Madenci said he didn’t have enough data to determine whether guns in specific homes were responsible for these deaths or injuries... [More]Gee, and which households might those be?
Perhaps the ones where"gun possession" might be a more honest description than "gun ownership"...?
Yeah, right, lump yours and mine in with crack houses and gangbanger cribs and then judge us all as one big homogeneous demographic.
The establishment popular "science" community is just another part of the propaganda machine.
Anybody think Eric Niiler is "reporting" from a position of ignorance?
1 comment:
I wrote about this "study" yesterday. As near as I can tell from the press releases (damned if I can find the actual presentation or study anywhere), the "methodology" amounted to "guns bad; cherry pick numbers to sorta-support conclusion, hope no one actual crunches them". Madenci used injury/death numbers from a few years and "correlated" them with all gun numbers from a single, different year, and never looked at specific handgun numbers in the homes of the "children" (never defines "child either, looks like he used the CDC definitions that include 25 year olds), then blamed handgun number from 2004 for 1997 injuries/deaths.
Even for the AAP, this is pretty pitiful.
Post a Comment