Miguel came up with a great idea, and Linoge turned it into a study.
Again, evidence points that more civilian ownership within a population means less per-capita murder. Of course correlation is not causation, but with certitude we can show that more civilian ownership does NOT mean more murder or danger to the public.
Of course a smart and honest study like Linoge just did will fall on deaf ears to the anti-freedom cult, as their members likely all reside on the lower slope of the IQ Bell Curve, so they’re scratch their heads for a bit attempting to understand the well-made graphic, and eventually give up, and declare Linoge as “Biased”, and simply go back to citing VPC “Studies” to “Support” their twisted agenda.
Still its not like we’re trying to reach THEM! They’re unreachable, hence why we call them a cult. Still any objective person looking for support for relaxing our gun laws might see a very reasonable argument for doing so.
Well done, Linoge!
Honestly, it is a bit of a stretch to refer to this as a “study” – I simply plotted two different datasets on the same graph and drew a few conclusions. I made no controls for… anything, really, and I did not really delve into the deeper causes for the relationship documented. Really, I just found a slightly-more-easy method of expressing a really dry data table.
And it is precisely because it is not a “study” that it is also not biased, unless you consider the facts themselves biased. After all, the graph clearly shows that in a country with X firearms, Y murders transpired, which means there were X/Y firearms per murder. I did not try to normalize anything, or fit it to a curve, or any of those sneaky methods often employed by statisticians in order to generate the results they want to have; I simply laid out the facts, and people can make and modify their own conclusions accordingly.
Obviously, the few idiots who still read my site will draw their idiotic conclusions, but the rest of us will be able to see those for what they are :).