It seems that the right believes that if you keep repeating lies they somehow become truths, but there may be something to that given what the Supreme Court has done in the Heller and McDonald decisions.
Anybody who has looked into Lott knows he is the pro-gun equivalent of Michael Bellesisles (except I think Bellesisles was sort of onto something), which the Quiet Mike Blog points out:
Critics of Lott’s research are plentiful, although he dismisses them as “Liberal.” So it’s important to note this blistering rebuke by conservative pundit Michelle Malkin:
“.”“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 is also important to note that John Lott has a history of vetting his own work under another pseudonym, Mary Rosh. This is not in question, Lott himself has admitted his use of the Rosh persona. Here’s Malkin again:
Assuming the survey data was lost in a computer crash, it is still remarkable that Lott could not produce a single, contemporaneous scrap of paper proving the survey’s existence, such as the research protocol or survey instrument.”
John Lott is quick to respond to his critics, this writer included. But he remains unable to definitively address the specific problem of his questioned data. On twitter, he produced these links to absolve himself of these issues.“By itself, there is nothing wrong with using a pseudonym. But Lott’s invention of Mary Rosh to praise his own research and blast other scholars is beyond creepy. And it shows his extensive willingness to deceive to protect and promote his work.”
The question remains as to why rubbish like John Lott's and the rest of the pseudoscholars has remained unchallenged? Why is the "pro-gun" side afraid of research (or is that research adverse?)?
John R. Lott Jr. is the key to defeating the gun lobbies. His data is either deliberately misleading or subject to ignorant methodology. It has been repeatedly defended only with his own responses. If Lott is held accountable for his mistakes and mistruths, gun lobby talking points would get their volume turned down. It will be fully revealed how baseless many gun lobby arguments are. They are motivated by what they want, not how things are, and certainly aren’t interested in the greater good of the country.
The short form--don't call people "sheeple" if you are unwilling, or just plain unable to research and discover the facts for yourself.
And don't try to persuade someone of something which they can spot as bullshit.
You only come off as idiots--no matter how much you try to soothe yourselves into thinking you're the "intelligentsia".
You aren't even a "pseudo-intellectual".
You're just real dumbfucks.