Gius is also the author of several other studies, including “The Effects of Interracial Marriage on Individual-Level Earnings,” in which he concludes that “persons in interracial marriages earn as much or more than persons in white marriages. The only interracial marriages that do worse than white marriages are those marriages that include an African-American male.”
One clue that Gius might not be such a straight shooter, ideologically speaking, is evident in his “The Impact of Ultrasound Laws on the Demand for Abortions by Young Women,” which naturally concludes that forced ultrasound laws “reduce the odds of a woman having an abortion quite substantially.”
In his conclusion, though, Gius slips up a little further [emphasis mine]:
The primary motivation for the present study was to determine if the anecdotal evidence on ultrasound laws was true: did giving women the opportunity to view their unborn fetus reduce the probability that they would have an abortion? Most pro-life groups believe that is the case. Most pro-choice groups also believe it to be true, although they believe that these laws are unconstitutional. Results of the present study suggest, however, that both groups are correct; ultrasound requirement laws reduce the odds of a woman having an abortion quite substantially.
Forced ultrasounds not being the same as voluntary ones, but hey, if it gets in the way of your snappy headline, fella …
(I’ve always liked the word “demand” as used by movement anti-abortion wingnuts, since it implies that the real problem is the tone of voice we girls use to request the procedure. It so beautifully illustrates how awful we are, demanding things, instead of asking nicely like our mothers raised us to do. Please, sir, if it’s not too much trouble may I make a medical decision?)
So this dick is now peddling a study that says gun control laws do not work, except that what it really says is that STATE gun control laws do not work:
The correct way to report on this would perhaps be to say “Economics Professor Claims Study Shows That Concealed Carry Results in Fewer Murders,” unless you’ve actually read the full study.
If you want to read it, you’ve got to pay, but even the abstract gives away the game. Gun control advocates will be the first to tell you that weak state laws can render strong local laws useless, and nonexistent federal laws do the same to decent state laws. Banning guns at the local or state level is a lot like trying to ban water from the middle of a bathtub. The National Firearms Act demonstrates how effective strong federal laws can be at eliminating crimes with certain classes of weapon.
In other words, if I can buy a gun in Wisconsin and drive to Indiana with it in three hours does it really matter that it’s illegal to have it in my purse in Illinois? Probably not. Also, the NRA has bascially won this whole thing so I do not understand why the Second Amendment martyrs do not SHUT THE FUCK UP. It starts to look needy, guys, and eventually you’ll run out of lube.