Is Gun Research by John Lott Discredited?: Responses to Media Matters' false claims

Note that I have tried to make many of these responses after the posts that Media Matters has made about me, but they do not allow me to put them up in the comment section.  I have tried putting out these points on twitter or in a few Fox News op-eds, but Media Matters never responds to those discussions, presumably because it would draw attention to my responses.  Unfortunately, as I have discovered over the years, Media Matters is uncritically read by many in the media, and possibly that is another reason that they don't allow my responses to be posted.  I also think that by constantly posting discussions about me being "discredited" they hope to influence Google searches (see the screen shot below from this morning showing a total of about 160 posts where they attack me (some of the 172 are not really about me)).  Anyway, here are some of my responses:

"The Nine Worst Claims About Guns From John Lott's New Book." -- response is available here.

"Who Is Gun Advocate John Lott?" -- response is available here.

"Mother Jones and Media Matters bungle study on Mass Public Shootings" -- response is available here.

"Why Is NY Times Citing Discredited Gun Researcher John Lott?" -- response is available here in the section labeled "update".

"Gun "Researcher" Pushes Sham Statistics In The Wall Street Journal" -- response is available here.

"Discredited Gun Researcher John Lott's Failed Attempt To Correct Obama's Gun Statistic" -- all one needs to see is the Washington Post Fact Checker article available here.  Kessler is making a similar argument to the one that I made here.  Will Media Matters attack Kessler in the same way that they attacked me?

"John Lott Tries To Substantiate His Debunked Assertions By Repeating Them" -- response available here.

"Gun Advocate John Lott: Travyon Martin's Mother Used As A Prop To Make Stand Your Ground Seem Racist-- response available here.

"John Lott Vs. The FBI" -- response available here.

Other responses to Media Matters by me:
Media Matters, 'Stand Your Ground' and me 
David Brock, Media Matters and gun control hypocrisy

"Media Matter's dishonest attacks on Fox News" -- discussion here.

Media Matters doctoring my picture is discussed here.

Often Media Matters and others will point to one single paper or two that criticize my work.  In fact, there is a large academic literature that exists on these topics, and when you look at the whole literature you will see that most academic peer-reviewed studies support my findings (see a list of published research in Table 2 available here).

A list of all my posts regarding Media Matters is available here.

UPDATE: Ann Coulter has a discussion on this attempt to keep on calling me "Discredited." See Ann's column available here.  One should also note the rest of the academic research on this topic.

Labels: ,


Blogger Ron Danielowski said...

Stefan Molyneux correctly observed that if a person claims they are anti-violence and are for “gun control” they are not truly anti-gun nor non-violent people - because the reality is that guns and violence will be needed to disarm innocent law abiding people.

Those people who claim they are anti-gun and anti-violence who claim to support gun control will rely on the credible threat of state (police or military) violence and the police’s or military guns to take away the peaceable citizenry’s guns.

So those who claim to be anti-gun and anti-violence are really very pro-gun and pro-violence. They ultimately believe that only government officials (which are of course portrayed as reliable, honest, moral, and virtuous) should be allowed to have guns. This obviously flies in the face of reality as the 20th century’s genocides at the hands of government.

There is no such thing as gun control, there is only centralizing gun ownership in the hands of a small, political class and the forces they control, which as recent history has proven a murderous nightmare for the peace loving, disenfranchised, and disarmed citizenry.

Typical collectivist wordplay and tactics, with lethal consequences.

4/03/2013 12:09 PM  
Blogger Martin G. Schalz said...

Truth is always the first victim when there are those whom wish to control others.

4/03/2013 12:31 PM  
Blogger stuff.it said...

John, the problem lies in the mistruths that media matters trys to spread. It seems that the Left believes that spreading these mistruths that somehow at some point in time they will become half truths. Keep up your Great work and please don't let these people get you down. The Truth will be Told!

4/03/2013 8:23 PM  
Blogger Unknown said...

Mediamatters is so blatantly deceitful and intellectually pretentious that I find it very difficult to understand how any one who can read and write could possibly take anything they say seriously.
A friend of mine from Alaska just sent me a link showing a woman state legislator - (Democrat from Colorado,I believe)speaking about gun legislation in such a way as to make it evident she did not realize that magazines could be reloaded. These are the morons making our gun laws.
I read the "criticism" of you and your book on their blog. Then I read the "comments". I believe one could make a pretty decent semester long course on logical falicies with just this material alone. The people behind Mediamatters are either incredibly stupid or seriously evil. My guess is EVIL. These people are trying to use the first amendment to stomp on the second. Thank God for you Dr. Lott. There are millions of us out here very greatful for what you do.

4/05/2013 1:00 AM  
Blogger J.Gibbons said...

I just finished watching your interview on C-Span. I've never heard of you before but I am impressed, and grateful that debate can be informative, that it can be factual, reasonable, and stimulating. I am sick of the emotional level of school yard debate, good-guy vs bad-guy. Thanks for your appearance on C-Span. Keep up the good work.
J. Gibbons

7/20/2013 9:52 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home