On 8 Dec 2003 19:28:40 -0800, (Carl
Nisarel) wrote:

Gunner wrote

On 8 Dec 2003 06:47:20 -0800, (Carl
Nisarel) wrote:

Gunner wrote ...


Did he lie IN his research,(which has been backed up by Kleck,

This is what Kleck thinks about Lott's MGLC research:

"more likely the declines in crime coinciding with relaxation of carry
laws were largely attributable to other factors not controlled in the
Lott and Mustard analysis."


Nice cut and paste out of context.

Lousy try at spinning it.

It's not out of context.


- Kleck G. Targeting Guns: Firearms and Their Control. New York, NY:
Aldine de Gruyter; 1997.

Kleck has never produced any research that 'backs up' Lott.

http://www.rdfrost.com/Reference/RKBA/Kleck.html
http://www.gunsandcrime.org/dgufreq.html

"222 of the 4799 respondents reported having at least one DGU

Kleck's DGU research does not 'back up' Lott's MGLC research. It's tangential.

But you're too stupid to realize it.

And they reached roughly the same conclusions. Thank you very much for
playing.

You really ARE this stupid. Sarah B is not getting her moneys worth
from you.

Gunner

No 220-pound thug can threaten the well-being or dignity of a 110-pound
woman who has two pounds of iron to even things out. Is that evil?
Is that wrong? People who object to weapons aren't abolishing violence,
they're begging for the rule of brute force, when the biggest, strongest
animals among men were always automatically "right". Guns end that,
and social democracy is a hollow farce without an armed populace to make
it work.
- L. Neil Smith