Making Stuff Up At The Times (Gun Control Safety, Ongoing...)

The NY Times editors are back to gun control and back to making stuff up. This morning, their target is Gayle Trotter, who spoke at the Senate hearing last week. Her message, ever so vexing to the Times - women with guns are safer against criminals.

Their intro:

Dangerous Gun Myths

The debate over what to do to reduce gun violence in America hit an absurd low point on Wednesday when a Senate witness tried to portray a proposed new ban on assault rifles and high-capacity magazines as some sort of sexist plot that would disproportionately hurt vulnerable women and their children.

The witness was Gayle Trotter, a fellow at the Independent Women’s Forum, a right-wing public policy group that provides pseudofeminist support for extreme positions that are in fact dangerous to women. She told the Senate Judiciary Committee that the limits on firepower proposed by Dianne Feinstein, a California Democrat, would harm women because an assault weapon “in the hands of a young woman defending her babies in her home becomes a defense weapon.” She spoke of the “peace of mind” and “courage” a woman derives from “knowing she has a scary-looking gun” when she’s fighting violent criminals.

The Times editors promptly descend into fantasy and fiction:

It is not at all clear where Ms. Trotter gained her insight into confrontations between women and heavily armed intruders, since it is not at all clear that sort of thing happens often.

What is very clear is that the Times editors either did not read her testimony or chose to misrepresent it. She opened with the story of Sarah McKinley, the Oklahoma woman who spent twenty minutes on the phone with a 911 dispatcher and eventually used her shotgun on one of two intruders. (As to how often this type of incident happens, I would say, more often than Times readers may realize, since their first mention of Ms. McKinely is in this editorial).

Ms. Trotter went on:

Guns make women safer. Most violent offenders actually do not use firearms, which makes guns the great equalizer. In fact, over 90 percent of violent crimes occur without a firearm. Over the most recent decade, from 2001 to 2010, “about 6 percent to 9 percent of all violent victimizations were committed with firearms,” according to a federal study.1 Violent criminals rarely use a gun to threaten or attack women. Attackers use their size and physical strength, preying on women who are at a severe disadvantage.

So Ms. Trotter talked about violent criminals who are equipped with typical male size and strength and specifically noted they are unlikely to be carrying a firearm. In TimesWorld, that became "heavily armed intruders". Hmm, maybe the editors meant "heavy armed" intruders - sort of a "Popeye guns" thing.

The editors continue:

It is tempting to dismiss her notion that an AR-15 is a woman’s best friend as the kooky reflex response of someone ideologically opposed to gun control laws...

Hmm, it is tempting to dismiss this editorial as the kooky reflex response of someone who thinks banning scary looking guns will make scary things go away. VERY tempting...

The editors then offer an argument that makes sense if you don't think about it:

The cost-benefit balance of having a gun in the home is especially negative for women, according to a 2011 review by David Hemenway, director of the Harvard Injury Control Research Center. Far from making women safer, a gun in the home is “a particularly strong risk factor” for female homicides and the intimidation of women.

In domestic violence situations, the risk of homicide for women increased eightfold when the abuser had access to firearms, according to a study published in The American Journal of Public Health in 2003. Further, there was “no clear evidence” that victims’ access to a gun reduced their risk of being killed. Another 2003 study, by Douglas Wiebe of the University of Pennsylvania, found that females living with a gun in the home were 2.7 times more likely to be murdered than females with no gun at home.

That is good intel for women in an abusive relationship, but maybe not so important for the rest of us. Which, as an aside, is an ongoing problem for the Nanny State - good advice for the population as a whole (Don't be in an abusive relationship with a guy with a gun!) may not be relevant advice for many members of that population. I'm not an epidemologist but this seems like an example of the Prevention Paradox, where a frequent puzzle is whether to attempt to treat the whole population or just high-risk sub-groups (and a Rose by any other name would still be fascinating).

Pressing on:

Regulating guns, on the other hand, can reduce that risk. An analysis by Mayors Against Illegal Guns found that in states that required a background check for every handgun sale, women were killed by intimate partners at a much lower rate.

They don't provide a source and I can't run down that reference so I don't know what to conclude from their assertion, but here is a Mayors Against Gun Violence White Paper, which includes in the footnotes this paper:

Risk Factors for Femicide in Abusive Relationships: Results From a Multisite Case Control Study

Among the conclusions overlooked by the Times editors:

Although the abuser’s access to a firearm increased femicide risk, victims’ risk of being killed by their intimate partner was lower when they lived apart from the abuser and had sole access to a firearm (adjusted OR = 0.22).

To be fair, that was inconclusive:

A victim’s access to a gun could plausibly reduce her risk of being killed, at least if she does not live with the abuser. A small percentage (5%) of both case and control women lived apart from the abuser and owned a gun, however, and there was no clear evidence of protective effects.

