Mass Shootings and Data-Free Zones

[Joe in PNG]

It won't get to that point.

Amending the Constitution is unnecessary when the undesirable civil right in question- 2nd Amendment or otherwise-can merely be ignored. See Mexico for a practical example.

Amending is unlikely, but not impossible.

[Kukuforguns]

You know which fact trumps yours and every other number cruncher's facts? The fact that my right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

The fact that judges have invented tests of societal benefit/government interests out of thin fucking air to infringe on our rights just makes them traitors to the Constitution.

I think you are inferring something that doesn't exist. I doubt RevolverBob would advocate for the abolition of the 2d A if his research indicated intervention worsened outcomes. As long as the 2d A is part of the Constitution, then you do have a right to keep and bear arms. But research has the potential to highlight ways to reduce the risk firearms pose. The thing is, we don't and cannot know how research can help us until after we do the research. Knowledge is good. How we use knowledge is an entirely different ball of wax.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

[Drang]

Also... Consider the fact that the Other Side pretty much runs on appeals to emotion; their citations of facts amount to lies or the "fact" that "Bad things happen." Study after study that doesn't rely on skewed or made up data keeps supporting the idea that law-abiding citizens who are armed are not a significant threat to themselves or to other law-abiding citizens.

Alpha Sierra is correct that one's right to defense of self and others would not go away if the Second Amendment were to go away. But...

What happens in Formerly Great Britain if one fights back?

This is just a little more than a week old: Teen decks bully who punched blind student — then is suspended | New York Post

We can argue that Heinlein disposed of the "Violence Never Solved Anything" argument decades ago, but our misguided fellow citizens elected President a man who seems to feel that that attitude is a solid basis for Foreign Policy. (Sometimes. Depending on the foreigners involved.)

[GardoneVT]

I think you are inferring something that doesn't exist. I doubt RevolverBob would advocate for the abolition of the 2d A if his research indicated intervention worsened outcomes. As long as the 2d A is part of the Constitution, then you do have a right to keep and bear arms. But research has the potential to highlight ways to reduce the risk firearms pose. The thing is, we don't and cannot know how research can help us until after we do the research. Knowledge is good. How we use knowledge is an entirely different ball of wax.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

An argument could be made they'd want to keep the 2nd Amendment on the books.Its easier to sell the low-info constituency if plausible deniability exists.

"What? Ban guns?! Heavens NO! We believe in the 2nd Amendment. That's why the only guns permitted for civilian ownership will be a Remington 700 and a GP100 4" "

[Alpha Sierra]

If the 2A is demonized enough, if enough people see gun rights as a positive evil, and they get enough states to vote for a repeal- goodbye rights.

That's probably a powder keg that those who know better ought not light

[oldtexan]

....Regarding releasing the data. While I respect that folks here want to see data in favor of their viewpoint and would rather see data that don't support their point swept under the rug. I am ethically, morally, and professionally bound to present the results as they come, and support my interpretations with published literature, be they negative or positive. If you wish to rebut them, you may. But I refuse to compromise or fail to publish or make freely available data that may be relevant to the discussion at hand. This is my professional responsibility as a researcher and I do not take it lightly. If I compromised my integrity, because the results did not meet my political expectations, I would be no different than a lying politician. I deal in facts and evidence. Again I will do my very best to present an unbiased interpretation of these data as they become available.

I recognize there are some who think this is a negative road to go down. I respect that opinion, but disagree with you. Hence, the warning at the beginning of this thread.

-Rob

Rob, thanks for doing this, and drive on. I want to see the results of your analysis no matter where they lead.

[WobblyPossum]

I agree with oldtexan. I would love to see more hard data added to this discussion. Right now each one of these events leads to a lot of emotional rhetoric and the occasional poorly thought out law. I would love to be able to provide some data and be able to say "this is what actually happens." I support this effort regardless of what the data will show at the end


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Hambo]

I still think that Rob is over-estimating the number of people who care about facts. As an example of the thought process of the other side, I was looking for stories on the Oregon shooting and watched part of CBS world news. They interview three people: the Milwaukee County sheriff (cool guy), a woman who runs a suicide prevention center (interesting ideas), and an African-American pastor from NYC. The pastor said something on the order of "the president should do whatever it takes to stop this". I don't think he realizes how dangerous this sentiment is, but a lot of people would agree with him. No facts needed, just do "whatever it takes."

[GardoneVT]

I agree with oldtexan. I would love to see more hard data added to this discussion. Right now each one of these events leads to a lot of emotional rhetoric and the occasional poorly thought out law. I would love to be able to provide some data and be able to say "this is what actually happens." I support this effort regardless of what the data will show at the end


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Data is subject to interpretation.

Raise your hans if you have ever worked in agencies or organizations where the available data all said "THIS IS A SH**TY PLAN" , and management said full speed ahead anyways?

I know I have. Data alone won't get the job done.

[MDS]

Just getting caught up and this thread caught my eye. Awesome work, Rob, thank you!

I'm disappointed that there were so many comments about not publishing data if they don't agree with existing beliefs. Why don't we just burn the anti-gun heretics, while we're at it?