide. Both studies were funded by the federal government’s Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

Arthur Kellermann, who was the lead researcher on the studies, said they weren’t intended as briefs for gun control, but simply to provide information that could help people make rational, evidence-based decisions about whether to keep a weapon at home.

“This was about whether you want to have a loaded handgun in a house with a curious 5-year-old, or an angry spouse, or a depressed grandparent who may be contemplating suicide,” Kellermann, a Tennessee native who says he learned to shoot a gun at the age of 10 and now directs the RAND Corporation’s health research division, told MSNBC.com in an interview.

Even so, the gun-rights community reacted as if the studies were a declaration of war. Calling the research flawed and politically motivated, it launched a campaign to pressure government agencies not to fund further work on gun violence.

That pushback from gun-rights supporters sent a not-so-subtle message to the CDC—as well as any other government agency thinking of funding gun violence research, Kellerman said: “You toucha this topic, I breaka your face.”

I find it fascinating that these old studies keep getting recycled despite the fact that crime is on the decline in the US even though firearm ownership is on the rise. It also doesn't seem to me that the article was really able to provide viable evidence to show that the NRA bullied agencies into withholding funds from research pertaining to firearms.
 
I find it fascinating that these old studies keep getting recycled despite the fact that crime is on the decline in the US even though firearm ownership is on the rise.

It's even more fascinating when the study in question has been pretty completely debunked.
 
Well we here in El Paso Texas didn't suffer spillover violence from Juarez Mexico due to the fact Texans are armed. Seems to me the presence of armed El Pasoans was a deterent to the criminals. Of course one would think our murder rate would be high for a city of 700,000 plus but it's quite low. Maybe 14 this year which is historically on the high side for us
 
It's even more fascinating when the study in question has been pretty completely debunked.
Just to add some insight as to why it was debunked... The study didn't take into account outside factors like gun owners knowing they will likely be involved in a shooting. For example, if you keep a gun in the home because you live next to a crack house, your chances of being a homicide statistic might be higher than someone who doesn't.
 
Yep, another debunked Kellerman study gets resurrected: The antis are getting desperate for "data". In one of his so called "studies" Kellerman falsified the numbers and refused to turn over his source data.
 
Does anyone have access to information pointing to the fallacy of this study? I'm going to hope that the article falls back into the depths but it's likely that it'll get brought up in discussion eventually since it's being recirculated by MSNBC. I have to deal with a lot of the tripe they peddle in my discussions with friends who regurgitate what they see on TV and don't seem to get the picture. I've made progress but every step is hard-earned. Thanks to everyone here on THR for making it easier.
 
MS-NBC

M ore (of the)
S ame
N othing
B ut
C ommunists.

I tuned across MS-NBC and saw the (in)famous Arriana Huffington (Huffington Post) on Morning Joe. In less that 30 second I was "high-velocity projectile vomiting" my breakfast across the TV-Room carpet.
 
i'm waiting for some breathless gun hating blissninnie to "rediscover" professor Michael Bellesile's fraudulent anti-gun hit piece.
 
Last edited:
busy as Herbert West Re-Animator....

Wait til they find Carl Bakal's article "This Very Day a Gun May Kill YOU!" 1959 or Bakal's book "NO Right to Bear Arms" 1966; Bakal was a Madison Avenue advertsing executive; the newspapers in the 1960s ballyhooed him as the "Ralph Nader" to the gun industry and his book as the "Unsafe at Any Speed" against guns.
 
a group of researchers published a study that challenged the most basic assumptions of many gun owners: That owning a gun makes you safer.

The data shows one thing conclusively, that firearms laws statistically make no difference in violent crime rates (murder included). Everything else can be spun or interpreted, but this one fact is clear in the state by state comparisons in the Uniform Crime Report you see no correlation between firearms laws and violent crime.

If you cherry pick for just firearms related deaths in the home you can bias the data to validate your assumption, but logic tells anyone willing to use it that if you just look at auto accidents your conclusion will be that owning a car makes you more likely to die in an auto accident than not owning a car. That's the flaw in the study published in the New England Journal of Medicine.
 
Does anyone have access to information pointing to the fallacy of this study?

everyone does, it's called an internet search. You can turn up tons of info on this.

Bingo!!!

Kellerman is a long time gun hating anti-self defense political operative. Its significant that congress saw fit to rescind some CDC funding over their political involvement in the Kellerman/New England Journal of Medicine hit piece.

http://www.keepandbeararms.com/newsarchives/XcNewsPrint.asp?cmd=view&articleid=1321

http://www.guncite.com/gun_control_gcdgaga.html
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top