http://blog.nj.com/njv_editorial_page/2013/02/nj_assembly_gun_control_bills.html#incart_most-comments

 

Given the 200 word limit for letters to the editor, I think a few people should take a couple of points to dissect and send in multiple letters.

 

Someone needs to attack the reference to the correlation between gun control and gun deaths. Classic fallacy of correlation = causation. And they didn't even bother to adjust the results for the many covariates that also correlate with gun deaths. There are ways to do this, and any serious study does it. In that study, one of the strongest correlations with gun deaths is poverty. Could it be that the aristocratic enclaves that favor gun control have fewer gun deaths because they have less poverty? A negative correlation was with number of college graduates. Same argument as above.

 

Finally, "gun deaths" is the wrong endpoint. It should be total violent deaths. If in states where it's impossible to get a gun, people just stab each other instead, I wouldn't call that a resounding success.

 

If this study were about anything but the liberal favorite of gun control, it would have gotten an F and been sent back to the author.

 

Can anyone translate the above into 200 words accessible to the average SL reader and send it in? I've already sent one. See below.

 

To the Editor,

 

I would like to challenge two assertions in your editorial, "NJ

Assembly Gun Control Bills Would Save Lives."

 

You state that a person can buy a "large stockpile of ammunition

online." The same person can buy a "large stockpile of ammunition"

face to face. It is in fact possible to create greater accountability

in online sales than in face to face sales, by requiring the vendor

have a firearm ID, a credit card, and a physical address, all

matching, on file in order to purchase ammunition. This would

effectively prevent ineligible individuals from illegally obtaining

ammunition without imposing unnecessary burdens on legal purchasers.

 

The ban on "armor piercing bullets" is flawed. The bill incorrectly

defines "armor piercing" as capable of breaching light police armor.

By this definition, almost all rifles used to hunt big game are "armor

piercing." Whether by error or by design, this bill essentially ends

firearm deer hunting in NJ.

 

Many of these bills seem "sensible" on the surface but, upon closer

inspection, are either ineffectual or impractical. I wish that our

lawmakers, and the Star Ledger editorial board, would better research

the substance of these bills before advocating for them.

My boss put that article on my desk yesterday morning. Ill has low gun deaths but Wyoming has high gun murders? Flawed logic=/=good logic.

 

Can anyone translate the above into 200 words accessible to the average SL reader and send it in? I've already sent one. See below.

 

 

Problem with your attempt is that the average SL reader is likely a moron. Bitter experience proves you can't reason with morons.

In 2009, the Star Ledger endorsed Daggett, efferctively telling their readers to throw their votes away. They might have thought Corzine was radioactive but they still couldn't bring themselves to endorse a Republican. Their editorial board is just warming up to endorse a-Democrat-to-be-named-later for November.

 

They're nuts about these bills "saving lives". North Carolina has similar racial demographics and their firearms homicide and overall homicide rates are within about one half of one percent of NJ's.

 

Without Draconian firearms laws. FWIW.

 

Firearm ownership is positively correlated with income and education, and inversely correlated with crime. That's a factoid that gun grabbers find impossible to wrap their minds around.

 

I'd cancel my subscription, but I've never subscribed to the paper.

2000s financial troubles

 

In 2005, George Arwady became the publisher of The Star-Ledger. A graduate of Columbia University, Arwady had previously been the publisher of the Kalamazoo Gazette in Kalamazoo, Michigan. Having worked closely with the Newhouse family for years, Arwady was asked to move to Newark to financially revamp the paper.^{[citation needed]}

 

Because the paper was losing money, parent company Advance Publications said on July 31, 2008 that it would sell the Star-Ledger unless it could get 200 of its non-union staff to voluntarily leave under a buyout offer, and its unionized truck drivers and mailers to agree to concessions.^[3] On September 16 publisher George Arwady sent employees a status update by e-mail, saying that management felt progress had been made on the buyout and concessions from the mailers, but that management is "far from an agreement with the Drivers’ union.".^[4] The email continued:^[4] Since it is doubtful that the Drivers will ratify an agreement by October 8, 2008, we will be sending formal notices to all employees this week, as required by both federal and New Jersey law, advising you that the Company will be sold, or, failing that, that it will close operations on January 5, 2009.

 

On October 24, 2008, the newspaper announced that 168 newsroom employees had offered to take the company's buyout offer, and that the company had accepted 151 of them, which will result in a newsroom staff that's 40% smaller.^[5]

 

On Jan. 16, 2013, the newspaper announced layoffs of 34 employees including 18 newsroom staff.^[6]

 

 

If you just ignore them, they'll go away! Seriously!

I've been arguing with some of the anti-gun people in the comments there, under the name "DTOM76". They have no arguments to offer (do they ever?), just emotional pleas.