Quote:
Originally posted by Lebell
The personal blindness to the arrogance of this statement (not to mention it's contradictory nature) along with This Brush Off is a good example of why I addressed my previous post to you.
From what I've seen on this board, you typify the average person who wants to ban guns.
You throw out statistics and "facts" that are refuted and when you are called on it, you resort to reporting half stories and massaging data while claiming victory, or statements like, "Those of us who know what we are doing..." to attempt to reclaim your untenable position.
A perfect example is what you just said. You've just stated what gun proponents have been saying all along, that there are many factors involved in crime, not just guns. (This, btw, goes along perfectly with what I said in the other post about homicide rates in Switzerland vs. the US.)
Yet as sure as the sun will rise in the east, I'll bet you still feel like you're 'refuting' my position.
Tell me, are you practicing for politics?
|
You can think what you like. I have a degree in sociology and am working towards my Ph. D. in Criminology, Law, and Society. The only knowledge I have of you in regards to guns and crime is that you post a lot of opinions accompanied by pictures of you shooting them. If you aren't a layperson in regards to crime statistics, my apologies to you--if you are, then my statement that you likely don't know how to analyze them holds true.
What was the link you posted supposed to indicate--that I posted a non-scholarly cite regarding gun ownership myths for those of you who couldn't access my university's crime stats database? I didn't write the page and I didn't feel like quibbling with you over every single citation it might have referenced. The page wasn't for me--I have access to journals and government data straight from the source--and I don't particularly care if you avail yourself of any information I take the time to provide for you. I wasn't even entering this debate, other than to explain to another poster that he was wasting his time, until you addressed your post to me.
If you claim that gun ownership does not cause a reduction in crime then we are in agreement--so I don't understand why you keep pitting your "position" against mine and claiming that I haven't refuted you.
If we agree, then I'm not trying to refute you.
Everyone on this board, however, must be chuckling at your assertion that you (along with people who share your opinion in this matter) don't believe guns reduce crime because almost every post from the "pro" gun advocates is along the lines of "crime in country X is high because guns have been banned" and "crime in state Y is low because they allow people to carry concealed weapons."
I'm not practicing for politics. I just become irked when people misuse data from my professional field and, since I enjoy teaching, I attempt to minimize the ignorance I find all over the internet.
edit:
You took my statement out of context. The paragraph before it clearly points out that a handful of scholars in my field have been misusing data to drum up public opposition to gun control legislation. "Those of us..." is referring to the rest of us in my field--it wasn't a jab at you. It's hardly an arrogant statement to claim that spurious correlations do not prove causation and that anyone arguing otherwise is either lying or does not know what he or she is doing.