Because the proposition I asked for admissions on in that thread was NOT nebulous, and the evidence was not statistically insignificant.
I said, then:
Now, your point about statistical weakness certainly applies to the long haul.
But as to the specific question: in that first year, gun crime in bars did not rise. THAT is an issue on which we have reasonably full, competent data on which to rely.
Right?
That’s all I asked for. I specifically said I’d be happy with someone who said, “I still say in the long run that crime will rise, but I admit that I was wrong about what would happen this past year.”
We have enough data to answer that question confidently, don’t we?