"D.A. Tsenuf" > wrote in
:

> The same can be said of John Lott who also was originally hired by the
ant-gun crowd and did a u-turn when he saw the numbers produced by his
study. It should be noted that the study was originally funded by the anti-
gun crowd.
> There was also another study whose intent was to discredit Kleck with
his 2.5M estimate. They were embarrassed when their methodology came up
with a 4M estimate Demonstrating that Kleck may have been conservative in
his numbers.

It's off topic for the group, so I won't ask for this information to be
posted here, but I would be interested in seeing it. I'm very interested
in the methods they used to collect their data. I would appreciate it if
you would email links to the reports or some additional information to help
me on a web search to me at the despammed address above. If not, I
understand your reasons.