refutation, go-to info

It's important to refute anti-civil rights stuff propogated by hoplophobes. But clever, intelligent, open-minded people want a cite to read that refutes disengenuous 'research.' And refutations can't have the taint of wackiness in it. I needed a repository to show people in the middle, that think both sides may be crazy.

When Bellesiles is cited I need to be able point to things that exposed him as a fraud. Or Kellerman's fraud, or Loftin's. And I found a nice one-stop shop for that ehre: A Brief History of Firearms Policy Fraud. One of the comments there brought it into stark releif. To paraphrase: those anti-gun anti-civil-rights researchers have SEEN the evidence. They KNOW they are wrong and have to tweak their data at the very minimum to achieve the ends they want to find at the very least, and they make up vast swaths of facts to support their erroneous thoeries at the worst. So the question is... Why? I'll tell you why.

Look at the Catastrophic Anthropogenic Greenhouse Warming religion. They started out with a solution and shopped around for a problem. Their solution was Socialism, and their problem became Global Warmening. If someone found a capitalistic solution that 90% of the public saw as superior to any socialist remedies and unquestionably better, the followers of Anthropogenic warming would lose interest in their pet project and faith and cast about for something else. The point is not the environment, the point is controlling other people. To force other people to be more like you, for their own good. Their intentions may be nice, many truly just want to do GOOD, but their methods of forced obedience is monstrous.

The same for Anti-Gun folks. They don't care so much about criminals, but for ordinary people to have control of their own lives and responsible for their own defense? That can't be. That's their fellow man, NOT under control. Their fellow man could hurt themselves, or WORSE, turn against anti-gunners for whatever reason. The possibility is just, THERE. It is an irrational fear, but it is there.

If we ascribe them the purest motive of "we just don't want people to die" then their methods of minimizing of eliminating guns of everyone doesn't jibe. Gun possession and minimizing death from guns don't have to be mutually exclusive, but to be as charitible as poosibe, THEIR side might think that it is mutually exclusive.

Anyway...

There is more details on the fraud perpetrated by the anti-gun folks here:

It turns out that Second Amendment advocates have gotten their story straight and their act together, while the gun control zealots have fumbled, fudged, and outright lied.

There is some other sources I turn to. Ethics from the Barrel of a Gun:
What Bearing Weapons Teaches About the Good Life.

[Ethics and Fraud were both themes I got from Hecate's Crossroad, and that blog got them both from Ricketyclick, it seems.]