Saturday, February 2, 2013

Debunking Gunloon Myths

I've debunked most, if not all, of these gunloon arguments.  But it's nice to have them in one place.

Mother Jones

9 comments:

  1. This is a sisyphean task. Right Wing Gun Crazies just invent new fake quotes to attribute to Washington or Jefferson and declare their intent to murder anyone who proposes end gun homicide.

    ReplyDelete

  2. Dave Gilson of Mother Jones purports to debunk “pro-gun myths.” It’s too bad the piece is riddled with misleading statements:



    It’s also interesting that many of these claims are cited to research by people affiliated with the “public health” school of gun-control studies. We’re going to be getting more of these claims, now that the Centers for Disease Control is back in the game.
    http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/339400/debunking-debunkers-robert-verbruggen

    orlin sellers

    ReplyDelete
  3. 1. Somebody knows how to draw a straight line. How cute. Never mind the fact that the data are scattered all about.

    2. I have my doubts about what's presented here. In 2011, Vermont had a homicide rate of 1.3 per 100,000, while Massachusetts's rate was 2.8. Now the graph covers gun deaths due to all causes, apparently, but that leaves suicide and accidents. Accidental gun deaths total around 600 in the entire country in a year, so the claim here is that a whole lot more people are killing themselves in Vermont than in Massachusetts. My side has shown many times that gun ownership does not correlate with suicide rates--remember Japan. What you're trying to say, then, is that the mere presence of a gun makes a person decide to die? My poor, defective guns haven't lived up to the magical powers of their family.

    3. If guns are so bad, how do we account for Iowa, New Hampshire, and Minnesota? They have just about identical death rates--rates that are only slightly above those of gun control freak states--but a varying and large number of guns.

    4. How do we explain identical gun death rates in states with wide variations in the number of guns? North Dakota and South Dakota, for example. Or Nevada and Tennessee. Or Maryland, Virginia, and Utah?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Replies
    1. Notice how Illinois's gun death rate is about the same as Wisconsin's, but the latter state has a much higher rate of gun ownership. Wisconsin also has good gun laws. Now how can this be?

      Delete
  5. Looks like gun ownership rates explain very little of the variance in the (poorly constructed) gun death rate.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Hmm...a scatter diagram as part of a study that doesn't control for variables and that presupposes its conclusions. Not the highest standard for research I've ever seen.

    ReplyDelete
  7. If you replace "gun deaths" on the y axis with murder rates, the line goes completely flat. Zero correlation. Care to debunk that, jade or mike?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't think what you said even makes sense, TS.

      Delete