re: A hundred school shootings a year wouldn't change my mind

quote:

---

that’s (D)iffe(R)ent

---

The way it really is.

i know Sao, you don’t need to repeat yourself every day.

quote:

---

Problem here is you, like the idiot authors you are citing, only focus on the extreme range of Kleck's findings. If you read his actual research, which I gave you a link to, you'd know that he based his work on previous studies that drew very similar conclusions. The range of a few hundred thousand to 3,000,000 leaves a lot of room and Kleck explains that. Kleck has also responded to these critiques with more data and for some reason that has gotten ignored by Cook and Co

---

Kleck can assert all he wants that the survey's he conducted and gathered and extrapolated are without critical flaws, as he asserts in his paper, but Hemenway points out, with receipts, why the numbers simply dont add up and the assumptions Kleck uses to justify trust in his flawed methodology doesnt hold up to basic scrutiny, and goes line by line explaining the methodological and survey flaws and the lack of external controls to try and verify or validate the findings.

And like Kleck, you seem to not really have an answer for why there is such an immense delta between the extrapolated numbers Kleck claims and the external data we can pull from that is gathered from law enforcement and medical records and use to compare and measure against(Kleck asserts up to 400,000 annual incidents where DGU saved a life, and 2-3 million annual uses of DGU overall, over 350,000 DGU prevented robberies a year). And when doing so immediate and glaring red flags pop up, which lands us in some absurdist territory if we are to rationalize Kleck's findings. Such as Kleck and Co. implying with his findings there were more DGU to stop a robbery than there were total robberies reported in a given year across the entire country. Even if you assume an absurd number of unreported robberies, the numbers simply don't add up.

You can keep regurgitating this stuff over and over, but until you actually articulate and provide some sort of reason why the results of this flawed research should be heralded as some sort of gold standard and it's findings trusted, you're wasting my time and just demonstrating your little more than bluster and a case study in motivated reasoning run amok.

It just feels so gross immediately yelling "but muh 2A" after something like this.

I get it. I do it too because I know what's coming.

But it still feels fricking gross.

quote:

---

When we have super lax gun

---

Lol

You commies are so stupid.

quote:

---

I advocate abolishing rights that do far more harm than good.

Which I propose the 2A qualifies for.

---

Here's where I'm going to ask you to back that claim up with some sort of substantive facts.

I believe that this is your opinion. I do not think this is objective take, however.

quote:

---

If you think politics didn't contribute to yesterday you're a piece of shite.

---

Wait, you;re saying this kid killed all these other kids because of politics?

quote:

---

There’s been over 25 this year alone so far.

---

What part of "Politicizing this event" did you miss?

At least wait until the bodies are buried, comrade, before you drag them out and run them through the streets.

quote:

---

What part of "Politicizing this event" did you miss?

At least wait until the bodies are buried, comrade, before you drag them out and run them through the streets.

---

Yeah that's right! Don't blame the government for these kids dying. The laws in place and inaction they've displayed have nothing to do with the kids dying on fricking schools.