Contact

If you need to contact site management, put it in a comment. Comments are fully monitored, and that will be by far the fastest way to make contact.

Please note that contact comments are not, as a matter of protection of privacy, approved.

And, the usual “terms and conditions” of blogging apply.

All comments made on main-board posts are read, and approved in accordance with site policy; posts must be relevant to the post, and “child safe<" in that profanity, vulgarity, and gratuitous insults are not allowed. Comments in English that meet those conditions will be approved; and may be the subject of post. All excerpts here are taken for "fair use commentary" under provisions of state and federal law, and are clearly identified as such, along with a link to the original source material. Should the copyright holder object to this use, leave a contact comment and it will be promptly taken down. All original material here is copyright by the individual who uses the nom de net of Stranger. Those who wish to use this material are welcome to do so, provided internal links to data sources are preserved; link or trackback is provided; and rebuttal is allowed should that use be facticidal. Stranger

126 Responses to Contact

  1. Stranger says:

    It already is the old, the sick, and the young. All three gorups are dying like flies, WiChang.

    S

  2. wuchang says:

    Disregard– everything went back to normal with a refresh –LOL

  3. Stranger says:

    Apparently, a part of the internet is having problems. I keep getting “bad gateway” notices, and severaly posts had to be reposted to unmangle them. Hopefully, the problem will be corercted promptly.

    S

  4. wuchang says:

    Good morning Stranger(s)
    Here is a link to a St Louis Post editorial that quotes a survey by Harvard/Northeastern that estimates the lack of firearm ownership and implies the NRA is a paper tiger.

    http://www.stltoday.com/news/opinion/columns/the-platform/editorial-debunking-the-gun-lobby-s-outsized-influence/article_fbab71ea-1550-50e5-b606-817dec35bd9e.html

    The article they ‘lift’ from is here
    https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/sep/19/us-gun-ownership-survey

    Of interest is they are “public health” researchers and the sample size

    This paragraph about the on-line poll would seem to really cast doubt on the results

    “The Harvard/Northeastern study is based on a survey of nearly 4,000 Americans conducted online in 2015 by a market research company, GfK, with a nationally representative panel of opt-in participants who are compensated to complete surveys on a variety of issues.”
    Reminds me of the folks that hang out at busy street crossings to collect signatures for petitions and get paid by the signature.

    and as usual they completely miss the correlation between increased firearm ownership and crime rates

    Anywho– have a good Sabbath– in 4 hours the grill will be fired up and some good eats are planned

  5. Stranger says:

    Morning, WuChang. As the Venerable Bede is said to have observed, “it is well to know what the devil is up to.”

    The editorial is what you get when you depend on flawed data sources. Especially those funde3d by advocates of some legislation, whether it be repeal of marijuana restrictions or banning guns. The “poll” is as full of holes as a Swiss cheese, since it fails to take into consideration the often demonstrated fact gun owners generally lie to pollsters. One need only look at Gallup’s long term series on gun ownership to see huge declines in admitted gun ownership when the gun control pressure is on, and impossibly large increases in gun ownership when gun ban pressures die down.

    Add to that the fact the “authority” for the editorial is not the poll but the Communo-Socialist Manchester Guardian, which has dropped the Manchester in an effort to gain readers, and it is difficult to take the Guardian propaganda seriously.

    And of course, the Post Dispatch is a Lee newspaper whose editors MUST, as a matter of corporate policy, take a like leading to an eventual gun ban. I have no doubt t the alchemists of the 17th Century sincerely believed that a you could turn a handful of leaves into gold coins, and a “humor” called phlogiston caused fire were sincere. But both the alchemists and the editors of the Post Dispatch are wrong and I can prove it.

    By the Guardian’s report, the 2015 FBI data will be out tomorrow. I have been waiting for fresh data to redo the many charts and graphs that prove the utter futility of gun control, and a rebuttal of the Guardian’s propaganda propaganda piece will be included.

    With, as is often the case, a more detailed analysis at Polite Society.

    S

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.