Lott Of Facts

Many thanks to Dr. John Lott – partly for his piece in National Review yesterday expanding on the work that is rapidly ripping the guts out of the left’s meme that “a good guy with a gun” doesn’t save lives and that gun free zones are anything but safe-criminal areas…:

But the deterrent and life-saving effects of concealed-handgun laws on mass public shootings aren’t just anecdotal. Bill Landes of the University of Chicago and I gathered data on mass public shootings from 1977 to 1999. We studied 13 different types of gun-control laws as well as the impact of law enforcement, but the only law that had a statistically significant impact on mass public shootings was the passage of right-to-carry laws. Right-to-carry laws reduced both the frequency and the severity of mass public shootings; and to the extent to which mass shootings still occurred, they took place in those tiny areas in the states where permitted concealed handguns were not allowed.

…and partly for giving me a solid half-dozen more cases of “good guys with guns” that have interrupted mass shootings, to add to this blog’s rapidly-expanding “Good Guy or Gal With A Gun” page.

18 thoughts on “Lott Of Facts

  1. It is wonderful you have such a rich fantasy life, but that has no place in shaping public policy, which should be exclusively grounded in objective reality.

    Lott is a discredited hack. Nat Rev is a discredited rag. Buckley must be rolling in his grave like a top.

    You may recall what a nasty piece of work Nat Rev is from the factually bizarre and just plain wrong piece they ran by Charlotte Allen on the Sandy Hook Shooting, intended to push something very much like your paleo-man / cave man hero bullshit fantasy. Yeah, that was ugly.

    Remember? http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2012/12/charlotte-allen-national-review-sandy-hook-shooting-response

    And among the many ways in which Lott is not a credible source, was running this news turd on his blog, right next to all his boastful claims about what a GREAT researcher and fact checker he was. Tip off should have been that it was on a par with an earlier US tabloid that ran Amazon Jungle photos of Bat-boy, the human bat hybrid, the Daily Mail, aka the Daily Fail as it is better known in the UK. From Lott the stupid story went viral among the pro-gunners; could not find one instance where a pro-gunner evinced the most basic and fundamental skepticism.

    Here is the link Lott promoted to the gullible gunners who still think he matters:
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2063954/Asda-tell-chef-You-buy-lime–classed-weapon.html

    Reality, slow news day, make up shit, same old same old Daily Fail. A five second fact check turned up there was a computer program error that would ring up all lime and lemon purchases as two, regardless of actual number, but correctly charge by weight for the produce.

    The terrorism nonsense? Yeah, that came from a clerk who was tired of explaining the glitch, and who just – typical Brit – smarted off something so stupid it was intended to insult the recipient.

    That appears to be the quality of anything pretty much that comes form Lott or Nat Rev, good only for wrapping up garbage.

    You can do better than this; your readers should all demand it. This is more of the same old propaganda worthless crap.

  2. DG,

    Lott is a discredited hack.

    No, he’s not. He got busted posting sock-puppet comments. NOT publishing bad research.

    Nat Rev is a discredited rag.

    According to a woman who publishes risible twaddle on a sparsely-visited blog under a pseudonym.

  3. By the way, DG, what’s with the language?

    You used to publish risible, easily-debunked twaddle, but do it with a veneer of class.

    Did you take a punch to the head recently?

  4. Oh, and DG?

    This comment section is intended for discussion and engagement.

    Not, unfortunately, serving as an adjunct to your blog or blogs.

    Your “poop and run” style of “engagement” isn’t really in the spirit of why I run a comment section. Since you’re here neither to engage and discuss, you are basically spamming me.

    People who disagree with me, but do it with a certain amount of integrity and style (Emery, Beeeej, Slash, Angryclown and a few others over the years) are not only welcome, but encouraged.

    Unfortunately, your approach has neither.

    Please address this.

  5. Guns have only one purpose, to kill people. Cops have guns; therefore, cops kill people, specifically Black people, the only people Whose Lives Matter. Dog Gone doesn’t want civilians to carry guns, she wants only cops to carry guns, which she knows cops will use to kill Black people; therefore, Dog Gone hates Black people and wants them to die. Dog Gone is a racist hater. Everything she says is racial hatred, which is hate speech. Free speech does not include hate speech. She should be banned. You should ban her from hate-commenting, Mitch. And if you don’t ban her, then you agree with every hateful thing Dog Gone says which would make you a racist hater spewing vile hate speech and you’d be forced to ban yourself from your own blog.

    /Liberal voice off/

  6. “You can do better than this; your readers should all demand it.”

    once again DG has slipped the surly bonds of reason – she actually thinks she has a sympathetic audience among your readers. Maybe Emery or AC will leap to her defense.

  7. Mitch, maybe you could convince DG to participate in your debate with Heather M. DG could bring her finely honed St Olaf educated mind to bear on a question of grave importance to every Minnesotan.

  8. Cesaire,

    DG doesn’t seem to have the self-confidence to address responses to her poop-and-run comments. Getting her out in public – absent some kind of pseudonymous cover – would seem pretty daunting.

  9. Dog Gone said:

    “Buckley must be rolling in his grave like a top.”

    Yes, I am sure he is “rolling” like a “top”. Because apparently tops roll now. And this is the very least of your inconsistencies, Dog Gone.

  10. ” . . . but that has no place in shaping public policy, which should be exclusively grounded in objective reality.”
    Sounds like DG is in favor of tyranny by those powerful enough to define what is and what is not “objective reality.”
    Go back to Russia, commie.

  11. While I’m no saint myself when I make comments, it is my observation that Doggy’s recent postings of lies, confirm that she has now entered the gutter.

  12. No one gives Emery a harder time than me. And although he’s laughably deluded 99% of the time, I think he does add value; comedic, but value nine the less.

    Given the fact the not only would ds never post a comment from a conservative on her blog, but she comes here and flouts every single one of her own rules for civility, while he has the ultimate say on who and what gets posted here, I have no idea why Mitch accommodates her.

  13. mitch,
    since shit seems to be DG’s favorite new word why not put it on your moderation word list forcing the redheaded stepchild to either return to a modicum of civility or she waits 24hrs for you to release her spew and thus she looses the fun of trolling in a timely manner

  14. Cesaire,

    Most of her posts already trip my mod-filter – either d/t language, or the presence of multiple links (both of which trip my filter).

    I usually just let the comments through, because my policy has always been unless a comment:

    • would get me in legal trouble, or
    • is nothing but a mindless attack on or quarreling with me (which was why I banned Bill “Demented Stalker” Gleason, as well as several of “Peev’s” incarnations)

    …then I figure it’s all part of the conversation.

    Truth be told, I’m thinking about cracking down on “poop and run” commenting.

  15. If there is an automated “poop” meter, it would be pegged on high whenever Doggie logged in. 😀

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.