That is common knowledge that gun owners would have no better or worse knowledge of than anyone else following the issue, so it remains that the researcher's premise is biased. The other issue here is the idea that if you question some small or flawed part of something you must be against the entire concept. I beg to differ. Those questioning this particular researcher are not anti research, which is what you inferred.
An Interesting Email Indeed....
- Thread starter Dlask Arms
- Start date
That is common knowledge that gun owners would have no better or worse knowledge of than anyone else following the issue, so it remains that the researcher's premise is biased. The other issue here is the idea that if you question some small or flawed part of something you must be against the entire concept. I beg to differ. Those questioning this particular researcher are not anti research, which is what you inferred.
Hello,
My name is (videogame character's name and pronouns) and I am a research assistant at Michael Canmore's Institute of Boating Accidents and Firearms. I am contacting you because we are conducting a study that may be relevant to students/faculty of your school and would like to inquire if you would be willing to help us recruit potential participants. Through our study, we are hoping to gain a better understanding of how Liberal Academics are involved in ###ual abuse of children in British Columbia. We are also hoping to determine why individuals are facilitating exposure to children, their preferred methods of indoctrination, and information about how they are being groomed. We have contacted you because many of your students/faculty may have experience with drag shows, and perhaps knowledge about illegal child grooming.
My name is (videogame character's name and pronouns) and I am a research assistant at Michael Canmore's Institute of Boating Accidents and Firearms. I am contacting you because we are conducting a study that may be relevant to students/faculty of your school and would like to inquire if you would be willing to help us recruit potential participants. Through our study, we are hoping to gain a better understanding of how Liberal Academics are involved in ###ual abuse of children in British Columbia. We are also hoping to determine why individuals are facilitating exposure to children, their preferred methods of indoctrination, and information about how they are being groomed. We have contacted you because many of your students/faculty may have experience with drag shows, and perhaps knowledge about illegal child grooming.
Thunderhog
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- East Kootneys
Snow Flake University.
Last edited:
Ouch !! lol
bcbravo2zero
CGN Regular
"[A]nyone else following the issue..." - I'd say that's the key phrase in your post. And if you think non-gun owners are closely following this issue then, again, you're operating under a fundamental misunderstanding. The general public does not follow the issue other than, perhaps, the occasional cursory glance. They are largely ignorant. They eat up the popular-prejudice pablum fed to them by the Libs. Reliance on facile heuristics is good enough! Polling data shows this to be true. (If this were not the case then the CCFR would hardly need to exist.) My anecdotal experience lends more evidence to my position. Professionally and socially, I swim in a sea of urbanites who are part of the 1/% of higher education. My degree has "doctor" on it too, but I often find it humbling to witness how capable and intelligent my peers are. (I am grateful for this, btw.) AND YET, they are shockingly prejudiced, uninformed and misinformed re: guns, gun ownership and gun crime. (One of my usual retorts is, "Where did your f***ing cortex just disappear to?".)
Their "premise is biased"? A premise is the basis of a theory which determines the hypotheses one uses to test the theory, so yeah, it contains a type of "bias". How could it not? My premise is that legal gun owners know more about gun issues...legal and non-legal...than non-gun owners. I guess I'm biased.
"The other issue..." - Nope, that's not my "idea" at all. In fact, given my educational background and professional activities over the last 30 years, it's a bit of a ridiculous suggestion. And from a plain reading of some of these posts, yes, very clearly many are suspicious, fearful and dismissive of all of these tricky university research-machinations, generally. (NB: my comments go beyond inference.)
Are we done now?
Yes, we're done doc. It's hard to argue when someone misses what you are saying but jumps to conclusions anyway, or denies exactly what they just did. I agree with you however on the average non-gun owner, but that wasn't the point.
bcbravo2zero
CGN Regular
LOL! What utter nonsense. Bye-bye...
Wallenstein
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Not the Fraser Valley
Joking aside, the people now at University will be the next generation of Lawyers, Judges, Politicans, etc.
So this is a valuable insight.
So this is a valuable insight.
Lay off the condescension. You aren't nearly as smart as you think you are.
Ever hear of a guy called Glen MacGregor. Many years ago, he came here to ask the community for help to do a series of articles showing gun owners side of the firearms debate for the Ottawa Citizen. People thought it would be an honest portrayal of gun owners, so they tried to help - some took him to the range, answered questions and explained themselves and their interests to him in the hope that an honest portrayal would be produced. What I'm trying to say, I guess, is that after the all out sh*t kicking we took in that series of articles, trust may never be restored. You can only have your butt kicked so many times before you retreat from any suggestion of this type of coverage. University studies are the current government's front line propaganda tool, regardless of what the study actually says, the government of Justin Trudeau will find a way to make their personal bias into 'science' in order to gather votes. Academia is rapidly falling into disrepute as a result of this, but unlike gun owners, academia doesn't seem to know when to back out of the room. There are lots of government dollars available to buy results in these studies, and by continuing to accept those dollars, by corrupting the 'peer review' process and by getting just plain greedy, academics are letting their fields of study become political tools. It looks as though the folks involved in this don't really care that their fields are looked on as entirely politicized by the unwashed public, but that is the problem (and always has been) with academics, the feel entirely superior to the rest of society, and now they believe they should be rewarded for that superiority.
Very well said. Ms. Commiefornia BA should research her predecessors' works if she senses reluctance and recalcitrance from this community.
Same thing with tat episode of political date with fred flinstone (m3endoccino) and Motz. Listen very carefully to the interview and the whole time Mendocino was manipulating all the gun club members/owners were telling him to fit the agenda he was after. Example, Oh, since you do all this paperwork then you wouldn't mind doing an extra step, etc....
Your first post is on this thread and is telling me to 'negotiate' with a WOKE LEFT WING university study whose end result is already pre-ordained ?
I have better things to do with my time, like down a Bud Light...
stripperclipper
CGN frequent flyer
- Location
- Middle East Alberta
Would you down a bud light for a $20 gift card to a popular retailer?
Hrmmm....do I have to do it in public ?
