Obama Administration's War Against The Second Amendment...

Out of date! Note that, as I've kept up with the available literature, I've referenced scholarly research not included in that review.

 

You have quoted a hypothesis from a study conducted more than 40 years ago and yet you consider a 2003 study out of date? You are as hypocritical as you are transparent.

 

Study? You mean review. Reviews are only useful if they are recent. Bit obvious really! You'd only have an excuse if it was a meta-analysis which is used to indicate some feature in the earlier evidence.

 

provide it then. provide the research so that a proper debate can be had.

 

I hear crickets again.

 

Quicj question for you: have you read any of the peer reviewed scholarly research on gun control?

 

I put those up at a hundred yards and read them through my scope.

 

We would be happy to, if you would actually provide this research to read.

 

I'll take that flippancy to mean 'none'.

 

It is apparent that you have no clue what you are talking about, and that you are clearly anti-gun.

 

Dismissed because it is inconvenient to you.

 

I am smart enough to see an anti-Second Amendment/Anti-gun Obama Administration slowly on puting in place the necessary measures to achieve their gun-free, or at least severely restricted utopia. He is laying low at this point because he does not want to stir the pot, especially since most Americans believe in the Second Amendment and gun rights.

 

Ayuh,... Obo is also headed into a tough reelection,...

If by chance the moron wins,...
We can expect a full on onslaught on our 2nd amendment rights...

 

No. Its full of error. Have a look at his wikipedia site. Full of amusing controversy!

Personally I don't bother with it. I simply refer to the econometric error, as demonstrated by other paper. Kleck's work is much more powerful. I'm amazed more gun fiends don't use it. I blame the low brow sites that tell them what to say!

 

Sure. Look here.

 

Thank you for proving my suspicions. You've bought the whole NRA propaganda, hook-line-and-sinker. Why are you so quick to buy into these evil conspiracies?

 

I'll take your repeated dodges to provide your evidence, to mean you have "none".

you lose by default.

 

As no one else seems interested in discussing Winkler's article I would be happy to. I would first like to hear your analysis of how the article supports your position. This will help to clarify what your position is and keep our discussion focused. Thanks!

 

I've only used it to refer to the history of US gun control (including how gun control changed following the 2nd amendment)

 

...just passing through... couldn't help but notice the disingenuous sound of feigned disbelief in the voices of the anti-gunners. For example:

"As evidenced by what? I have not seen the administration do anything at all that would indicate they have the slightest interests in gun laws."

As with so many of his actions, Obama has kept his true intentions under the radar until the last minute; he's quite proficient at maintaining a subterfuge. Alas, his underlings less so:

February 26, 2009, CBSnews(dot)c*o*m

[[
Headline: HOLDER REVIVES TALK OF AN ASSAULT WEAPONS BAN

Attorney General Eric Holder was busy announcing the capture of more than 50 alleged members of the notorious Sinaloa Cartel yesterday when he unwittingly stepped into a larger debate about gun control.

Responding to a reporter's question on weapons' regulations, Holder said, "Well, as President Obama indicated during the campaign, there are just a few gun-related changes that we would like to make, and among them would be to reinstitute the ban on the sale of assault weapons. I think that will have a positive impact in Mexico, at a minimum".

Holder refused to speculate when legislation would move forward.

"There are obviously a number of things that are -- that have been taking up a substantial amount of [Obama's] time, and so, I'm not sure exactly what the sequencing will be," he said.
....
]]
====================

"...as President Obama indicated during the [2008 Presidential] campaign..."

And the actions of the Obama admin before they became the Obama admin are laughingly easy to identify with the anti-gunners. This took no more than 90 seconds to find: "Mrs. [Hillary] Clinton [then-First Lady] said after rolling off a 10-minute testimonial in which she presented Mr. Florio as a national champion in the fight for gun control..." -- NYTimes, Oct. 21, 1993, Hillary stumping for the re-election of NJ Gov. Jim Florio. He lost.

 

"Yes we can!" He, along with Hilary, both support the Small Arms Treaty from the UN. It was opposed until the Obama Admin took office. Fortunately for freedom and Constitutional loving Americans, Congress would have to bless that treaty, which is very unlikely.

 

Facts are the facts - statistics do not lie.

 

Not a conspiracy, but factual. You, however, fail to see it. That's your choice. This is America after all.

 

"More ice cream is eaten in the summer and more people also swim, ice cream therefore must make you swim".

Statistics must be treated within an empirical specification capable of testing hypothesis. You've been told this multiple times

 

Don't get silly like your views on gun control and crime.