Wikipedia

User:Tiggerjay/BLP Draft

< User:Tiggerjay
John Lott
Born
John Richard Lott Jr.

(1958-05-08) May 8, 1958 (age 66)
Academic career
FieldEconomics
InstitutionsUniversity of Chicago
Yale University
The Wharton School
University of Maryland, College Park
American Enterprise Institute
Alma materUniversity of California, Los Angeles (BA, MA, PhD)

John Richard Lott Jr. (born May 8, 1958) is an American economist, political commentator, and gun rights advocate.[1] Lott was formerly employed at various academic institutions including the University of Chicago, Yale University, the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania, and the University of Maryland, College Park, and at the American Enterprise Institute conservative think tank. He is former president of the Crime Prevention Research Center, a nonprofit he founded in 2013. Lott holds a Ph.D. in economics from UCLA.

Lott has previously been a columnist for Fox News, the Cato Institute and National Review.[2][3][4] He has authored books such as More Guns, Less Crime, The Bias Against Guns, and Freedomnomics. He is best known as a gun rights advocate[1][5][6] and has argued against restrictions on owning and carrying guns. Newsweek referred to Lott as "The Gun Crowd's Guru."[7]

Academic career

edit

John Lott studied economics at UCLA, receiving his B.A. in 1980, M.A. in 1982, and Ph.D. in 1984. Lott has held positions in law and economics at several institutions, including the Yale Law School, the Hoover Institution, UCLA, the Wharton Business School, Texas A&M University, and Rice University. Lott was the chief economist at the United States Sentencing Commission[8] (1988–1989). He spent five years as a visiting professor (1994–95) and as a fellow (1995–99) at the University of Chicago. Lott was a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute (2001–2006). He left AEI for SUNY Binghamton.[9] From July 2007 to 2010, Lott was a senior research scientist at the University of Maryland Foundation at the University of Maryland, College Park and lectured on law and economics.[10][11]

Op-eds by Lott have appeared in such places as The Wall Street Journal, The New York Times, the Los Angeles Times, USA Today, and the Chicago Tribune. Since 2008, he has been a columnist for Fox News, initially weekly.[12][8]

Research on guns

edit

Concealed weapons and crime rate

edit

In a 1997 article written with David B. Mustard[13] and Lott's subsequent books More Guns, Less Crime and The Bias Against Guns, Lott argued that allowing adults to carry concealed weapons significantly reduces crime in America. In 2004, the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) National Research Council (NRC) conducted a review of current research and data on firearms and violent crime, including Lott's work, and concluded "that with the current evidence it is not possible to determine that there is a causal link between the passage of right-to-carry laws and crime rates."[14] The NAS report wrote of Lott's work, "The initial model specification, when extended to new data, does not show evidence that passage of right-to-carry laws reduces crime. The estimated effects are highly sensitive to seemingly minor changes in the model specification and control variables."[15] The criminologist James Q. Wilson was the only member on the 18-member NAS panel who dissented from this conclusion.[16][17][15] For similar reasons as highlighted by the NAS, as well as "multiple serious problems with data and methodology", a 2020 comprehensive review of existing research on concealed-carry by the RAND Corporation discounted Lott's studies.[18]

Other reviews said that there were problems with Lott's model. A replication by Dan A. Black and Daniel Nagin found that minor adjustments to Lott and Mustard's model led to the disappearance of the findings.[19][20] In the New England Journal of Medicine, David Hemenway argued that Lott failed to account for several key variables, including drug consumption.[21] Ian Ayres and John J. Donohue said that the model used by Lott contained significant coding errors and systemic bias.[22] In the American Journal of Public Health, Daniel Webster et al. also raised concerns about other flaws in the study, such as misclassification of laws and endogeneity of predictor variables, which they said rendered the study's conclusions "insupportable".[23] Florida State University criminologist Gary Kleck considered it unlikely that such a large decrease in violent crime could be explained by a relatively modest increase in concealed carry.[24] A 1998 study by Jens Ludwig that said it "more effectively control[ed] for unobserved variables that may vary over time" than the Lott and Mustard study concluded that "shall-issue laws have resulted, if anything, in an increase in adult homicide rates."[25] A 2001 study in the Journal of Political Economy by University of Chicago economist Mark Duggan did robustness checks of Lott and Mustard's study and found that the findings of the Lott and Mustard study were inaccurate.[26]

Other academics praised Lott's methodology, including Florida State University economist Bruce Benson,[27] Cardozo School of Law professor John O. McGinnis,[28] College of William and Mary professor Carlisle Moody,[29] University of Mississippi professor William F. Shughart,[30] and SUNY economist Florenz Plassmann and University of Adelaide economist John Whitley.[31]

