View Single Post
Old January 15, 2009, 11:42 AM   #83
David Armstrong
Junior member
Join Date: January 24, 2005
Location: SW Louisiana
Posts: 2,289
It is if the "thing" has not been done right. See my links on academic studies that contradict one another.
No it isn't. That is just like the anti-gunners blaming the guns when they are misused instead of blaming the people.
"academic" studies can be incredibly biased and politically motivated AND supported by sympathatic peers.
Just like non-academic writings can be incredibly biased, motivated by profit or politics, and supported by sympathetic peers. The difference is that in the academic studies there are usually plenty of voices out there pointing out the problems with the studies so people can make a better informed, more accurate decision.
Remember the "study" that said you are 40 soemthing times likely to be killed with a gun in home than ifyou didn't have one?
Sure I remember it, at least I think I know what you are talking about even though the description isn't real accurate. Do you remember that it was academics who wrote articles pointing out the inadequacies of the research, the limitations on it, and other problems with it? If your claim is that "experienced people" don't misuse data, don't pass on their biases, don't have agendas, and so on, you are sorely mistaken. I find far more factual errors in the popular literature than in the academic literature, and far weaker interpretations of the data.
As I've said before, I find it strange that so many in the world of guns seem to think that lack of knowledge is a good thing when it comes to DGU planning and response.

Last edited by David Armstrong; January 15, 2009 at 02:53 PM.
David Armstrong is offline  
Page generated in 0.03301 seconds with 7 queries