It’s 10 pages (scroll at the bottom) and goes very in depth. They explain their methodology as well. I recommend reading it over.
Interesting quote from the article that demonstrates how easy to mislead if not outright manipulate public perceptions:
Despite national attention to the issue of firearm violence, most Americans are unaware that gun crime is lower today than it was two decades ago. According to a new Pew Research Center survey, today 56% of Americans believe gun crime is higher than 20 years ago and only 12% think it is lower.
Umm…
Wow.
Pew Research, that was practically a pro-gun article, especially considering the source.
What is the world coming too?
They even made a sideways mention that maybe the number of guns isn’t the cause of crime:
“the causal direction of this relationship remains in dispute, however, with some researchers maintaining that firearm violence elevates rates of gun ownership, but not the reverse.”
PEW has always been objective and unbiased, to whatever extent that is possible when human beings are doing research. They provide information, not policy recommendations, and are perhaps the most respected research institution because of their lack of bias.
I actually heard the results last night on NPR, didn’t know it came from pew.
I agree, what they choose to report on is generally objective and unbiased in that the report the data.
However, I get the feeling that they selectively choose what they will research and what they report to fit a slightly left of center agenda.
But that could just be MY bias.
It’s the fallacy of believing if something that is supposed to remain unbiased doesn’t advance your agenda, it must be against your agenda. I’m sure the anti-gun crowd probably feels it is slanted the other way as well.
I think PEW did a good job, especially on such a controversial subject like guns.
^This. I generally trust the rigor and integrity of Pew’s reported data more than that of other polling orgs. However, any organization can be biased not just by distorting the data, but also by what it chooses to report or ignore.
I agree with this. But I would challenge anyone to present a case that PEW has a track record of doing this. Not one or two anecdotes, but a thorough argument showing a historical trend.
The Los Angeles Times covered the story as well.
This info is all that is needed to counter silly anti-gun arguments.
Really? 10 posts in and nobody has said it?
^ Anti-LEO.
:jester:
This is also an interesting companion study from DoJ
Only in 'Mercia do our fake guns eject brass. What is that yellow thing on his right sleeve. I assume it is a tag , but there isn’t one on the other side, and the top seems like it has a rim?