Referring to the research done on the topic, The Chronicle of Higher Education wrote in 2003 that "Mr. Lott's research has convinced his peers of at least one point: No scholars now claim that legalizing concealed weapons causes a major increase in crime."[32] As Lott critics Ian Ayres and John J. Donohue III pointed out, "Lott and Mustard have made an important scholarly contribution in establishing that these laws have not led to the massive bloodbath of death and injury that some of their opponents feared. On the other hand, we find that the statistical evidence that these laws have reduced crime is limited, sporadic, and extraordinarily fragile."[22] A 2008 article in Econ Journal Watch surveyed peer-reviewed empirical academic studies, and found that 10 supported the proposition that right-to-carry reduces crime, 8 supported no significant effect and none supported an increase.[33] The article was rebutted by Ian Ayres and John J. Donohue in the same journal in 2009.[34]

In 2013, Lott founded the nonprofit organization Crime Prevention Research Center to study the relationship between gun laws and crime. As of July 2015, he was also the organization's president.[35] The board of directors for the organization includes guitarist Ted Nugent, conservative talkshow host Lars Larson and former sheriff David Clarke.[36] In 2020, Lott left the organization to take a position in the Trump administration.[36]

Defensive gun use

edit
Main article: Defensive gun use

Lott argues in both More Guns, Less Crime and The Bias Against Guns that defensive gun use (DGU) is underreported, noting that in general, only shootings ending in fatalities are discussed in news stories. In More Guns, Less Crime, Lott writes that "[s]ince in many defensive cases a handgun is simply brandished, and no one is harmed, many defensive uses are never even reported to the police." In May 1998, Lott wrote that "national surveys" suggested that "98 percent of the time that people use guns defensively, they merely have to brandish a weapon to break off an attack." Lott cited similar figures in op-eds in the Wall Street Journal[37] and the Los Angeles Times.[38]

In 2002, he said that brandishing a weapon was sufficient to stop an attack 95% of the time. Other researchers criticized his methodology. A study in Public Opinion Quarterly said that his sample size of 1,015 respondents was too small for the study to be accurate and that the majority of similar studies suggest a value between 70 and 80 percent.[39] According to Lott, Gary Kleck and Marc Gertz's 1994 estimate rises to 92 percent when brandishing and warning shots are added together.[40]: 8  Lott said that the lower rates found by others was at least in part due to the different questions that were asked.[41]

Defamation suit

edit

On April 10, 2006, John Lott filed suit[42] for defamation against Steven Levitt and HarperCollins Publishers over the book Freakonomics and against Levitt over a series of emails to John McCall. In the book Freakonomics, Levitt and coauthor Stephen J. Dubner claimed that the results of Lott's research in More Guns, Less Crime had not been replicated by other academics. In the emails to economist John McCall, who had pointed to a number of papers in different academic publications that had replicated Lott's work, Levitt wrote that the work by several authors supporting Lott in a special 2001 issue of the Journal of Law and Economics had not been peer reviewed, Lott had paid the University of Chicago Press to publish the papers, and that papers with results opposite of Lott's had been blocked from publication in that issue.[43] A federal judge found that Levitt's replication claim in Freakonomics was not defamation but found merit in Lott's complaint over the email claims.[44] The dismissal was affirmed by a three-judge panel of The United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit on February 11, 2009.[45][46]

A settlement was reached over the claims made by Levitt in the emails to McCall whereby Levitt did not have to issue a formal apology but rather send a letter of clarification to John McCall that the issue of the Journal of Law and Economics was peer-reviewed, and that Lott had not improperly influenced the editors.[47][48][49] The Chronicle of Higher Education characterized Levitt's letter as offering "a doozy of a concession."[50]

Disputed survey

edit

In the course of a dispute with Otis Dudley Duncan in 1999–2000,[51][52] Lott claimed to have undertaken a national survey of 2,424 respondents in 1997, the results of which were the source for claims he had made beginning in 1997.[52] However, in 2000 Lott was unable to produce the data or any records showing that the survey had been undertaken. He said the 1997 hard drive crash that had affected several projects with co-authors had destroyed his survey data set,[53] the original tally sheets had been abandoned with other personal property in his move from Chicago to Yale, and he could not recall the names of any of the students who he said had worked on it. Critics questioned whether the survey had ever taken place,[54] but Lott defends the survey's existence and accuracy.[55]

Mary Rosh persona

edit

In response to the dispute surrounding the missing survey, Lott used a sock puppet by the name of "Mary Rosh" to defend his own works on Usenet and elsewhere. After investigative work by libertarian blogger Julian Sanchez, Lott admitted to use of the Mary Rosh persona.[54]

Further accusations claimed that Lott praised himself while posing as one of his former students[56][57] and that "Rosh" was used to post a favorable review of More Guns, Less Crime on Amazon.com. Lott has claimed that the review was written by his son and wife.[57] "I probably shouldn't have done it—I know I shouldn't have done it—but it's hard to think of any big advantage I got except to be able to comment fictitiously," Lott told The Washington Post in 2003.[57]

