Gordie
Regular Member
imported post
AWDstylez wrote:
Today,when Igoogle Steven Levitt + research fraudI get 68,200 results, John Lott gets 17,300. I don't think that the number of results you find on google are a good indication of the veracity of your argument. Many of the hits are duplicates. If you look only at the raw numbers it would appear that John Lott is a far more reliable source.
As for your examples of evidence against John Lott, all but one are op-ed pieceswith nothing to really back them up except opinion. One even says that studies show that allowing people to be armed increases crime rates. This is true, in that property crimes do increase (due to the fear that criminals have of coming across an armed victim), while violent crimes decrease. This is hardly being honest. If they looked only at violent crime, they would see a different result. My being armed is about personal protection, not property protection.
Another links the legalization of abortion with a decrease in crime. Strange, the majority of abortions occur in the same populations that have the highest rates of violent crime. Maybe there are other forces at work.I question his objectivity in coming up with his study results.
Armed citizens will have very little affect on the burglary of an unoccupied residence or business, but they will have an affect on the personal, violent attacks on the citizenry. Isn't the whole idea behind being armed self defense, not defense of property while you are away?
AWDstylez wrote:
Today,when Igoogle Steven Levitt + research fraudI get 68,200 results, John Lott gets 17,300. I don't think that the number of results you find on google are a good indication of the veracity of your argument. Many of the hits are duplicates. If you look only at the raw numbers it would appear that John Lott is a far more reliable source.
As for your examples of evidence against John Lott, all but one are op-ed pieceswith nothing to really back them up except opinion. One even says that studies show that allowing people to be armed increases crime rates. This is true, in that property crimes do increase (due to the fear that criminals have of coming across an armed victim), while violent crimes decrease. This is hardly being honest. If they looked only at violent crime, they would see a different result. My being armed is about personal protection, not property protection.
Another links the legalization of abortion with a decrease in crime. Strange, the majority of abortions occur in the same populations that have the highest rates of violent crime. Maybe there are other forces at work.I question his objectivity in coming up with his study results.
Armed citizens will have very little affect on the burglary of an unoccupied residence or business, but they will have an affect on the personal, violent attacks on the citizenry. Isn't the whole idea behind being armed self defense, not defense of property while you are away?