A May 14 NewsBusters post by Warner Todd Huston claimed that a Washington Times op-ed by Alex Gerber is "filled with lies," but Huston promotes a couple deceptions himself to attack the op-ed.
Huston claimed that Gerber "ignored all the evidence that says more armed people in a given area actually lowers gun violence," adding, "I would not claim to know that, should other students have been armed, fewer would have died, but the evidence that more guns means fewer gun crimes is strong enough that the idea should be considered sensible. Whereas the opposite, that posited by Gerber, simply is not as logically deducible. But, either way, no one will know unless the idea is tried." In support of his claim, Huston linked to an interview with researcher John R. Lott Jr., who wrote the book "More Guns, Less Crime." But Lott's thesis has been criticized for alleged flaws in his methodology and unsubstantiated claims. (And we haven't even gotten to the whole Mary Rosh thing.)
And, I have to say, it has always amazed me that "Doctors" like Gerber get in such high dudgeon over 15,000 some murders a year, but they don't bother their self-righteous selves about the 39,189 auto deaths in the US. (see US murder rates since 1965 here See 2005 auto accident stats here) How are guns more dangerous than autos at this rate?
Has Huston never heard of safety improvements in autos or anti-drunk driving campaigns, signs that people have in fact been in "high dudgeon" over vehicle fatalities? Indeed, the auto accident statistics to which Huston links shows definite improvement over the years; while the number of fatalities have increased, the rate of deaths per capita and per miles traveled has decreased. Huston also plucked the wrong statistic out that report -- 39,189 is the number of fatal accidents in 2005, not the number of victims (which for 2005, including pedestrians, was 43,443).