Another "study" trying to prove that carrying a gun increases your chances of being shot

[ttocswob]

I've studied the issue, and concluded that carrying a gun greatly increases my chances of returning fire. ;)

[chances R]

What they don't tell you is that the gun they were killed with was the one brought into the home by the assailant.  Of course it also includes suicides.  The knee jerk reaction by the uninformed is that the studies indicate that the owners gun is the one that killed the owner.

[Guest ab28]

I can think of about 6 million dis-armed "data points" in 1940s Central Europe that might skew their findings a little.   :bored:

It was actually about 12 million total, 6 million Jews, and 6 million or so gays, "political dissidents" ect.

[East_TN_Patriot]

you guys are so silly and old fashioned ... "science" is no longer a process where you objectively gather data and draw conclusions based on that data ...

its the process of drawing a conclusion based on the liberal political agenda point of the day, and "gathering"/creating/misconstruing data points reported on the internet (where everything is true if it supports your belief, and false if it supports the opposite) that support your already drawn conclusion.

if you pay enough $ to a University and your "study" supports the agenda, you might be granted a Ph.D and be considered an "expert" in something likely not useful in everyday life ... 

 

science is such a joke now a days

 

let me put it in pictures: "scientists" =  :jester: who are  :owned: by, and  :bow: to the  :usa: who gives them  :2cents: to produce  :poop: so that you will drink the  :koolaid:

 

now ... back to my graduate level studies in mid 18th century Belgian lesbian studies ...

So does that mean my PhD in criminology is useless, I lack honesty and objectivity, and any research I produce is only for the purpose of convincing people to buy into the liberal agenda?  I guess I'll stop fooling with the research I am currently working on that examines the role of media rhetoric in shaping flawed gun policies.  Too bad I didn't realize how liberal and "owned" I am before I started on it.  I guess someone needs to call John Lott and Gary Kleck and let them know that they are really liberal hacks too.

Sounds to me like you are just as biased and incapable of objective thought as the authors of that study.  

 

Edited March 2, 2013 by East_TN_Patriot

[Guest ab28]

So does that mean my PhD in criminology is useless, I lack honesty and objectivity, and any research I produce is only for the purpose of convincing people to buy into the liberal agenda?  I guess I'll stop fooling with the research I am currently working on that examines the role of media rhetoric in shaping flawed gun policies.  Too bad I didn't realize how liberal and "owned" I am before I started on it.  I guess someone needs to call John Lott and Gary Kleck and let them know that they are really liberal hacks too.

Sounds to me like you are just as biased and incapable of objective thought as the authors of that study.  

 

He was being sarcastic, doesn't translate well text only.

[East_TN_Patriot]

He was being sarcastic, doesn't translate well text only.

I caught the sarcasm in the first part, but I'm not so sure that was sarcasm in the second part.  While I was a LEO, my coworkers regularly said that PhD stood for "post hole digger" and other comments I've read from other gun owners are pretty much in line with that one.