C_Clayton_Jones
Diamond Member
‘In the battle to dismantle gun restrictions, raging in America's courts even as mass shootings become commonplace, one name keeps turning up in the legal briefs and judges' rulings: William English, Ph.D.
A little-known political economist at Georgetown University, Dr. English conducted a largest-of-its-kind national survey that found gun owners frequently used their weapons for self-defense. That finding has been deployed by gun rights activists to notch legal victories with far-reaching consequences.
[…]
But Dr. English’s interest in firearms is more than academic: He has received tens of thousands of dollars as a paid expert for gun rights advocates, and his survey work, which he says was part of a book project, originated as research for a National Rifle Association-backed lawsuit, The New York Times has found.
He has also increasingly drawn scrutiny in some courts over the reliability and integrity of his unpublished survey, which is the core of his research, and his refusal to disclose who paid for it. Other researchers say that the wording of some questions could elicit answers overstating defensive gun use, and that he cherry-picked pro-gun responses.
[…]
Dr. English extrapolated from the survey responses that guns are used in self-defense 1.67 million times a year, a high figure that has resonated in the courts: A federal judge last year cited it as he invalidated California’s assault weapons ban.
Some experts consider it to be vastly overstated. In 2018, the RAND Corporation analyzed a similar claim from a 1990s study widely cited by gun rights activists, and concluded it was “not plausible.” Other estimates range widely, with several putting the annual number below 100,000.
The professor’s definition of self-defense was broad: Almost a third of those who answered yes in the survey said they may have “verbally told someone “ they had a gun, without showing one. In addition, the survey asked people if they had defended themselves with a gun ever in their lifetime, rather than during a defined period.’
What’s alarming, of course, is that a biased, invalid, falsified ‘survey’ with corrupt data is being used by the courts to consider the constitutionality of firearm regulatory measures.
A little-known political economist at Georgetown University, Dr. English conducted a largest-of-its-kind national survey that found gun owners frequently used their weapons for self-defense. That finding has been deployed by gun rights activists to notch legal victories with far-reaching consequences.
[…]
But Dr. English’s interest in firearms is more than academic: He has received tens of thousands of dollars as a paid expert for gun rights advocates, and his survey work, which he says was part of a book project, originated as research for a National Rifle Association-backed lawsuit, The New York Times has found.
He has also increasingly drawn scrutiny in some courts over the reliability and integrity of his unpublished survey, which is the core of his research, and his refusal to disclose who paid for it. Other researchers say that the wording of some questions could elicit answers overstating defensive gun use, and that he cherry-picked pro-gun responses.
[…]
Dr. English extrapolated from the survey responses that guns are used in self-defense 1.67 million times a year, a high figure that has resonated in the courts: A federal judge last year cited it as he invalidated California’s assault weapons ban.
Some experts consider it to be vastly overstated. In 2018, the RAND Corporation analyzed a similar claim from a 1990s study widely cited by gun rights activists, and concluded it was “not plausible.” Other estimates range widely, with several putting the annual number below 100,000.
The professor’s definition of self-defense was broad: Almost a third of those who answered yes in the survey said they may have “verbally told someone “ they had a gun, without showing one. In addition, the survey asked people if they had defended themselves with a gun ever in their lifetime, rather than during a defined period.’
What’s alarming, of course, is that a biased, invalid, falsified ‘survey’ with corrupt data is being used by the courts to consider the constitutionality of firearm regulatory measures.
