Natalie Wolchover and her inaccurate "news story" for LiveScience.com
For a piece that focuses so heavily on criticizing my research, one would think that she would give me more time to respond, and I had responded to her on the evening of July 23rd. But Ms. Wolchover obviously had no intention of waiting for a response from me. Her 660 word piece was obviously not written and then go through editing between when she emailed me and when the piece appeared. Her claim that "Lott did not respond to requests for comment" was thus false on multiple counts. First, she is dishonest about "requests." She sent only one email. Second, as noted, despite the piece being about my work, she had no intention of giving me the time to respond.
Wolchover claims: "Although Lott's work still gets cited by the National Rifle Association and others as evidence in favor of greater gun freedom, the research "was found to be substantially flawed . . . ." Yet, she ignores all the academic research noted above that also favorably cites my research.
Her other false claims are dealt with in my book More Guns, Less Crime.