Abstract

In response to my recent article on guns, firearms homicide, and mass shootings, Kleck questions the reliability of my findings and cited concerns related to spuriousness, invalid measurement, and causal ordering. Most of the points raised by Kleck were addressed as sensitivity analyses in the original manuscript; the remaining issues reflect challenges that face the field of firearms research as a whole, including Kleck’s own work. Rebutting his critiques and defending the literature more broadly, this response elaborates on the modeling strategy utilized in the original article, provides additional sensitivity analyses validating these decisions, and discusses the futility of shooting down strawman arguments that fail to advance scholarship.

摘要

在回应我最近关于枪支，枪械凶杀和大规模枪击事件的文章时，Kleck质疑我的发现的可靠性，并列举了与虚假性，无效测量和因果排序有关的担忧。Kleck提出的大多数观点都在原始手稿中作为敏感性分析加以解决。剩下的问题反映了整个枪支研究领域面临的挑战，包括克莱克自己的工作。这种回应反驳了他的批评并更广泛地捍卫了文学作品，详细阐述了原始文章中使用的建模策略，提供了验证这些决定的其他敏感性分析，并讨论了否决无法提高学术水平的稻草人论证是徒劳的。