Re: Prof Lott publishes the 3rd edtion of More Guns, Less Crime.


"Scout" <me4guns@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:mtGIn.7397$304.6956@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Trevor Wilson wrote:
Scout wrote:
Trevor Wilson wrote:
ozarkheart@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
On Wed, 19 May 2010 07:28:01 +1000, "Trevor Wilson"
<trevor@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

betweentheeyes wrote:
"Trevor Wilson" <trevor@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:85fc2mFqinU1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
betweentheeyes wrote:
http://www.nraila.org/Legislation/Federal/Read.aspx?id=5818

"With over 180 pages of new material, the third edition of More
Guns, Less Crime (published by the University of Chicago Press)
covers issues that are most important to Second Amendment
supporters today, as well as those that were on the
front-burner during the battle to protect the right to keep
and bear arms in the 1990s." This piece is for you, Phil.

"Lott also documents how every place in the world that has
adopted a ban on guns has experienced an increase in murder
rates, often suddenly and dramatically."

**As usual, Mary Rosh will fail to produce any hard evidence for
this claim. As usual, nor will you.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au


My apologies, I'm trying to do two things at once and I'm doing
neither very well.

Trevor, it is not my book I don't need to produce any evidence.

**Of course. You just parrot information, without first
ascertaining the accuracy of that information.

Is that something akin to verifying the accuracy of a claim that "a
friend can stop his heart"?

**Since I cannot provide verifiable evidence to support such a
thing, you may dispense with that claim.

Why should we disspense with what you claimed to be the truth?

**You should dispense with any claims that cannot be backed by hard
evidence.

Advice you should take to heart. Since you won't it just illustrates your
hypocracy.

**MY hypocrisy? Does it? How so?


Including any of my claims that are not backed by hard
evidence.

Which would be nearly all of them.

**Really? Cite "nearly all of them".

However, the point isn't that your claims
are crap. It's the fact you make them without verifying their validity and
without any expectations of being able to back up your bullshit
assertions. THAT is what exposes your stupidity and ignorance. That you
bitch about others whom you claim are doing what you regularly do shows
your hypocracy.

**I'm not bitching about anyone else's claims. I am simply stating that
without providing any hard data, those claims can be dismissed.


So, no. I'm not going to forget your crap claims, nor am I going to simply
dismiss them because you wish for people to ignore your Usenet history.
Your bullshit is going to follow you and will come up anytime you point
fingers at other people.



Why should we ignore such proofs that you make claims without verify
the accuracy of the claim?

**Same question. Same answer.

IOW, you don't have a good answer.

**If you wish, I will provide the answer to your question again then:

**You should dispense with any claims that cannot be backed by hard
evidence. Including any of my claims that are not backed by hard evidence.


Why should we ignore your hypocracy?

**If I engage in hipocrisy, then you should ignore it.

Sorry, but I'm not going to ignore your hypocracy.

**Your choice.


As a person living in a glass house, you really shouldn't be throwing
rocks, Trevor.

**I ask for evidence. Nothing more. NO evidence = claim dismissed.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au


.

Relevant Pages