In response to:

Doing the Research the New York Times Won't Do

CombatMissionary Wrote: Jan 10, 2013 5:32 PM
The ultimate in selfishness: Giving women and children the means to defend themselves from rape, sodomy, physical and sexual abuse, murder, armed robbery, etc. isn't good for my political agenda. Throw the physically disadvantaged masses to the wolves so that my opinions may rule the land! My daughters are going in for martial arts classes this spring. I'm handling their tactical firearms training myself. A Bronze Star Afghan Vet
bridget38 Wrote: Jan 13, 2013 7:26 PM
I've always thought that the answer to the abusive behavior towards their own females .... beatings, beheadings, etc....would be to give each female a small pistol to carry under their burka's. That would end all that nonsense posthaste.
jrosen Wrote: Jan 10, 2013 7:08 PM
Thank you sir, for your service to this country! I hope its not in vein.

In Sunday's New York Times, Elisabeth Rosenthal claimed, as the title of her article put it, "More Guns = More Killing." She based this on evidence that would never be permitted in any other context at the Times: (1) anecdotal observations; and (2) bald assertions of an activist, blandly repeated with absolutely no independent fact-checking by the Times.

There is an academic, peer-reviewed, long-term study of the effect of various public policies on public, multiple shootings in all 50 states over a 20-year period performed by renowned economists at the University of Chicago and Yale, William Landes and John...