FBI gun background checks remained high in April during coronavirus pandemic

Also: not peer-reviewed, and funded by the anti-gun Joyce Foundation

IOW: No more credible than a paleontology paper funded by Answers In Genesis,
or a sociology paper funded by the Heritage Foundation.


Full paper at:

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.07.02.20145508v1.full.pdf

https://kstp.com/news/5-investigates-juul-recruited-u-of-m-researcher-as-vaping-controversy-intensified-july-6-2020/5783926/?cat=1

It seems gun control organizations follow the same playbook as big tobacco to get favorable studies. You simply fund the study and somehow it just happens to reach a result you like.

Perhaps that is why this, like so many others, is published without peer review. I suppose the tactic should not be surprising since the person who is arguably the face of the movement is also a former Monsanto PR exec.

The casual observer is meant to be impressed by his status as a professor.

We are not supposed to notice that (just like Phil McGraw) he doesn't have credentials in the field that he
pontificates about...

One useful point mentioned within is:
These mental, emotional and financial stresses and physical limitations are present even without a pandemic as a cause and have similar effects on people sometimes resulting in violence.

It is plain to me that this phrasing above prefaced by:
...points to a predisposition suggesting the authors' bias for concluding that this association is a cause for violence.

IMO, the additional stresses due to the pandemic are the cause for the increase in acquisitions but limiting the availability will not necessarily reduce violence. This is a key point because these factors often lead to violence with or without firearms. A combination of these factors along with a marginalized group within the population will contribute to violence and likely is disproportionate to the size of the marginalized group.

In short, the actions of law enforcement leading to the police abuse of minorities and especially POC, when added to any of the stresses noted above in the first paragraph will make violence more common and, if not a means to an end, at least means to relieve stress and anxiety.

The sad fact here is that police policies are actually fueling the fire that lights some the fuses in this perfect storm of events. Police, who are first hand dealing with domestic violence, looting and gang activity, are saddled with outdated methods and laws that often cause more harm than good. The bad apples in the bunch are making it worse.

I do feel that some cops are caught in a situation they don't like. I know many cops support reform and the BLM cause. Legislators need to be responsive to the will of the citizens. Many of the laws and policies regarding drugs need to change. The money and effort which goes to maintain the counterproductive "war" on drugs needs to be redirected into community support.

Two unrelated populations. One group is legally buying guns, mostly first time (and many liberal) gun buyers concerned about social break down (although the riots are not connected to COVID). These are not part of the stat. What is the uptick in gang violence is mostly due to decreased proactive policing and police demoralization.

The study reminds me of the anti-marijuana shill studies from the 1920s and 1930s.

Now you're just tediously predictable. G'bye and welcome to ignore.

https://www.mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/1177/citizens-for-decent-literature



Also, the disapproval of the person who touted the endorsement of Republicans over two good Democrats at DU...

https://www.democraticunderground.com/10028123984#post28



...isn't exactly a bad thing, imo.