Just so people don't have to take my word for the nature of Lott's attack on Levitt, here are Lott's exact words. On page 54:
- Another panel member, Steve Levitt, an economist, has been described in media reports as being "rabidly anti-gun."[10]
On page 289:
[10] Dave Kopel and Glenn Reynolds, ibid., 347. Levitt apparently tried to overcome this image by writing his first op-ed about a week before his name was publicly nominated for the panel. Given that panel members are supposed to not have strong views on the topic that they are studying, it was strange that Levitt would write his first op-ed piece at this time. The op-ed argued that swimming pools posed a greater risk to children than guns, but it is hard to understand why he would choose this very time to write his very first op-ed on this particular topic when this would normally be considered the least appropriate time to do so. When I raised concerns about Levitt's strong opposition to guns to John Pepper, who was serving as the staff director for the panel, Pepper pointed to the op-ed piece that Levitt had written as evidence that Levitt believed the same things that I believed on guns. Personally knowing Levitt, I know that was not true and one could point to several of Levitt's academic papers. But the op-ed served its purpose.
Notice how Lott makes it look like Kopel and Reynolds are accusing Levitt of being "rabidly anti-gun", even though the accuser was anonymous.