Stanford Law Professor John J. Donohue have revised a study that shows John Lott is wrong, and more guns actually equal more crime. Looks like his premise is that you can’t count the years that were part of the decline in the crack cocaine epidemic. In other words, if you cherry pick your data, Lott is wrong. John Lott didn’t waste any time pointing out the flaws with the study, noting that Donohue used a statistical method that Donohue himself argued was misleading in a different context. Will you see the media reporting on that? I doubt it.
Based on a Facebook thread I saw about this topic earlier, a lot of people don’t like the idea of basing their rights on the outcome of statistical studies, and believe we ought to keep strictly to a rights argument. The problem with that is a rights argument only appeals to a certain part of the population. There are plenty of people out there who, if you asked them, would agree with a prohibition on speech or actions that “hurt someone else’s feelings.” There are voters out there who are swayed by statistical magic, because it makes them feel smart. We can’t let the other side own that field, because if we do, they own those voters.