John Lott on e-voting

[gunsmith]

I pulled my gun,never reported it (twice)

I am an armed guard and have pulled my gun out 2x so far,I didn't report it cause of all the dang incident reports,waiting for the police and all the crap I'd have to go thru....of course if I had to shoot I'd be making all kinds of call's -1st one to my lawyer!


Good work Jim!

 

[agricola]

Jim,

Dont confuse the numbers game - which is what Kleck is playing - with the fabrication game, which is what Lambert pretty well exposes Lott as doing, and which Lott is doing to you and yours now.

 

[TimLambert]

Dear Mr March,
How on earth can you possibly claim that I don't think chase offs happen? I have 83 posts on my blog about Lott's fabricated survey. One of things I have pointed out over and over and over again, is that all the genuine surveys give figures for chase offs much lower than Lott's 98% figure. I stated many times that the figure was more like 75% where the defender did not fire the weapon. 83 posts, but you claim I don't think they happen. Sheesh.
Lott's behaviour on the voting machine issue is no different from his conduct on, well, everything else. He's made up his mind, and any contrary facts will be ignored.
Here is another example.

 

[Jim March]

Tim,

What is your basic personal view of widespread "shall-issue" CCW permits, as public policy? Either an explanation here or a link to a statement will do just fine.

My prior understanding is that you're against the concept. Was I wrong? From that, I assumed you were among the numerous others I've personally heard disparage the whole notion of "chase-offs". If I'm wrong about the latter, then let's ask where you stand on CCW and go from there. If one realizes that "chase-offs" happen, and is aware that egalitarian CCW access in 36 states is working just fine, then I can hardly see how somebody could be anti-CCW.

BTW: I would say based on my own experiences and those of numerous others where their stories are personally known to me, that 75% is on the low side. BUT it's at least an attempt at accuracy, versus the "close to zero" stated by the head of the San Francisco Trauma Foundation (also a former board member of the "Million Mom March" before Nadja and I caught them in major fraud).

As to Lott: yes, I know all about "Mary", so I was quite relieved that he'd already trashed his own rep before this electronic voting thing came up. My theory: his alien eyebrows are somehow taking over his brain. It makes as much sense as anything else .

 

[agricola]

As to Lott: yes, I know all about "Mary", so I was quite relieved that he'd already trashed his own rep before this electronic voting thing came up. My theory: his alien eyebrows are somehow taking over his brain. It makes as much sense as anything else

except "charlatan who managed to dupe the likes of the NRA" perhaps

*bows at Tim*

 

[TimLambert]

What is your basic personal view of widespread "shall-issue" CCW permits, as public policy?

Jim, the evidence strongly suggests that they make very little difference to crime rates. The best analysis suggests that they might cause a small increase, but the evidence is weak -- the statistics cannot reliably detect such small changes.
Whether or not you should have such laws is a different question. Changes in crime rates is only one of the considerations. I'm not going to comment on what laws you should have in your country, but I don't think adoption of such laws is warranted here in Australia.
My link to my argument with Mary Rosh was not to alert you to his female impersonation schtick, but to warn you about his pathological refusal to ever admit to making a mistake. That's why he fabricated the 1997 survey---he didn't want to admit that he had misread Kleck to come up with the 98% number. When that story about his survey fell apart he actaully did a survey in 2002. Trouble is, it gave a different number. Do you think this bothered Lott? No, he just lied about the result of his 2002 survey. And he won't stop -- he was on CSPAN2 last weekend repeating his lie.

 

[Colt46]

Jim- I don't know what you make....

but I doubt it is even close to the value of the services you provide. Keep up the good work.
I'm beginning to suspect that John Lott might become an albatross around our neck if he keeps up with his sleight of hand and questionable methods. God I hope not.

 

[Jim March]

As a registered lobbyist, my income is an open book .

Free apartment use worth around $750ish a month, and a grand a month pay.

Ain't great, but I'm having a grand ol' time .

 

[TimLambert]

I'm beginning to suspect that John Lott might become an albatross around our neck if he keeps up with his sleight of hand and questionable methods.

His stuff on e-voting is just like all of his other work. One thing you might like to consider is that Eugene Volokh, who is probably the smartest person on the pro-gun side, has removed Lott's name from his list of pro-gun scholars that he recommends as sources for journalists.

 

[Jim March]

I'm not surprised and I agree re: Volokh. Clayton Cramer is another of our best.

Tim: can you answer my questions above?

 

[Pendragon]

"As a registered lobbyist, my income is an open book .

Free apartment use worth around $750ish a month, and a grand a month pay.

Ain't great, but I'm having a grand ol' time ."

and:

All the anti's you can eat

Keep given 'em hell Jim.

I am glad I got to hang with you a little while I was doing my time...

I am sure the Good Lord will allow you to go on to your reward and move to Texas when you are done doin his work. Check six.

 

[Art Eatman]

I've had a rather jaundiced view of e-voting since I first heard of it. Some of it stems from the fact that I'm from Texas, home of "Landslide Lyndon" and his 87-vote victory over Coke Stephenson in that long-ago Senate race.

When you can cheat with paper ballots, yuou can cheat with computer ballots. At least with the paper ballots there is a definite physical means to do at least some verifying--if they're not destroyed, as in the infamous "fire on the courthouse lawn" at Alice, Texas, in the aforementioned landslide.

Seems to me that our penchant for instant gratification extends to voting results as well as too many other subjects.

Drifting back to gun researchers and credibility, I've long admired "Under the Gun" by Wright, Rossi and Daly. I found it interesting that they admitted that at the beginning of their work that they were neutral to mildly anti-gun.

Art