elwoodblues

Reason.com has put up a critique of Arming America: The Origins of a National Gun Culture. I remember a few people in this forum have cited this book, using it to argue that guns and private gun ownership has not been an important or integral part of the history of the US. I picked up the book and read some of it a few months back, and didn't think much of it. It was academic, so of course it had to be boring, but it also seemed fairly pre-determined in it's conclusion. Whatever evidence was turned up seemed to be bent by the author to support his thesis.

The book drew a lot of early praise from all circles. That support has melted away as the dishonesty of the author has been revealed.

Far as I can tell, Bellesiles was being even more dishonest than I gave him credit for. Atrocious use of statistics, ignoring disconfirming evidence, and what sure seems like bald-faced lying.

link

Anyone here read the whole book? What'd you think of it?

emphryio

I think owning guns should be legal although I don't own one myself so I don't really care so much. And therefore of course I didn't read the book.

It appears this man omitted and changed history to suit his purposes. Exactly as many others have done and gotten away with because their version of history supported the powers that be.

I wonder if anything that is being done to Bellesiles could be done to corporate media journalists?

Probably not because they usually aren't considered part of true academia.

Clutch

Dunno. If he falsified or ignored data, he should be exposed, and his argument regarded as uncompelling. (Not, of course, to say that the conclusion is false.)Would these be the same corporate media journalists who rush to explain every assault rifle massacre by blaming rock music, goth music, atheism, etc?