The illegitimacy of one-sided speculation: getting the defensive gun use estimate down.
A response to a commentary in this issue by David Hemenway on the writers' “Armed Resistance to Crime: The Prevalence and Nature of Self-Defense with a Gun,” which appeared in The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, vol. 86, 1995. The writers argue that Hemenway's commentary on their survey o...
| Publicado en: | Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology Vol. 87; pp. 1446 - 1462 |
|---|---|
| Autores principales: | , |
| Formato: | Artículo |
| Publicado: |
Northwestern University
Summer97
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | Ver este registro en EBSCOhost |
| Sumario: | A response to a commentary in this issue by David Hemenway on the writers' “Armed Resistance to Crime: The Prevalence and Nature of Self-Defense with a Gun,” which appeared in The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, vol. 86, 1995. The writers argue that Hemenway's commentary on their survey of civilian defensive gun use is one-sided and almost entirely speculative. They argue that Hemenway's article is an attempt to neutralize concerns about the cost of gun prohibition and to provide intellectual respectability for positions identified with Handgun Control Incorporated, the America's main gun control advocacy group. |
|---|