kates

Category archives for kates

Paul Blackman writes: I’m not sure Kates actually prevents anyone from learning anything. He presents something with a clear bias, but he no more prevents anything than does Tim’s commentary. Kates claims that he is trying “to place Malcolm’s contribution in the context of extant social scientific and historical evidence on that question.” He does…

My comments on this article by Don Kates. Mr Kates does readers of the History News Network a grave disservice with his article. He pretends to provide them a criminologist’s perspective on the guns-crime question, but only quotes from pro-gun criminologists. He carefully selects the evidence he presents to prevent his readers from learning about…

Kates and “Overt Mendacity”

In the Tennessee Law Review (v61 513-596 1994) Kates et al wrote: the inventive Dr. Diane Schetky, and two equally inventive CDC writers Gordon Smith and Henry Falk in a separate article actually do provide purportedly supporting citations for the claim that “[h]andguns account for only 20% of the firearms in use today, but they…

If you just want to look at accidental death, I would note that most of the decrease in fatal gun accidents in the US occured before there was an increase in handgun ownership Table 2.1 of Kleck’s “Point Blank” shows that handgun sales jumped dramatically around 1965 — from around 0.5M per year to 1-2M…

Don B Kates, Jr. writes: Having been out of town on two different trips, I have not had a chance to finish my response to Mr. Lambert’s latest screed to me. But I note his comment that Ed Suter has offered, “the same incorrect citation as in Kates’ paper. Doesn’t anyone check their references these…

Someone writes: TO List Supervisor, Prof. Volokh: Mendacious, Fabrication, Falsity, Untrue. These words used by Mr. Lambert to describe Mr. Kates’s arguments. Is it permissible to call a list member a liar if you use a thesaurus? No. The only people you are allowed to call liars are those not in a position to defend…

[Writing to Don Kates] You asserted that handguns are involved in less than 50% of criminal firearm injuries. You dismissed my calculation that the data in your paper implied that the percentage was 90-97% as some sort of trick. Could you please tell me what you consider the correct value of this percentage to be?…

Don B Kates, Jr. writes: In vol. 62 # 3 (1995) of the TN Law Rev, Henry Schaffer, three professors at Harvard and Columbia Medical Schools, and I have an article evaluating the medical/public health literature on firearms. Our general conclusion goes beyond simple negativity. We conclude that it is not just methodologically incompetent, but…