Safe storage gun laws

edit

In a 2001 study, Lott and John E. Whitley reported that safe-storage gun laws not only did not reduce juvenile suicides or accidental gun deaths, but that they also increased rates of violent and property crime.[58] The study was criticized by Webster et al. in the Journal of the American Medical Association for using Tobit regression despite the fact that the data used in the study on youth suicides was "highly skewed and heteroskedastic", and because the vast majority of crimes that Lott and Whitley claimed increased due to safe-storage laws occurred outside the home.[59] Webster and Carroll also wrote in Guns in American Society: An Encyclopedia of History, Politics, Culture, and the Law that the Lott and Whitley study's findings with respect to crime were inconsistent with prior research.[60]

Other research

edit

Lott claims that most of the large recent increases in campaign spending for state and federal offices can be explained by higher government spending.[61] Lott also supports the conclusion that higher quality judges, measured by their output once they are on the court (e.g., number of citations to their opinions or number of published opinions), take longer to get confirmed.[62]

Lost Bush votes in the 2000 presidential election

edit

In 2000, Lott argued, using a regression analysis, that George W. Bush lost at least 10,000 votes in Florida after the media incorrectly called the state for Al Gore while voting was still on-going in the more conservative parts of the state.[63] Lott's argument is used in the influential social science methodology textbook Rethinking Social Inquiry (edited by Henry Brady and David Collier) as an example of poor methodology. Contrary to Lott's study, they show that the number of lost Bush votes ranged from 28 to 56.[63]

Abortion and crime

edit

With John Whitley at the University of Adelaide, Lott published a study that argued that liberalization of abortion laws led to higher murder rates.[64] In a review of the literature on the relationship between abortion and crime, Theodore Joyce, an economist at Baruch College and the National Bureau of Economic Research, praised Lott and Whitley for gathering additional data on abortion but criticized the methodology that they used.[65]

Illegal immigration and crime

edit

Lott has non-peer-reviewed research that purports to show that undocumented immigrants are more crime-prone than U.S. citizens. In doing so, Lott lumped together both legal and illegal immigrants in prison into a category for illegal immigrants, leading to an elevated crime rate for illegal immigrants.[66][67] The Washington Post fact-checker wrote that this was a "significant flaw in Lott’s study that undercuts his conclusion. Lott says the overall thrust of his study still holds, but the issue muddles his research and invites guesswork as to the actual crime rate for the undocumented immigrant population in Arizona."[68]

Lott's claims were heavily promoted by the Trump administration to justify its anti-immigration policies, in particular their attempts to end DACA.[66][69]

Women's suffrage and government growth

edit

According to a study by Lott and Larry Kenny, "women's suffrage coincided with immediate increases in state government expenditures and revenue and more liberal voting patterns for federal representatives, and these effects continued growing over time as more women took advantage of the franchise."[70]

Affirmative action in police departments

edit

Lott published a study arguing that affirmative action in hiring of police reduced the overall quality of all officers and increased crime. The most adverse effects of these hiring policies have occurred in the most heavily black populated cities. There is no consistent evidence that crime rates rise when standards for hiring women are changed.[71]

Environmental regulations

edit

Together with John Karpoff and Eric Wehrly at the University of Washington, Lott has worked to show the importance of government regulations through both legal and regulatory penalties and the weaknesses of reputational penalties in reducing pollution.[72] Firms violating environmental laws suffer statistically significant losses in the market value of firm equity. The losses are of similar magnitudes to the legal penalties imposed; and in the cross section, the market value loss is related to the size of the legal penalty.

Voter fraud claims

edit
Further information: Attempts to overturn the 2020 United States presidential election

Lott has claimed there was voter fraud in the 2020 election.[73] He argued there was "irregularities" in the absentee ballots in Missoula County, and later wrote a paper claiming there was evidence of fraud in the absentee ballots in Georgia and Pennsylvania.[74] Political scientists at Stanford University and the University of Chicago rebutted Lott's paper, writing that his analysis was "entirely dependent on the completely arbitrary order in which pairs of precincts in other counties are entered in the dataset" and that his conclusions about voter fraud were "utterly baseless."[74][75]

U.S. Department of Justice

edit

In October 2020, Lott left his company, and was hired by Office of Justice Programs within the U.S. Department of Justice as a senior adviser for research and statistics under the Trump Administration.[36]

Stolen Election

edit

Lott resigned from the DoJ on January 16, 2021.[76]

Controvery

edit

Defamation suit

edit

On April 10, 2006, John Lott filed suit[77] for defamation against Steven Levitt and HarperCollins Publishers over the book Freakonomics and against Levitt over a series of emails to John McCall. In the book Freakonomics, Levitt and coauthor Stephen J. Dubner claimed that the results of Lott's research in More Guns, Less Crime had not been replicated by other academics. In the emails to economist John McCall, who had pointed to a number of papers in different academic publications that had replicated Lott's work, Levitt wrote that the work by several authors supporting Lott in a special 2001 issue of the Journal of Law and Economics had not been peer reviewed, Lott had paid the University of Chicago Press to publish the papers, and that papers with results opposite of Lott's had been blocked from publication in that issue.[78]

A federal judge found that Levitt's replication claim in Freakonomics was not defamation but found merit in Lott's complaint over the email claims.[79]

