[circlecity]

HA! When this study was intitially reported on FR a couple of days ago my first questions was, “what was the year to year change in the murder rates in the decade prior to the 2007 change in the law.” Looks like it was the right question to ask. But then, I guess all of us on FR have learned how to question a liberal “study” and for the same reasons.

[dartuser]

But there are other reasons not to accept the conclusion touted by the press. . . .

yeah ... because it's the press that is touting it!

[DJ MacWoW]

Click The Pic To Donate

Support FR, Donate Monthly If You Can

[thorvaldr]

If the citizen disarmament people had a point, they wouldn’t have to lie. Citizen disarmament is simply not a logical way to reduce crime. It has always had the same goal, to reduce the power of the masses and increase the power of the state.

[BitWielder1]

Just as I thought when I first saw that study a few days ago, the state and the time window must have been carefully selected.

[thorvaldr]

And nothing at all will be done to daniel webster or john’s hopkins for being paid by fascists to lie in order to steal the rights from free people. Nothing at all.

[fungoking]

Turns out ole dad's advice is right again:

“Figures don't lie, but liars can figure.”

[Robert357]

Thank you for posting this, as my state's legislature (WA) is going to be dealing with this question and I know that the pro-gun control folks will be pushing the study at the legislators.