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、枪支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，并引用了与虚假、无效测量和因果排序相关的担忧。Kleck 提出的大部分观点都在原稿中作为敏感性分析得到了解决。剩下的问题反映了整个枪支研究领域面临的挑战，包括 Kleck 自己的工作。更广泛地反驳他的批评并为文献辩护，这个回应详细阐述了原始文章中使用的建模策略，提供了额外的敏感性分析来验证这些决定，并讨论了驳回未能推进学术的稻草人论点的徒劳。