Levitt settled the second defamation claim by admitting in a letter to John McCall that he himself was a peer reviewer in the 2001 issue of the Journal of Law and Economics, that Lott had not engaged in bribery (paying for extra costs of printing and postage for a conference issue is customary), and that he knew that "scholars with varying opinions" (including Levitt himself) had been invited to participate.[48][80] The Chronicle of Higher Education characterized Levitt's letter as offering "a doozy of a concession."[81]

The dismissal of the first half of Lott's suit was unanimously upheld by The United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit on February 11, 2009.[82]

Charges that gun makers or the NRA have paid for Lott's research

edit

In 1996 when Lott's research first received media attention, Charles Schumer wrote in the Wall Street Journal: "The Associated Press reports that Prof. Lott's fellowship at the University of Chicago is funded by the Olin Foundation, which is 'associated with the Olin Corporation,' one of the nation's largest gun manufacturers. Maybe that's a coincidence, too. But it's also a fact."[83] Olin Foundation head William E. Simon strongly denied Schumer's claims in a reply letter. Olin Foundation was funded by the personal estate of the late John M. Olin independently of Olin Corp. Like all candidates, Lott was selected to receive his Olin Fellowship by the faculty of the university, not by Olin Foundation and certainly not by Olin Corp.[84][85]

In a debate on Piers Morgan Tonight on July 23, 2012, Harvard Law School Professor Alan Dershowitz claimed: "This is junk science at its worst. Paid for and financed by the National Rifle Association." Lott countered: "The NRA hasn't paid for my research." Dershowitz continued: "Your conclusions are paid for and financed—The National Rifle Association—only funds research that will lead to these conclusions."[86][87] Separately both Lott and the NRA have denied NRA funding of Lott's research.[88]

Disputed survey

edit

In the course of a dispute with Otis Dudley Duncan in 1999–2000,[51][89] Lott claimed to have undertaken a national survey of 2,424 respondents in 1997, the results of which were the source for claims he had made beginning in 1997.[90] However, in 2000 Lott was unable to produce the data, or any records showing that the survey had been undertaken. He said the 1997 hard drive crash that had affected several projects with co-authors had destroyed his survey data set,[91] the original tally sheets had been abandoned with other personal property in his move from Chicago to Yale, and he could not recall the names of any of the students who he said had worked on it. Critics alleged that the survey had never taken place,[54] but Lott defends the survey's existence and accuracy, quoting on his website colleagues who lost data in the hard drive crash.[55][self-published source?]

Use of econometrics as proof of causation

edit

In 2001, Rutgers University sociology professor Ted Goertzel[92] considered multiple regression to be not of much use in proving causal arguments in studies by Lott (and by Lott's critics Levitt, Ayres and Donohue).[93]

The National Academy of Sciences panel that reported on several gun control issues in 2004 looked at Right-To-Carry laws in Chapter 6 and endorsed neither the Lott & Mustard (1997) level and trend models as definite proof nor the Ayres & Donohue (2003) hybrid model as definite refutation of Lott's thesis: the majority of the panel concluded that econometrics could not decide the issue, suggesting instead alternate research, such as a survey of felons to determine if RTC changed their behavior.[94] The criminologist on the NAS panel, James Q. Wilson, wrote a dissent from the econometricians' conclusion. Wilson noted in the report that all the panel's estimates on murder rates supported Lott's conclusion on the effect of RTC on murder.[95] The Committee responded that "[w]hile it is true that most of the reported estimates [of the policy on murder rates] are negative, several are positive and many are statistically insignificant."[96] They further noted that the full committee, including Wilson, agreed that there was not convincing evidence that RTC policies had an impact on other kinds of violent crime.

In a 2011 article for ALER, Donohue claimed the NRC panel results published from the hybrid model "could not be replicated on its data set".[97] Lott replicated the NRC's results using the NRC's copy of the Ayres & Donohue model and data set, pointing out that the model used for the ALER article was different and introduced a truncation bias.[98]

Mary Rosh Pseudonym

edit

In response to the dispute surrounding the missing survey, Lott created and used "Mary Rosh" as a sock puppet to defend his own works on Usenet and post a favorable review of More Guns, Less Crime on Amazon.com. Rosh was allegedly a former student of Lott in the 1990s, who not only praised his academic writing, but also called Lott "the best professor I ever had". After investigative work by blogger Julian Sanchez, Lott admitted to use of the Mary Rosh persona.[54] During a hearing before the senate [citation needed], Lott has claimed that the Rosh account was shared by his whole family, and that the review in question, written by his son and wife.[57] "I probably shouldn't have done it—I know I shouldn't have done it—but it's hard to think of any big advantage I got except to be able to comment fictitiously," Lott told the Washington Post in 2003.[57]

