"Bill Kniess" wrote in message
...
Jim Yanik wrote in
4:
Bill Kniess wrote in
:
"Attila.Iskander" wrote in
:
"Robert Green" wrote in message
...
That *you* can find. That's a serious limitation. Does your
state publish the names of CHL holders? If not, how can you
or a reporter tell whether a shooting involves a CHL? This
article explains precisely why "not finding any cases"
absolutely does not equal "not being any cases."
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/27/us...d-guns-and-som
e- are-in-the-wrong-hands.html
Here is an even better counter to that biased piece of
propaganda from that rag the NYT
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner...ti-s-bad-gun-s
ta tistics-robert-verbruggen
"The NYT's Bad Gun Statistics
By Robert VerBruggen
December 27, 2011 11:44 A.M.
The New York Times examined the [concealed-carry] permit
program in North Carolina, one of a dwindling number of
states where the identities of permit holders remain public.
The review, encompassing the last five years, offers a rare,
detailed look at how a liberalized concealed weapons law has
played out in one state. And while it does not provide
answers, it does raise questions.
More than 2,400 permit holders were convicted of felonies or
misdemeanors, excluding traffic-related crimes, over the
five-year period, The Times
found
when it compared databases of recent criminal court cases
and licensees. While the figure represents a small
percentage of those with permits, more than 200 were
convicted of felonies, including at least 10 who committed
murder or manslaughter. All but two of the killers used a
gun.
All of these numbers are completely meaningless; in any
large population, there will be some crime. The only way to
see what these numbers mean is to compare concealed-carry
holders to the general population. Fortunately, state-level
murder data are easy to find.
North Carolina has a statewide murder rate of about 5 per
100,000. Even without counting manslaughter, that's 25
murders committed per 100,000 North Carolinians every five
years. There are about 230,000 valid concealed-carry permits
in North Carolina, so by pure chance, you'd expect these
folks to be responsible for nearly 60 murders over five
years. And yet only ten of them committed murder or
manslaughter. Instead of "rais[ing] questions," the Times
has demonstrated yet again that permit holders are more
peaceful than the general population."
There is NO WAY the "permit holders are nore peaceful than the
general population" conclusion can be drawn. Bad logic.
It's true.
the facts support it. permit holders obey the law because they
don't want to have their permit revoked. THEY are not the ones
committing acts of violence against lawul citizens. Even police
-as a group- break the law more often.
National Review??????? that's a rag in and of itself.
NR is much more truthful than the NYT. Probably the Washington
Post,too. certainly more than HuffPo.
By whose standards? What metric do you use to judge veracity of an
article in a publication?
How about by past performance
The NYT has a LONG history of bias and dishonest spin to outright lies
It sounds like any right wing pub is truthful by definition? They
have no positions to support, only printing the pure unadulterated
The difference seems to be that they provide both sides of the story and
don't try to spin it to suit their ideology
See the recent NBC editing the 911 call played to make Zimmerman look like
a racist.
facts? Any publication centrist or left wing only prints lies?
Modifies the facts to support positions contrary to YOUR ieas and
beliefs?
Nice strawman
"only print lies"
We never made such a claim
But they DO have a LONG chain of incidents behind them where they did lie
and where they spun the truth.
Out of curiosity, what do you thinnk of the website factcheck.org?
SO far so good
But then, I do NOT paint with a broad brush
But I will IMMEDIATELY put a flag on ANY media source that has previous
history of spinning.