Lott letter in The Columbus Dispatch

Lott has a letter in the 26 July Columbus Dispatch replying to an earlier letter from Paul van Doorn. Lott repeats his claim from his 21 July letter:

Yet, in the very same issue, another paper appeared by professors Plassmann and Whitley, who examined three additional years' worth of data and found "annual reductions in murder rates between 1.5 and 2.3 percent for each additional year that a right-to-carry law is in effect. The total benefit from reduced crimes usually ranges between about $2 billion and $3 billion per year."

Once more he pretends that he never miscoded his data.

Another example of the same sort of behaviour occurs later in his letter:

[van Doorn] was wrong that I attributed my survey work to other researchers.

So, Lott insists that he isn't attributing the 98% number to the Los Angeles Times, Gallup, Roper, and Peter Hart here:

"There are surveys that have been done by the Los Angeles Times, Gallup, Roper, Peter Hart, about 15 national survey organizations in total that range from anything from 760,000 times a year to 3.6 million times a year people use guns defensively. About 98 percent of those simply involve people brandishing a gun and not using them." (cite)

And he's not attributing the 98% to "national surveys" here:

"If national surveys are correct, 98 percent of the time that people use guns defensively, they merely have to brandish a weapon to break off an attack." (cite)

and he isn't attributing the 98% number to the Los Angeles Times, Gallup, and Peter Hart polls here:

"Polls by the Los Angeles Times, Gallup and Peter Hart Associates show that there are at least 760,000, and possibly as many as 3.6 million, defensive uses of guns per year. In 98 percent of the cases, such polls show, people simply brandish the weapon to stop an attack." (cite)

And he isn't attributing the 98% number to the Los Angeles Times, Gallup and Kleck polls here:

"There have been sixteen national surveys, everything from the Los Angeles Times, to Gallup, Gary Kleck from Florida State University, which show that over two million times a year people use guns defensively. The vast majority of times (98%) they merely have to brandish a gun and that is sufficient to cause the criminal to break off the attack." (cite)
Tags

More like this

compiled by Otis Dudley Duncan and Tim Lambert revised 23 Oct 2005 by Tim Lambert Note: With the exception of academic publications, some tapes and some found by LexisNexis search, these were found on the Internet. The web is, of course, not perfectly reliable, and items appearing there…
[Note: This is a copy of a document found on John Lott's website on April 6, 2003. I have added critical commentry, written in italics like this. Tim Lambert ] ------ Forwarded Message From: "Dave Kopel" Date: Sun, 9 Mar 2003 13:07:49 -0700 To: <cut> Subject: Re: FW: A quick question. John…
[On Sep 14 2002 I posted this to firearmsregprof. I also emailed it to John Lott. ] Way back in 1993 in talk.politics.guns, C. D. Tavares wrote: The answer is that the gun never needs to be fired in 98% of the instances of a successful self-defense with a gun. The criminals just leave…
After I concluded yesterday that Kopel had probably added the attribution to Kleck in one Lott op-ed, Lott has weighed in, contradicting Kopel's story. In this posting Lott writes: "My vague recollection of what happened is that David Kopel (Research Director at the Independence…