2021 Fake Graduation Commencement

edit

On June 4, 2021, Patricia and Manuel Oliver, parents of a child killed in the 2018 Stoneman Douglas High School shooting organized a fake graduation for a fictitious school called, "the James Madison Academy" in Las Vegas. The space for the audience was made up of 3,044 empty folding chairs which were meant to represent victims of school shootings. They misled former National Rifle Association president David Keene and Lott into speaking and being recorded during the empty dress rehearsal, to later be used for gun violence prevention video.[99][100]

Upon learning of the faux event, Lott told CNN, "I have dedicated years of my life to try to prevent school shootings." He told CNN he talked about "how to fix the system" and "how to make it work," and how gun control advocates are fighting against his ideas, but he said the organization edited it out.[99] In an interview with KSNV, "...what they put online is about one minute of that 15-minute address, and it kind of chops up and takes out of context numerous points I was making," he said.[101]

Bibliography

edit
  • Are Predatory Commitments Credible? (1999; ISBN 0-226-49355-5)
  • More Guns, Less Crime (1998; ISBN 0-226-49364-4)
  • The Bias Against Guns (2003; ISBN 0-89526-114-6)
  • Uncertainty and Economic Evolution (2005; ISBN 0-415-15166-X)
  • Private Guns, Public Health (2006; ISBN 9780472031627)
  • Straight Shooting (2006, ISBN 0-936783-47-8)
  • Freedomnomics (2007; ISBN 978-1-596-98506-3)
  • Debacle: Obama's War on Jobs and Growth and What We Can Do Now to Regain Our Future (2012; ISBN 978-1118186176)
  • At the Brink: Will Obama Push Us Over the Edge? (2013; ISBN 978-1621570516)
  • Dumbing Down the Courts: How Politics Keeps the Smartest Judges Off the Bench (2013; ISBN 978-1626522497)
  • The War on Guns, (2016, Regnery Publishing; (ISBN 978-1-62157-580-1)
  • Gun Control Myths: How Politicians, the Media, and Botched Sutdies Have Twisted the Facts on Gun Control (2020; ISBN 9798663221535)


