Re: New Scientific Study Highlights Idiocy of Owning Gun for "Protection"

"Wise Canadian" <smarterth@xxxxxxx> wrote in
news:kKSBm.163225$nL7.4515@xxxxxxxxxxxx:



"Jim Alder" <jimalder@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:Xns9CA64F6E4C27jimaldersssnetcom@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

I had serious doubts about the methodology of this 'study' as soon
as I
heard about the results. Now that I've read about it some more, it's
laughable.

And so are you.

Yes, and you are qualified to challenge the methodology of a peer
reviewed study in a leading journal of epidemiology. LOLOL!!!

Where did you receive your M.D. or Ph.D.?

My God, the delusions from which you people suffer are truly
frightening.



There are actors that are unaccounted for, at least per the press
releases and news articles. The actual study won't be released until
next month. Some of those questions are:

Who are the 677 cases?

What were their jobs?

Were they required to face criminals as, perhaps, law enforcement?

Were they criminals who could not own a legal firearm?

Were they involved in either drug or gang activity that would require
them to expect to be shot at?

Did they have concealed weapons permits?

These are limitations mentioned in the study itself but not in the press
release or news accounts. If you want to see a form of review please go
to:

http://volokh.com/2009/10/05/guns-did-not-protect-those-who-possessed-
them-from-being-shot-in-an-assault/

--
Sleep well tonight,

RD (The Sandman)

On TV, they show how detergents take out bloodstains. A pretty
violent image. I think if you've got a Tshirt full of bloodstains,
maybe laundry isn't your biggest problem. Maybe you should get rid
of the body before you do the wash and get some different friends.
.