It dropped by a whopping eight crimes. I was unable to find the number for previous years before the 153-to-145 decline everyone is reporting but I doubt it's stastically significant. My opposition here is four years' worth of watching falling down drunks make fools of themselves. I don't want to picture people in that state of mind with guns.
Even assuming there was no statistically significant difference, doesn't that imply the law has no real justification since it didn't actually effect things much anyway? Shouldn't it be on the government to explain why it's absolutely necessary that something should be banned (at gun point, if it comes down to it), not on us to explain why it should be legal?
So you agree that using statistics and empirics can help us judge policies? In that case you should be against the
NRA trying (successfully) to suppress studies using statistics and empirics in the spirit of free inquiry.