See also

edit

References

edit
  1. ^ a b Frum, David (January 14, 2014). "With Guns, the Threatened Can Quickly Become the Threat". Daily Beast. Retrieved January 16, 2014. Cite error: The named reference "Frum140114" was defined multiple times with different content (see the help page).
  2. ^ "John Lott". Fox News. 2013-09-17. Archived from the original on October 27, 2021. Retrieved 2014-08-19. {{cite web}}: |archive-date= / |archive-url= timestamp mismatch; February 7, 2017 suggested (help)
  3. ^ "Cato Unbound Contributor John R Lott Jr".
  4. ^ "National Review Author John R Lott Jr".
  5. ^ Blake, Meredith (December 16, 2012). "Piers Morgan on gun control: 'How many kids have to die?'". Los Angeles Times. Retrieved January 16, 2014.
  6. ^ Bovard, James. "Review quotes". press.uchicago.edu. University of Chicago Press. Archived from the original on September 19, 2018. Retrieved January 16, 2014.
  7. ^ "Matt Bai, The Gun Crowd's Guru: John Lott has a high profile—and a target on his back, Newsweek, March 12, 2001" Archived May 2, 2015, at the Wayback Machine
  8. ^ a b "Dr. John R. Lott Jr". Fox News. 2016-07-27. Retrieved 2016-07-27.
  9. ^ Curriculum Vitae of John R. Lott Jr., dated March 17, 2008.
  10. ^ Social Science Research Network
  11. ^ Blogspot.com
  12. ^ Fox News
  13. ^ John R. Lott Jr. and David B. Mustard, "Crime, Deterrence and Right-To-Carry Concealed Handguns", 26 Journal of Legal Studies 1 (1997) working paper PDF Archived 2010-06-16 at the Wayback Machine; journal article PDF (subscription required).
  14. ^ NAS, Firearms and Violence: A Critical Review (2004) Executive Summary, Major Conclusions, page 2. Chapter 6 Right-to-Carry Laws, pages 120–151, reviews research by Lott and others on this issue.
  15. ^ a b Farley, Robert; Robertson, Lori; Kiely, Eugene (2012-12-20). "Gun Rhetoric vs. Gun Facts". FactCheck.org. Retrieved 2021-01-02.
  16. ^ NAS, Firearms and Violence: A Critical Review (2004) Appendix A Dissent by James Q. Wilson, page 269.
  17. ^ Firearms and Violence: A Critical Review (2004) Appendix A Dissent by James Q. Wilson, page 270.
  18. ^ "Effects of Concealed-Carry Laws on Violent Crime". www.rand.org. Retrieved 2021-01-02.
  19. ^ Black, Dan A.; Daniel S. Nagin (January 1998). "Do Right-to-Carry Laws Deter Violent Crime?". Journal of Legal Studies. 27 (1): 214. doi:10.1086/468019. S2CID 154626760.
  20. ^ Ted Goertzel, "Myths of Murder and Multiple Regression", The Skeptical Inquirer, Volume 26, No 1, January/February 2002, pp. 19–23. Expanded as: Ted Goertzel, "Econometric Modeling as Junk Science"
  21. ^ Hemenway, David (December 31, 1998). "More Guns, Less Crime: Understanding crime and gun-control laws / Making A Killing: The business of guns in America". The New England Journal of Medicine. 339 (27): 2029–30. doi:10.1056/NEJM199812313392719.
  22. ^ a b Ayres, Ian; John J. Donohue III (April 2003). "Shooting Down the 'More Guns, Less Crime' Hypothesis". Stanford Law Review. 55 (4): 1193. doi:10.2139/ssrn.343781. S2CID 55757925.
  23. ^ Webster, D W; Vernick, J S; Ludwig, J; Lester, K J (June 1997). "Flawed gun policy research could endanger public safety". American Journal of Public Health. 87 (6): 918–921. doi:10.2105/AJPH.87.6.918. PMC 1380922. PMID 9224169.
  24. ^ Kleck, Gary (1997). Targeting Guns: Firearms and Their Control. New York, NY: Aldine de Gruyter.
  25. ^ Ludwig, Jens (September 1998). "Concealed-gun-carrying laws and violent crime: evidence from state panel data" (PDF). International Review of Law and Economics. 18 (3): 239–254. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.487.5452. doi:10.1016/S0144-8188(98)00012-X.
  26. ^ Duggan, Mark (2001-10-01). "More Guns, More Crime". Journal of Political Economy. 109 (5): 1086–1114. doi:10.1086/322833. ISSN 0022-3808. S2CID 33899679.
  27. ^ Benson, Bruce L. (September 1999). "Review of More Guns, Less Crime". Public Choice. 100 (3–4): 309–313. doi:10.1023/A:1018689310638. S2CID 150500420.
  28. ^ McGinnis, John O. (July 20, 1998). "Trigger Happiness". National Review. 50 (13): 49.
  29. ^ Moody, Carlisle E. (October 2001). "Testing for the Effects of Concealed Weapons Laws: Specification Errors and Robustness*". The Journal of Law and Economics. 44 (s2): 799–813. doi:10.1086/323313. S2CID 154918586.
  30. ^ Shughart, William F.; Lott, John R. (April 1, 1999). "More Guns, Less Crime: Understanding Crime and Gun Control Laws: Review". Southern Economic Journal. 65 (4): 978–981. doi:10.2307/1061296. JSTOR 1061296.
  31. ^ "Plassmann and Whitley Stanford Law Review (2003)" Confirming More Guns, Less Crime, by Florenz Plassmann and John Whitley, 2003, p. 1361
  32. ^ Glenn, David (May 9, 2003). "'More Guns, Less Crime' Thesis Rests on a Flawed Statistical Design, Scholars Argue". The Chronicle of Higher Education. 49 (35): A18. Retrieved 2007-05-27.
  33. ^ Carlisle E. Moody and Thomas B. Marvell, "The Debate on Shall-Issue Laws", Econ Journal Watch Vol. 5, Iss. 3 (2008).