In any case, with these statistics the Times is not promoting the assault weapons ban but instead is arguing for broader background checks, which looks like a winning idea with the public.

They close with a strawman:

The idea that guns are essential to home defense and women’s safety is a myth.

"Essential"? No one is arguing that guns are a "must have", only that they ought to be a matter of individual choice.

It should not be allowed to block the new gun controls that the country so obviously needs.

They led with their assault on 'assault weapons' and magazines and closed with statistics about background checks, so I guess it is still obvious to the editors that their full agenda is urgently and obviously needed. As to whether broader background checks would actually stop abusive males from obtaining guns (legally or illegally), I have no idea. 

NOTE TO SCHOOL ADMNINISTRATORS EVERYWHERE: If an earnest teacher overhears two teen lads talking about "Popeye guns", don't take 'em down too hard without a bit more info.

Comments

[Jack is Back! (On his iPad)]

This is an indictment against the arrogant, know all NFL. So who in the NFL is responsible for checking the stadium systems before the biggest game of the year? Incompetence.

[Ignatz Ratzkywatzky]

SBW, as I read it he is not even referring to COs at all and in fact juxtaposes these guys who were trying to receive a medical deferment with COs.
Not sure why or if you were rejected from CO status and I have no doubt guys who should have been granted it were denied, but these guys he's referring to weren't even trying for it. You don't become a CO by faking schizophrenia.

[Beasts of England]

Fiat lux!

p.s. the GoDaddy babe is my imaginary girlfriend: Bar Refaeli.

[daddy]

Since it looks like we have a technical delay due to field lighting problems here's a link to the famous Roman stoic Seneca, writing about the importance of reading good books some 2000 years ago. Scroll down just a bit to Epistle 2:
ON DISCURSIVENESS IN READING.

Not, I suspect, a very fun time guy at a Pub, but wisdom in his writings. BTW, I finished "US Grant's Memoir's" coming home today. I thought that an excellent read and highly recommend it. Now I am on to stuff Seneca may not have approved of, a new history on Dino-Fornication The Dawn of the Deed: The Prehistoric Origins of Sex

Already by Chapter One I have penis envy of some Argentinian Duck! (1.3 feet!) Lord love a duck!

[peter]

That Bar Refaeli commercial creeped me out. Reminded me of a scene from The Last Picture Show where they pushed the retarded kid into the arms of the town hooker.

[daddy]

Off with the dogs. I'll leave the game tied 5 to 5. Bye! Say "Vavoom" to Kate Upton for me when she arrives.

[narciso]

All is well, nothing to see here;

Wow. RT @MikeGrunwald: Uh oh. @entergy got a $9M #stimulus grant for #smartgrid in New Orleans. Guess they didn't get to the Superdome.

[Dave (in MA)]

I wonder if Marino fathered any kids while the lights were out.

[Beasts of England]

Agreed, Peter. I plan to speak with her about that...

[Carol Herman]

It ain't like the old days, anymore.

Teachers and cops have lost public respect. While who ever thought a kid could become headline news because she threatened a playmate with a toy gun that blows bubbles?

Lost respect never comes back.

[Ann]

Why can't we make the white house lights go out?

sbw:

I was screaming at Oprah's ad. When did she care when our guys came home? This is what upset me:

“When you are home ... we are more than a family … we are a nation,” Winfrey says as military members are embraced by family members when they arrive home. “We are a nation that is home again.”

You can tell she only listens to MSNBC.

[Dave (in MA)]

Ha, sbw @8:46, that's what I said to my brother when it happened.

[Jane - Mock the Media!]

I really can't believe there was an electrical outage. Hell it went on so long I came home. What a joke.

But I'm rooting for the Ravens so I guess I;m winning.

I liked the old people ad, for Taco bell.

[sbwaters]

Ig. I did just gloss over it, saw the CO reference, and tons more words. I will read it tomorrow.

I don't expect anyone to understand the complexity of the late 60s-70s. I am thoroughly comfortable with the military and could have been an effective soldier. At the same time, CO status had solid reasoning behind it at the time.

[Jim Rhoads a/k/a vjnjagvet]

Only the ad contest is still in play. The game is over. Baltimore's defense has played up to its ability. San Francisco showed in its game against Atlanta that its defense is suspect.

[sbwaters]

Daddy, I wouldn't know for fact, but apparently it is better to love a duck than have the duck love you.

[narciso]

On Ace's thread, they paraphrased lines from 'Die Hard' , 'You ask for miracles, (I give you the NFL) Why didn't they play the remaining commercials, they could screw up a one car
parade.

[peter]

SF down by two touchdowns with 22 minutes left. It is not over.

[peter]

now it is a one touchdown game.

