Carl Nisarel wrote:
"Dave Bugg" muttered:

Carl Nisarel wrote:
Jim Yanik muttered:

Lott,Gary Kleck of FSU;IIRC,they were both ANTI_GUN before
they began their research.

Pure, unsubstantiated gunhugger myth.

The claims about Lott and Kleck's views on guns only came after
they posted their pro-gun research.

Feel free to post your cite supporting that statement.

Nice double-standard. Get back to me after Yanik produces his
evidence.

The weaseling doesn't work. Support your claim.

Yanik (and you) can easily prove that my statement is incorrect by
posting a statement, from a date prior to their gun research, from
Lott and/or Kleck where they say they were 'anti-gun'.

Straw man. It doesn't matter when the authors made their statement.

All claims that I have read from Lott or Kleck's where they say
that they were 'anti-gun' prior to their research were made
*after* they did the research.

So what? If you don't believe them, that's your opinion, not a matter of
fact.

IOW, they (and you) have no substantive evidence that shows that
they actually were anti-gun prior to their research.

I haven't looked, 'cause it's a non-issue. By the same token, the fact that
you say their is no evidence of such doesn't make it so. Please find a
statement, prior to their books, in which they stated that they were
pro-gun.

Their post-
hoc claims are nothing more than marketing for their books.

And your argument is just plain silly.

--
Dave
www.davebbq.com