  34. ^ "Yet Another Refutation of the More Guns, Less Crime Hypothesis—With Some Help From Moody and Marvell · Econ Journal Watch : Law and economics, criminal justice policy, guns and crime". econjwatch.org. Retrieved 2017-09-13.
  35. ^ Lurie, Julia (28 July 2015). "When the Gun Lobby Tries to Justify Firearms Everywhere, It Turns to This Guy". Mother Jones. Retrieved 6 February 2016.
  36. ^ a b c Gerstein, Josh (November 24, 2020). "Controversial gun advocate hired by Justice Department last month". Politico. Retrieved November 24, 2020.
  37. ^ Lott Jr., John R. (1998-06-23). "Keep Guns out of Lawyers' Hands". Wall Street Journal. p. 1.
  38. ^ Lott Jr., John R. (1998-12-01). "Cities Target Gun Makers in Bogus Lawsuits". Los Angeles Times. p. 7.
  39. ^ McDowall, David (Summer 2005). "John R. Lott Jr.'s Defensive Gun Brandishing Estimates". Public Opinion Quarterly. 69 (2): 246–263. doi:10.1093/poq/nfi015.
  40. ^ Lott, John. "What Surveys Can Help Us Understand About Guns?" (PDF). Retrieved 22 June 2016.
  41. ^ Discussion of different surveys on defensive gun use Johnlott.org
  42. ^ PDF of Lott's complaint v. Levitt
  43. ^ Higgins, Michael (2006-04-11). "Best-seller leads scholar to file lawsuit; Defamation allegation targets U. of C. author". Chicago Tribune. p. 3.
  44. ^ "Judge Castillo issues decision on Lott v. Levitt" on John Lott's website
  45. ^ "7th Circuit Affirmation of District Court Dismissal of Defamation Lawsuit Archived 2009-02-16 at the Wayback Machine"
  46. ^ Staff, Courthouse News (2009-02-13). "Professor Wasn't Defamed by 'Freakonomics' Author". Retrieved 2021-01-02.
  47. ^ Gajda, Amy (2010-02-15). The Trials of Academe. Harvard University Press: Harvard University Press. pp. 166–170. doi:10.2307/j.ctvjghvr3. ISBN 978-0-674-05386-1.
  48. ^ a b Glenn, David (2007-08-10). "Dueling Economists Reach Settlement in Defamation Lawsuit". Chronicle of Higher Education. 53 (49): 10. Cite error: The named reference "settlement" was defined multiple times with different content (see the help page).
  49. ^ "Unusual Agreement Means Settlement May Be Near in 'Lott v. Levitt,' July 27, 2007"
  50. ^ "Unusual Agreement Means Settlement May Be Near in 'Lott v. Levitt'," Chronicle of Higher Education, July 27, 2007
  51. ^ a b Otis Dudley Duncan, "Gun Use Surveys: In Numbers We Trust?" Archived 2012-05-25 at the Wayback Machine, The Criminologist, Vol. 25, No. 1, Jan/Feb 2000, p. 1, 3–7. Cite error: The named reference "DuncanNumbers" was defined multiple times with different content (see the help page).
  52. ^ a b "John R. Lott Jr.'s Reply to Otis Dudley Duncan's Recent Article in The Criminologist", The Criminologist, Vol. 25, No. 5, Sep/Oct 2000, page 1, 6.
  53. ^ Sanchez, Julian (February 13, 2003). "Red Herrings". Julian Sanchez — blog. Retrieved July 28, 2016. (Julian Sanchez noted that the 1997 harddrive crash is widely accepted as a fact; the dispute is over the lack of solid evidence that Lott lost a survey data set in that crash)
  54. ^ a b c d Sanchez, Julian (May 2003). "The Mystery of Mary Rosh". Reason. Retrieved 2007-06-15. Cite error: The named reference "reason" was defined multiple times with different content (see the help page).
  55. ^ a b "Evidence of Survey"., "2002 Survey". Cite error: The named reference "surveysupport" was defined multiple times with different content (see the help page).
  56. ^ Chris Mooney in Mother Jones: Double Barreled Double Standards. October 13, 2003
  57. ^ a b c d e "Scholar Invents Fan to Answer His Critics". Richard Morin, The Washington Post, February 1, 2003; Page C01 Cite error: The named reference "wifeandson" was defined multiple times with different content (see the help page).
  58. ^ Lott Jr., John R.; Whitley, John E. (October 2001). "Safe‐Storage Gun Laws: Accidental Deaths, Suicides, and Crime" (PDF). The Journal of Law and Economics. 44 (S2): 659–689. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.180.3066. doi:10.1086/338346. S2CID 154446568.
  59. ^ Webster, Daniel W. (4 August 2004). "Association Between Youth-Focused Firearm Laws and Youth Suicides". JAMA. 292 (5): 594–601. doi:10.1001/jama.292.5.594. PMID 15292085.
  60. ^ Carter, Gregg Lee (2002). Guns in American Society. ABC-CLIO. p. 151. ISBN 9780313386701.
  61. ^ "A Simple Explanation for Why Campaign Expenditures are Increasing: The Government is Getting Bigger" by John R. Lott Jr., Journal of Law and Economics., October 2000
  62. ^ Lott, John R. (2005). "The Judicial Confirmation Process: The Difficulty with Being Smart". Journal of Empirical Legal Studies. 2 (3): 407–447. doi:10.1111/j.1740-1461.2005.00056.x.
  63. ^ a b Brady, Henry E.; Collier, David (2004). Rethinking Social Inquiry: Diverse Tools, Shared Standards. Rowman & Littlefield. ISBN 9780742511255.
  64. ^ John R. Lott Jr. and John E. Whitley, "Abortion and Crime: Unwanted Children and Out-of-Wedlock Births", (2001) SSRN Yale Law & Economics Research Paper No. 254 working paper and Economic Inquiry, Vol. 45, No. 2, pp. 304–324, April 2007 published article.
  65. ^ Joyce, Theodore J. (June 2009). "Abortion and Crime: A Review". doi:10.3386/w15098. S2CID 74738947. {{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
