- Messages
- 1,104
- Reactions
- 606
I apologize is there is another thread on this, couldn't find one.
<broken link removed>
A pro-gun buddy for mine forwarded this to me a little bit ago, it also made the news a few weeks back.
I've been digging into it as the whole summary struck me as having some serious flaws. The first issue I had was with the group that produced the 'study.' Center for American Progress is the group who did or sponsored the study. Their CEO and president worked on both the Obama and Clinton administrations, this doesn't automatically mean they are bias but it sure does slant it that way.
The other item was they use a lot of correlation to show causation, which is poor science.
Has anyone else dug through this report and really looked at the numbers? I've been doing some looking and something about the numbers just don't feel right.
Anyone? And if there is another thread, please point me to it.
<broken link removed>
A pro-gun buddy for mine forwarded this to me a little bit ago, it also made the news a few weeks back.
I've been digging into it as the whole summary struck me as having some serious flaws. The first issue I had was with the group that produced the 'study.' Center for American Progress is the group who did or sponsored the study. Their CEO and president worked on both the Obama and Clinton administrations, this doesn't automatically mean they are bias but it sure does slant it that way.
The other item was they use a lot of correlation to show causation, which is poor science.
Has anyone else dug through this report and really looked at the numbers? I've been doing some looking and something about the numbers just don't feel right.
Anyone? And if there is another thread, please point me to it.