American Report on John Robby Show

**Todor** · 26-08-2014, 12:51

Originally Posted by JS4

From PC to AC. Dafuq!?

There's a method behind the madness of science, not behind the madness of political correctness...

**JS4** · 26-08-2014, 12:55

Originally Posted by Todor

We are not in disagreement about that. We are in disagreement about guns being responsible for Chicago's reduction in crime - because it happened before the guns arrived.

e.g I am interested to know what actually caused it versus just re-affirming what I already know about guns (that they aren't the problem).

Cool.

But I'm not saying firearms is the only reason for the drop in crime, just that it is a contributory factor.

As for your assertion that the drop in crime happened before the guns arrived, I don't know those facts and dates. I do know however that the mere opening up of the possibility of the guns arriving in the near future (such as that a CCW law has been approved) will already influence criminals' decision-making and risk analysis.

Very much in the way that Lott showed how an increase in CCW among females benefited non-carrying females too in that the rape rate in it's entirety decreased, not just for those that carry.

**Todor** · 26-08-2014, 13:01

Originally Posted by JS4

I do know however that the mere opening up of the possibility of the guns arriving in the near future (such as that a CCW law has been approved) will already influence criminals' decision-making and risk analysis.

Very much in the way that Lott showed how an increase in CCW among females benefited non-carrying females too in that the rape rate in it's entirety decreased, not just for those that carry.

It is illogical, but I won't go as far to say impossible. Maybe the criminals never got the memo about the delay in issuing CCW permits.

**wesleyss** · 26-08-2014, 13:11

Podcast is on my server http://foxred.co.za/podcasts/20140826USReport.mp3

Right click and select "save link as" to download a local copy.

**Centrefire** · 26-08-2014, 14:46

Heard Harley on the JR show this morning and thought' This will be a good post on Gunsite" but got beaten to it. lol
The above #54 responses attest to this

**Peter Wells** · 26-08-2014, 16:20

I'm not quite sure about JR's true stance - I had him on the range a few years ago with a MAG and I couldn't get him off it!

**Wanderin' Zero** · 26-08-2014, 16:33

Originally Posted by Peter Wells

I'm not quite sure about JR's true stance - I had him on the range a few years ago with a MAG and I couldn't get him off it!

Then let's offer him a PKM and a case of ammo! :-)

**spiggs** · 26-08-2014, 16:42

Originally Posted by Wanderin' Zero

Then let's offer him a PKM and a case of ammo! :-)

**Wanderin' Zero** · 26-08-2014, 16:51

Originally Posted by spiggs

Okay, okay.... Maybe an MG42 rather.

**Zoo Keeper** · 26-08-2014, 18:48

Originally Posted by Todor

We are not in disagreement about that. We are in disagreement about guns being responsible for Chicago's reduction in crime - because it happened before the guns arrived.

e.g I am interested to know what actually caused it versus just re-affirming what I already know about guns (that they aren't the problem).

Lott has posted a list of studies that are peer-reviewed. The studies come to the conclusion of either a positive effect or no effect. The only studies which had a negative correlation failed peer review ...

I haven't checked the stats but if Chicago's contact crime began dropping before the actual licenses were issued it does not mean the CCW had no effect. The major publicity around the fact that it was now legal (with nothing said about actual licensing) creates the perception in the BGs that CCW is now around, even if it factually is not. Therefore the perception of the CCW is as powerful deterrent as actual CCW. Which goes to the theory that 99.9999% of a gun's work is done sitting quietly in a holster.

But you are perfectly correct to dismantle the figures. Real attacks on these results will come so we need to be able to bat them all off.

Interestingly, Bloomberg has spent about 250milllion on gun control and has yet to come up with any credible study, yet Lott has spent about 500k and has beaten Bloomberg to a pulp.

I googled gun control studies and peer review and came across an article on a gun control website explaining why peer review was bad - and all it was was a concoction of "the dog ate my homework so I can't pass" excuses.

I am sure on this website we have doctors, can any of them do some research to rebut the rubbish put out by Abrahams, Matzopolous and Van As? What about the CSIR? Any scientists here who could help us?