  66. ^ a b Lind, Dara (2018-03-01). "The right-wing effort to paint DREAMers as a nightmare". Vox. Retrieved 2021-01-04.
  67. ^ "The Fatal Flaw in John R. Lott Jr.'s Study on Illegal Immigrant Crime in Arizona". Cato Institute. 2018-02-05. Retrieved 2021-01-04.
  68. ^ "Questions raised about study that links undocumented immigrants to higher crime". The Washington Post. 2018.
  69. ^ Exstrum, Olivia. "The guy behind the bogus immigration report has a long history of terrible and misleading research". Mother Jones. Retrieved 2021-01-04.
  70. ^ "How Dramatically Did Women's Suffrage Change the Size and Scope of Government?" by John R. Lott Jr. and Larry Kenny, Journal of Political Economy, 1999
  71. ^ "Does a Helping Hand Put Others At Risk?: Affirmative Action, Police Departments, and Crime" by John R. Lott Jr. Economic Inquiry, April 2000
  72. ^ "The Reputational Penalties for Environmental Violations: Empirical Evidence" by Jonathan M. Karpoff, John R. Lott Jr., Eric Wehrly, Journal of Law and Economics
  73. ^ Gerstein, Josh. "Controversial gun advocate hired by Justice Department last month". POLITICO. Retrieved 2021-01-02.
  74. ^ a b Hansen, Jordan. "GOP-backed group claims 'irregularities' on Missoula County 2020 ballots". missoulian.com. Retrieved 2021-09-14.
  75. ^ Grimmer, Justin (5 January 2021). "Comment On "A Simple Test For The Extent Of Voter Fraud With Absentee Ballots In The 2020 Presidential Election"". Hoover Institution. Retrieved 14 September 2021.
  76. ^ "John Lott, Discredited Gun Researcher, Leaves DOJ". The Trace. 21 January 2021. Retrieved January 22, 2021.
  77. ^ PDF of Lott's complaint v. Levitt
  78. ^ Higgins, Michael (2006-04-11). "Best-seller leads scholar to file lawsuit; Defamation allegation targets U. of C. author". Chicago Tribune. p. 3.
  79. ^ "Judge Castillo issues decision on Lott v. Levitt" on John Lott's website
  80. ^ "Unusual Agreement Means Settlement May Be Near in 'Lott v. Levitt,' July 27, 2007"
  81. ^ "Unusual Agreement Means Settlement May Be Near in 'Lott v. Levitt'," Chronicle of Higher Education, July 27, 2007
  82. ^ "7th Circuit Affirmation of District Court Dismissal of Defamation Lawsuit"
  83. ^ Charles Schumer, "Gun-Control Thesis Is a Shot in the Dark", Wall Street Journal, September 4, 1996.
  84. ^ William E. Simon, "An Insult to Our Foundation," Wall Street Journal, September 9, 1996.
  85. ^ Steve Chapman, "Taking Aim a Gun Study and a Conspiracy Theory", Chicago Tribune, September 4, 1996
  86. ^ Piers Morgan Tonight, "Mayor Bloomberg Speaks on Guns; The Right to Bear Arms; Acts of Heroism", CNN Transcripts, 23 Jul 2012.
  87. ^ Piers Morgan And Alan Dershowitz Get In Heated Argument With Anti-Gun Control Advocate, CNN, July 23rd, 2012
  88. ^ Christopher Goins, "Gun Control Won't Make Mass Shootings Less Likely to Happen, Academic Says," CNSNews.com, September 4, 2012.
  89. ^ "John R. Lott, Jr.'s Reply to Otis Dudley Duncan's Recent Article in The Criminologist", The Criminologist, Vol. 25, No. 5, Sep/Oct 2000, page 1, 6.
  90. ^ John R. Lott. Jr.'s Reply to Otis Dudley Duncan's Recent Article in The Criminologist, The Criminologist, Vol. 25, No. 5, Sept/Oct 2000, p. 1, 6.
  91. ^ Julian Sanchez noted that the 1997 harddrive crash is widely accepted as a fact; the dispute is over the lack of solid evidence that Lott lost a survey data set in that crash.
  92. ^ "The Conspiracy Meme", Skeptical Inquirer, Vol. 35 No. 1, January/February 2011, Page 37
  93. ^ Ted Goertzel, "Myths of Murder and Multiple Regression", The Skeptical Inquirer, Volume 26, No 1, January/February 2002, pp. 19–23. Expanded as: Ted Goertzel, "Econometric Modeling as Junk Science"
  94. ^ NAS panel report on right-to-carry laws
  95. ^ James Q. WIlson, "Dissent," Firearms and Violence: A Critical Review, National Academies Press 2004, pp. 269–271.
  96. ^ "Committee Response to Wilson's Dissent"Firearms and Violence: A Critical Review, National Academies Press 2004, pp. 272.
  97. ^ Abhay Aneja, John J. Donohue III, and Alexandria Zhang, "The Impact of Right-to-Carry Laws and the NRC Report: Lessons for the Empirical Evaluation of Law and Policy", Am Law Econ Rev (Fall 2011) 13(2): 565–631.
  98. ^ Carlisle E. Moody, John R. Lott Jr., Thomas B. Marvell and Paul R. Zimmerman, "Trust But Verify: Lessons for the Empirical Evaluation of Law and Policy", SSRN Working Paper Series, 25 Jan 2012.
  99. ^ a b "A Parkland shooting victim's parents tricked a former NRA president into giving a graduation speech for a gun violence prevention video". Retrieved October 27, 2021.
  100. ^ "A Parkland Victim's Dad Tricked a Former NRA President into Speaking at a Fake Graduation".
  101. ^ Clark, Lauren. "Gun activists tricked into speaking at fake Las Vegas high school graduation". 3LV News. 3LV News. Retrieved 8 September 2021.
edit
 
Wikimedia Commons has media related to John Lott.

Lott's websites

edit
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Tiggerjay/BLP_Draft&oldid=1052440225"