What did the Founders mean...

[gejohnston]

71. your rant is nonsense

You are card stacking by using a few select cities.
Fact check is "reputable" according to whom? It is only as good as the writer's intelligence, curiosity, and honesty. Journalism does not attract people with a high amount of two of those three qualities. Fact Check used one study and ignored the tens of studies that use a better methodology that contradict it.

You say 'nor' did the 'harvard school of public health admit their bias'. This is supposed to be a rational argument from you? As if the nra is supposed to begin every critique with 'we are biased pro gun'? What a sophomoric remark from johnston.

You clearly don't know anything about the scientific method, how legitimate studies are done, or anything else. Hemenway is an activist, not a scientist. His department exists to create studies its funders want. IOW, it is not science, it is propaganda. Also, you are using the false comparisan. The NRA is honest about who they are. Hemenway and his band of shills pretend to be scientists to give their bullshit the veneer of authority like Bill Nye's lab coat.

You show a complete lack of understanding what the correlation/causation tenet means. It only means that causation cannot be definitely attributed to correlation without further analysis, but it does NOT RULE OUT THAT A CAUSATIVE EFFECT CAN INDEED RESULT FROM A CORRELATION.

This is where we get to the card stacking. You use a few select cities that you call "pro gun" but ignore other cities within the same "progun" state that have lower murder rates than you list of "anti gun" cities, etc. When looked at honestly, and is the consensus of criminologists, there is no correlation and no relation gun ownership or gun laws. The real issue is the GINI coefficient. That is a perfect correlation. There are almost an infinite reasons.
Also, criminals and gangs get guns from the black market or make their own. They don't go to Gander Mountain or a gun show to buy them. That disproves any cause. Also using your "reasoning" that legal gun ownership causes crime, Canada, Norway, Czech Republic, should have similar murder rates to ours while it should be almost non-existent in Mexico and Brazil.
Also, the "study" in the Trace, does not say there are a cause and effect, just tries to imply it to the noncritical thinker. It does not show any connection outside of its "adjusted" statistics, yet never explains how those are adjusted or why it is relevant. All of these studies use the same sentence to hand wave the fact that their "statistics" do not match official statistics.

Your "broken lamp" shows that at least your imagination compensates for your critical thinking skills or lack of. But then, you are still pissed about a liberal court not ruling your way in Pink Pistols v DC and Wrenn v DC. How does it feel that the dissenting judge is a right wing "originalist" who used the ink to claim that Marbury vs Madison was wrong and should be overturned.