Joseph Meehan wrote:

It is foolish to continue to argue without data. If you have good
data you would like to present, I would be happy to review it and
comment. However I believe we have reached the end of useful
discussion of the issue until new better data is made available.

You don't seem to get it, Joseph; we don't hold you to be the arbiter of
what constitutes 'good' data. You can argue til you're blue in the face that
the data doesn't exist, or isn't sufficient for whatever reason you wish to
rationalize, but we don't care. Feel free to continue to be anti-gun; feel
free to attend the next Brady Gun Control meeting or attend the Million Mom
PMS march because no one cares. You reject the data for spurious and
self-serving reasons, and I don't care.

Please carefully note the differences between when I explain what I
believe and what I know. They are very different statements. You
seem to have confused the two.

BWAAA---HAAAA!!!! That is a big, freekin' laugh, Joseph. You don't think
you have left a written trail in this thread which demonstrates how you have
bobbed and weaved and have appeared contradictory and confused? Take the
time and call up this whole thread from its beginning and re-read it.

If you believe that is being blind, then go ahead and believe it.

OK.