I asked Steve Levitt about Lott's attack. He comments:
I wrote that op-ed piece on swimming pools and guns almost a full year before it was published. Members of the U of C publicity department can attest to that. I wrote it at the tail end of the summer, so they suggested waiting until the beginning of the next summer to try to publish it, which I did. I had certainly never heard of any NRC panel at the time I wrote it. I wrote it because it is the truth and it is an important point
So Lott was wrong about the timing of when Levitt's op-ed was written. Lott either knew this or was grossly irresponsible in not finding it out.
I also got some comments from John Pepper, director of the NAS study on firearms:
Lott's critique, as described on your web page, seems rather premature. We have not finished our work and, as you correctly note, we have heard formal presentations from Lott, Kleck (2x), Bronars, Wright, Blackman, and many others typically associated with the "pro-gun" side of the debate. I can assure you, as I have assured Lott and others (e.g. the NRA and Paul Blackman), that we are considering research and data relevant to both the positive and negative aspects of firearms.John and I did speak about his concerns regarding Steve Levitt and several other committee members. I did not try to persuade John that Steve Levitt shared his views. Rather, I recall trying to get specific documentation from John and others making similar claims on Steve's purported biases. At that time (July/Aug 2001), I knew about Levitt's short theoretical paper in the American Economic Review, and the editorial, neither of which would indicate strong biases for or against the Lott research or firearms research more generally. Is there anything else? I do not recall whether we specifically discussed the Levitt editorial, but it is possible within this context. As an aside, I still have never seen documentation that would indicate that Levitt is biased in favor of any particular side on this debate, and certainly nothing supporting the claims that he is rabidly anti-gun.
Finally, in regards you April 9, 2003 commentary on the August 2002 meeting you should know that this was not an NAS panel but rather was a workshop held an NAS facility at the request of the Packard Foundation to showcase their work on kids and guns. It did not result in an NRC report and the comments of particular speakers were not endorsed by the NRC. Rather, it was a discussion centered around the Packard report, the record of which is up on our web-site (as you know). The Packard report can be found at: http://www.futureofchildren.org/pubs-info2825/pubs-info.htm?doc_id=154414.
It seems that Lott has misrepresented his discussion with Pepper. Lott has not the slightest scrap of evidence for his smear of Levitt. His unprincipled attack on Levitt tells us more about Lott than it does about Levitt.