I recently signed up at Salon.com’s blog page, Open Salon. The site it about 99% Liberal. But that’s okay… I mainly mirror Capitol Commentary there although I will visit, and comment, upon some of the articles there.
I was “greeted” by a fine gentleman named Paul. Now Paul and I had never been formally introduced but he did have some kind words for me:
You’re aiming for a lower emotional age and IQ number than you’ll find around here, generally speaking. You can “favorite” about 7-8 more before you run out of a similarly afflicted fan base.
I’ll look in from time to time and will let you know when you’ve maxed-out on available conservative dunderheads. It’s my way of supporting diversity on OS.
He’s a fine lad, isn’t he?
Typical of Open Salon which brings me to and article by the name of a fellow called Kanuk. This gentleman seems to feel that the Stand Your Ground law in Florida (which may offer legal cover for Trayvon Williams’ shooter, George Zimmerman) has caused an increase in firearm deaths.
Kanuk apparently went to great trouble to make his article appear to be “scientific” and “accurate” but, when it comes to Liberals and guns it was (of course) anything but those things.
Here’s an example:
Using the Florida Department of Law Enforcement (see here) as well as the FBI (see here) websites, I extracted data on the number of homicides, the number of homicides involving a firearm, as well as the number of violent crimes. I decided to include those because one person who commented on my first post indicated that the SYG law could potentially influence violent crime rates.
Kanuk then goes on to list a bunch of pretty graphs like the ones below:
Those look pretty and scientific (Click for a larger view), don’t they?
Of course, they tend to support what I believe his pre-determined conclusion was:
Accounting for the national data, the SYG law in Florida seems to be associated with an increase in the number of homicides involving a firearm, although the total number of homicides didn’t increase significantly after 2005.
So this is all very nice but his article has one fatal flaw
One fatal flaw…
What could it be..?
The fatal flaw..?
He doesn’t know how many murders Stand Your Ground was cited as a reason… or if it had anything to do with the particulars of an incident. 75% of the murders with firearms could have been between convicted murderers shooting it out in the streets or they could have involved senior citizens living in retirement homes.
Nobody knows because those statistics are not present in the study.
So Kanuk’s entire “study” is bogus.
Of course, that didn’t stop fellow gun-haters from admiring all of his hard “work” and effort:
- Some of us simply want facts and analyses we can trust. I, too, want somebody to pay you to publish your work, which goes far beyond what so many bloggers do.
- The whole idiotic notion espoused by second amendment/NRA wingnuts is that we will all be safer if everyone walks the streets armed to the teeth.
- You’re confusing gun-nuts with facts and logic and you’re gonna make their heads explode. Then we’ll have a huge mess to clean up, dammit.Very nicely done, Kanuk
Sad, indeed, that hardly anybody seems to have noticed the fatal flaw in his study (boy is it a glaring one) but they all take his conclusions at face value.