Joseph Meehan wrote:
"Dave Bugg" wrote in message
...
Joseph Meehan wrote:
"Dave Bugg" wrote in message
...
...

You have chosen to reject information by tagging a 'bias' line onto
those sources which don't support your notions. That you fail to
show that the facts provided are biased puts the lie to your
statement that you try to be fair and that you truly seek
information.

I intended that line to apply to all the sources I have seen,
including those supporting gun control. However "bias" is not
really the most accurate term for my opinion. Inconclusive might
be better. There is a lot of bias information out there (on both
sides) I would like to get past that and lacking the ability to do
that to acknowledge that good information is not available or has
not been presented at this time.

Your statement is a Straw Man. The good sources are there, some have
been presented in this thread. You keep stating that you are waiting
for good information, and yet those who have a true interest, and
have accessed the data, never waited for it to show up. You honestly
don't expect us to believe that you cannot find data with the
current resources that anyone has at their fingertips, do you?

I am sorry, but I don't agree with you. I don't see good data on
either side. Please see another response on that subject one the
John Lott book.

The fact that you don't agree with me hurts my feelings and matters a whole
bunch.