[JerryRigged]

...plus a little...2 point conversions are not easy...

[Jim Rhoads a/k/a vjnjagvet]

I spoke too soon. I may have given the Ravens too much credit over my Falcons. Go Niners.

[Jack is Back! (On his iPad)]

Once again I spoke too soon. This is going done to a very clos game.

[sbwaters]

I'm a softy for horses.

[Jim Rhoads a/k/a vjnjagvet]

Will this game be remembered as the one where the Lights Went Out In The Big Easy?

[Ann]

I wouldn't want to be Governor Christie tomorrow:

Where the hell is my electricity?

[narciso]

Well we saw this pattern in the playoff games, specially the last half dozen.

[Rick Ballard]

Where did everyone go?

[narciso]

Speaking of in the tank referees;

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/brent-baker/2013/02/03/pelley-prompts-obama-explain-need-higher-taxes-warns-budget-cuts-could-

[Buckeye]

By far, best commercial, God made a farmer. Cut right through the other BS.

[anonamom]

I sneak in Downton Abbey during the power outage, and come back to a five point game.
What'd I miss????

[Jim Rhoads a/k/a vjnjagvet]

Paul Harvey lives on in that add. Three cheers for Dodge trucks.

[Thomas Colins]

That's my vote, too, Buckeye.

At the moment, I can't think of a better SB.

[jimmyk]

Where did everyone go?

Rick, I gather there's some kind of sporting event going on. Or perhaps it's an advertising contest occasionally interrupted by some sports.

[narciso]

Three touchdowns, right, including one be Kaspernick.

[Captain Hate]

This is an indictment against the arrogant, know all NFL. So who in the NFL is responsible for checking the stadium systems before the biggest game of the year? Incompetence.

King Roger is not happy with this display of bad manners and effrontery from you parvenus.

[Jane - Mock the Media!]

By far, best commercial

I completely agree.

[narciso]

What was that last call, about?

[narciso]

Well that's the Hawaii 5.O commercial, that ties the guns,

[Jane on Ipad]

What a difference an electrical failure makes.

[daddy]

Just back in. What the heck happened? How'd it suddenly become a contest. Darn my dogs.@#$%^

Great to see the 9er's come back tough and make it a nailbiter.

[narciso]

They project what they do themselves;

http://hotair.com/archives/2013/02/03/ecuadorian-judge-in-chevron-suit-admits-to-being-bribed/

[AliceH]

1:42 on the game clock, so that's, what - an hour in regular people time?

[Ignatz Ratzkywatzky]

49ers should win a Super Bowl or two if they can stop spotting teams fifteen or twenty points.

[Thomas Colins]

Congrats to the Ravens and their fans. Great game.

[narciso]

As Raylan Givens would say, Ignatz, they should stop doing that,

[daddy]

There was massive defensive holding on the right side of the Raven's line during that Safety. The defender was completely bear-hugging the 49er trying to get at the punter. But oh well. Glad it turned out to be a decent game, and that there was at least one redeeming advertisement.

[Ignatz Ratzkywatzky]

Personally I think the 49ers would have benefitted from that delay of game penalty.
Would have opened the field up much more at the ten rather than the five.

[narciso]

Yeah, they were just running out the clock, maybe that last throw, could have been shorter,

[Dave (in MA)]

Paul Harvey's words of wisdom.

[jimmyk]

Via Tim Blair, the Night the Lights Went Out featured an eco-friendly green Super Bowl. Maybe from the same folks who brought us the Chevy Volt?

[daddy]

Daddy, I wouldn't know for fact, but apparently it is better to love a duck than have the duck love you.

RSE,

Truer words, never spoken. From page 20-22, some unexpected info on duck wangdoodles:

The Duck penis is made erect through filling with lymph fluid rather than blood...Duck penis's have another interesting ability; they can literally explode out of the duck's body.

colleagues from Yale...published a paper in a prestigious scientific journal...research concerned the Male Muscovy Duck...and the speed of their penis eversion (the coming out or unraveling of the enormous corkscrew shaped penis). The first step was to study how professional "duck fluffers" collect semen for artificial insemination...

...The Duck fluffer then whips the drake (male duck) off the female and quickly touches the cloaca whilst holding up a specially made corkscrew shaped glass jar to catch the penis exploding out of the body and ejaculating as it fully extends. In the lab the researchers measured this phenomenon and found that the entire 8-inch duck penis would extend from inside the cloaca to outside and fully erect in just 0.348 seconds. (Next time you are barreling down the highway at 75 miles per hour, just think you are going as fast as a Muscovy Duck can erect his penis.)

Schwing!

Or perhaps that's a little too much info on waterfowl?

