Recently a story appeared in the Mesa Tribune talking about a project that a professor and his son undertook in 1989, when the son was 12 years old. Prof. Fabricius and his son spent 3 months scanning through the newspapers searching for stories of people who had used a gun to defend themselves, and based on the number of stories they collected, concluded that almost no one uses a gun to defend themselves against attack. They stated as much in the article.
Think about that for a second...if you were to use that methodolgy to try and draw conclusive evidence about life in America, you'd draw some immediate conclusions, all of them incorrect:
- Most black people are in the sports and entertainment industry, or they're criminals.
- Most cities are overrun with crime
- Most of the country-side is filled with racists and rednecks (okay, maybe this one has a grain of truth ;) )
But seriously folks...the newspaper is not an objective source of ALL material on ANY subject. It's a filter on material that the editors think their readers will find interesting. Every news source has a bias, it's just a fact of life.
So I penned the following letter to the good professor. I don't know what good it will do, but I can always dream:
Dear Prof. Fabricius,
I'm writing you to express my dismay regarding the news article in the Mesa Tribune "Teen, Dad Track Gun Use". I am sure that you have received a lot of mail on this subject already, so I will keep this short. I cannot even be sure you will read this, but I had to add my voice to those who have already spoken out against the conclusions drawn in the story. Having been a psychology major in college (Rider University - Class of 1997) I am acutely aware of how important following an ethical standard for research projects is paramount. People trust that those of you who conduct research and publish findings are above reproach, both in methodology and findings. People trust that you have done the hard work and will make personal and policy decisions based on your word. By using such an obviously flawed method as searching through newspaper clippings for stories of people defending themselves with guns you have cheapened your reputation and called all of your previous work into question.
I am sure that that was not your intention, but it is true.
I urge you to print a retraction of your statements and explain why what you said is incorrect. It would be a travesty if people made what could be a potentially life-altering decision on the basis of what you said. Furthermore, I urge you to pick up a copy of "More Guns, Less Crime" from John Lott Jr., from University of Chicago Press, which is not only thought-provoking, but also commendable for it's extensive and thorough research of the subject matter.
I fear I have taken enough of your time as it is.
Please speak up and retract your statements. It's the only honorable thing to do.
Thank you for your time.
Sincerely,
Maurice Reeves
www.mauricereeves.com
- It is better to light a candle, than to curse the darkness.
Thanks to Alan Korwin and Vin Suprynowicz for bringing this to my attention.
Leave a comment