(May 11, 2023 at 9:34 pm)Jackalope Wrote:(May 11, 2023 at 11:07 am)Helios Wrote: Sorry but it's a garbage study written by a hack
Not to mention that absent some objective criteria "better" is a subjective value judgment.
Also, as someone who works with data every day - garbage data is garbage. It's a bit like a syllogism with garbage premises. Garbage in, garbage out. "BuT iT's ThE bEsT wE HaVE!!!!!1111!!!". It isn't. It's one that produced a result gun nuts like. It's methodology is trash, as a result the data is trash, and it's conclusions are trash.
Kleck's work is oft-refuted garbage and nobody ought spend additional effort to debunk it.
Then point me to any other study that tried to estimate the number of lives saved by guns. As far as I know, there isn't any. There are some other studies that tried to estimate the number of defensive gun uses per year, the vast majority of them concluding there are millions of defensive gun uses per year. But no study other than Gary Kleck's one tries to estimate the number of lives saved by defensive gun use.