[centralcal]

After a really awful 1st half, the game got quite exciting. I have had too much food, too many cocktails, and quite a bit of drama (did Mama Harbaugh fiddle with the electric circuit to even the playing field for her boys? lol).

[jimmyk]

Also via Blair, this reporter gets a gold star for dealing with a videobomber:

http://www.vidiload.com/video/110535/News_Reporter_Owns_Videobomber/

Guaranteed to bring a smile.

[Beasts of England]

I guess that answers the age-old question: 'What's up duck?'

[Dave (in MA)]

daddy, the duck dong doyen.

[Stephanie]

Long Duk Dong from 16 Candles...

Daddy's excerpt puts that character's name in an entirely new light.

[daddy]

Not tonight Dear, I have a headache!

[Manuel Transmission]

daddy, check your math. An inch/millisec is 60mph. Chasing trains may be more boring than duck dicks, but it usually pays better.

[daddy]

MT,

I took the above verbatim from the book, so if he's wrong I blame Global Warming. Page 21 has a cutaway anatomical drawing of the mallard's tally-whacker, with the words beneath reading as follows:

Muscovy Duck demonstrating rapid 75-mile-per-hour (120-kilometer-per-hour) penis eversion.

Further research led me to this Science article (With Videos) of Muscovy Duck-fluffers in action: Ballistic penises and corkscrew vaginas – the sexual battles of ducks:NSFC (Not Safe For Chicken-Coop)

[rse]

I have no idea how I got pulled into daddy's duck story but it is certainly a graphic image to wake up to.

[peter]

too funny, Daddy

[peter]

I always found Paul Harvey to be a wee bit of a blowhard, and how exactly do those virtues get co-opted by a union owned socialist car company?

[Patriot4Freedom]

Interesting game . . .
Went from a "blow-out" to a "black-out" to a "shoot-out"
(if we can still use that expression).

The RNC and our candidates would do well to make campaign ads that touch upon the themes and emotions of the "God made a farmer" commercial for Dodge.

Easily the best ad of the night, imo.

[Captain Hate]

I always found Paul Harvey to be a wee bit of a blowhard

I did too but that was old school radio where his bread and butter was built around creating a schtick in a medium that a lot of people listened to that would work.

[narciso]

Our Duke snd Duke station, would never get that, they had a contest prize a DVD of Julianne's Bender, 'winning the future'

[Haiku Guy]

You know that when the MFM pulls out all the stops to smear somebody, as they have with Gayle Trotter, they are afraid of the truth.

The truth is, an AR-15 is the ideal defense weapon for most women, and banning them will impact women dispropotionately, and make them less safe.

As a man, I can use just about any gun in the safe, because they were all designed for me. But women, because of smaller hands and lesser upper body strength, do much better with the light recoil and high volume of fire they can get from an AR-15, and features like pistol grips, foregrips, barrel shrouds and adjustable stocks are what makes the weapon even more effective for them.

But these are the very features they want to ban. It is almost as if they want to disarm women!

[peter]

It actually was a very good commercial. I am just being a grump.

[Captain Hate]

More about Rove doing Soros's bidding. At least he's being honest about it: http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/02/03/Rove-declares-war-Tea-Party

[Janet]

You know that when the MFM pulls out all the stops to smear somebody, as they have with Gayle Trotter, they are afraid of the truth.

Haiku Guy, I noticed on FB that there were a lot of negative, mocking posts on Gayle Trotter from the lefties...is that happening all over the MFM?

[Manuel Transmission]

You have to think back to Paul Harvey's hay day. He was talk radio. I can remember many a elder friend, sibling, aunt that managed to be near the radio at 11:45 (or whenever ) to catch his broadcast. It was definitely a red state thing.

[sbwaters]

So, is it Duke & Duke or Duck & Duck?

I suppose it depends on who is getting screwed.

[Manuel Transmission]

I've waited for TK to jump in here, but in his absence, what happens if one of 'um has left-handed threads? ;)

[Melinda Romanoff]

MT-

Mandatory Lunch listening on the ranch. Loved pagination.

[Porchlight]

Morning all. I had a feeling it was going to be a great Super Bowl (and that the Ravens woudl win), but I also just didn't feel like watching it. So I didn't (after the first quarter). Glad it was fun though.

[D. Smith]

The comment that was heard a lot in the Old West, just as it is today, goes like this: "I thought he was reaching for a gun. It looked like he was going for a gun." Really? So then if guns are illegal this wouldn't happen?? Oh puhleeze. People are gonna have guns whether the idiots on capitol hill pass some asinine bill "banning" them or not. It won't matter if they try to ban hand guns or "assault weapons". If people want them they'll get them, and if criminals want them they already have them. Do you think they run right up and register them?! Yeah, who's funnin' who?

Taking guns away only gives the WADC criminals more power than they can handle. We've seen what they do with it, so far.