*Ad hominem *.
So bad data is okay if you say “ad hominem?”
John Lott, dude. By now we should *all *know that’s a synonym for “This is bullshit”. That is not an ad hominem.
Nope, but you see- it’s not bad data.
If you do attack the cite, you can say “That cite is biased, here is a unbiased cite I provided for contrast”- and that’s great. Just attacking that cite without a counter cite is a ad hominem.
Note that you didnt have a counter cite.
It’s bad data. A textbook example of how to lie with statistics. Snopes explains why.
Then where is your counter cite?
And Snope rated his as a mixture.
I mean the famous CDC “guns are dangerous to those who own them” studies were even worse, but people trot them out all the time. All the time here on this board, people trot out a small cherrypicked list of nations with low murder rates and high gun controls to “prove” that gun control works everywhere so the uSA needs to try it. Its’ the same thing.
Within the scope of his period and the scope of his very reasonable definition, Lott is correct.
I am not going down this tedious rabbit hole. The Snopes article speaks for itself, and is a counter-site. I’m confident curious dopers can read it themselves.
From the article:
Sure. But how about if we found a year with no mass shootings in America? Does that prove our rate is low? That one mass shooting did push the numbers high, but does that mean we shoudl ignore it?
So you made the claim- “put up or shut up” as they say.
Read the fucking article.
The prefered terms are “developed nations” and “developed Western nations.” This form of bigotry/racism denies that the people of the other nations have agency and are capable of making moral decisions. What it amounts to is saying “We can’t compare ourselves to those bloodthirsty savages, we’re civilized.” It’s a form of racism and bigotry that gets a pass at this board and in liberal circles generally.
Since I quote part of it. But again, that’s not a counter cite.
OK, whatever you say, chief.
What does a three day non-voluntary commitment do for anyone? Doctors can judge a person’s mental state in three days?
The only th8ing I can see is it sells drugs. Anyone in that system is given drugs, and a prescription of more drugs. Drug companies must love this.