Originally Posted by
HughC
Lott is not a creditable source...
His compiled data, methodology and conclusions are or aren't valid, independent of his behavior. Perhaps you should also apply a similar level of scrutiny to the gossip-mongers, assign possible or probable motive, and then assess their credibility. You seem to have accepted the prosecution's argument in toto, without cross-examining them or hearing the defense. I suspect you haven't read "More Guns, Less Crime" and are basing your assertions from sites you found after a Google search.
There are plenty of anti-gun sites that offer selective and unfair criticisms of Lott, plenty of pro-gun sites that vehemently defend him, and a very few objective pieces regarding the issue. The 1997 surveys (along with a large amount of other data) were lost in a hard-drive crash, which is corroborated by many (quite distinguished) individuals. Bizarre accusations have arisen nonetheless.
I don't condone the Mary Rosh incident (although I can sympathize, given the years of attacks and misrepresentations by various publications he has endured and tried to correct). I also don't condone whatever is going on with his eyebrows. Frankly, they freak me out.
Bookmarks