Still waiting for you to cite this lie:

I guess for all the times I've accused you of using questionable data
it shouldn't take me a second look to be sure this one was just one
more fake in a long line of trumped up or at least selective data. -JOF

===============
 "Popeye" <popeye@finalprotectivefire.com> wrote in message
news:12f3hecpn8udq3e@news.supernews.com...

 That's a lie.

 You've -never- once accused me of using questionable data, at least with a
cite of any data.

 Please verify this (as if -that- would -ever- happen).

 When I use data (rarely), it comes from front line news publications* or
the U.S. Government.

 Should be -no- problem, with that "long line", for you to cite -several-
instances of your accusation.

 Like last time, when it was about "buying the pot", eh?
==================

And that being said the antigun arguments are proportionally useless
for the same reasons. That's why I have trouble coming up with valid
cites to support some of my contentions - it's hard to find objective
evidence, and subjective evidence is misleading. -JOF

Do you see though how all this discussion validates my contention that
stats can be used, misused or abused? It's tough for the observer to
know for sure which is the case, particularly if the comparability is
really apples and oranges? -JOF

 2000

Suds, this is the type of information the general public receives. This is
simply an example of why I ask people to spend a little time investigating
this
question thoroughly.

 2002

 No. First off, get your information from government statistics, not
pro -or-
anti gun orgs.

 2003

 Stay off the HCI website and refer to government statistics.

 2004

 No it's not, they just make up sh.t.

 2005

 As opposed to an anti-handgun source?

 Try the federal government.

 2005

Andrew wrote:

 I don't employ NRA data, and didn't read the article.
 Although I'm a life member of the NRA, I realize their bias just as I
realize the bias of antigun organization.
 My views come from the empirical evidence of my own experiences, and
recorded history.
 When I need facts or numbers, I use government information.
 While its' perfect neither, it's at least somewhat less bias.

 You're still presenting the same assumptions, and, you've yet again
assumed that I use NRA data.

 2005

 If memory serves me, I've never once quoted an NRA cite, or even
one from the pro-gun cites that Scott uses.

           I only quote government figures.

=======================
* sometimes, and not recently, I quote Lott, from Newsweek.
The point is just as good as the numbers.
=======================

 Still waiting for you to cite this lie as well:

========================

 Do you have any of the cites I've asked for?

 Can you cite the lie you're referring to above?

 Did you have any comment about the lie you told that I already cited?

 Please remember that while you falsely accuse me quite frequently, flatly
refusing to provide evidence, I'm not the one that sent you the video.

 Are you going to start in on someone else now, who's treated you
respectfully in the past?

 Well, there's that credibility of yours I describe.

=======================

Scuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuurrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrryyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy

yyyyyyyyyy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 Guess we aren't getting any cites of your previous accusations, or your
lies from today.

  Imaaaaaaaaaagine -that-.

  Oh, and, try and keep this in mind, the next time we discuss scurrying,
and ass-whippings, to save me having to look it up.

  Perfect timing, too, I have to froth over to get the Sex Twins to take
them to "Pirates Of The Caribbean", and then maybe a night dive.

 Enjoy the view of your own rectum. ;-)