Crime Rate & Concealed Carry

[Tennessee Gentleman]

Thanks Glenn. I think it is difficult to prove or disprove the question. In fact, didn't the CDC say they could find no causality between gun control laws and the reduction of crime? I am beginning to think crime rates are independent of gun availability as relates to causality.

[Double Naught Spy]

Funny how that works.

[David Armstrong]

As are many "studies" as many that the Joyce Foundation produces. I think the debate illuminated the differences and explained to the layman well what the research showed.

There is the problem. Some want to "illuminate the difference" while others suggest learning about an issue.

That is incorrect and insulting.

Sorry, I can only comment based on what you have shown. Again, if one considers a debate posted on YouTube as a good source of information, or if they think that a link where someone posts something they read about what somebody else about what somebody else wrote, or if they don't understand the concept and ease of inter-library loan, and so on, I'm gong to suggest they don't understand basic research issues.

Apparently some academics believe CCW reduce crime.

Some academics believe in Intelligent Design. Most academic don't. Same with the idea the CCW was responsible for the drop in crime rates without considering all the other variables out there.

And I read and commented on the Donohue article he posted which IMO shed no better light on the discussion than the debate.

I think that says more about ones ability to be a good consumer of research than anything else.

[David Armstrong]

Let's just keep it calm, folks. I think the point is that we need to examine the sources and look at the originals if we can. Panel discussions with experts are quite useful as summaries.

I think we have reached a useful conclusion that we can't just spout a catch phrase but gather real info to back up the summaries.

BIG +1. Examine the sources, look at the originals, gather real info to flesh out and understand summaries. Learn something about what it is yo want to discuss so you can discuss it intelligently. Get off the internet sometimes and go read a book!

[Tennessee Gentleman]

Originally Posted by David Armstrong

There is the problem. Some want to "illuminate the difference" while others suggest learning about an issue.

That's a nice opinion but I think we can learn a lot by seeing how experts disagree as Glenn mentioned.

Originally Posted by David Armstrong

Sorry, I can only comment based on what you have shown...Again, if one considers a debate posted on YouTube as a good source of information

I accept your apology. This of course is your opinion but not factual. Lots of very good information is on the internet as well as bad. However, the debate was very useful to the discussion IMO and not all good information comes from books alone. Furthermore as I have stated repeatedly I am not doing academic research but rather participating in a discussion forum with mostly non-academics.

Originally Posted by David Armstrong

Some academics believe in Intelligent Design. Most academic don't.

I agree with your idea that just because an academic says something doesn't make it so. Hence I look at multiple sources of info.

Originally Posted by David Armstrong

or if they think that a link where someone posts something they read about what somebody else about what somebody else wrote,

Which the Donohue article was.

Originally Posted by David Armstrong

I think that says more about ones ability to be a good consumer of research than anything else.

Again your opinion but I think other posters can look at the two and make their determination. Once more, this is a discussion forum not an academic panel. Not all knowledge is in print these days. But you know that article Glenn posted was on ....the internet!

[Glenn E. Meyer]

I think the relevant points have been made. Stand down.

IMHO - reading the original sources is the best. However. a panel discussion of the experts who produce the original literature can be useful. I've watched such panels myself.

But we are done for a bit. The issue of whether CCW reduces crime will need a look from scholary folks past Lott and Donahue.

So say Goodnight, Gracie.