Is RKBA (Right to keep and bear arms) a Progressive value?

[gejohnston]

200. a respected award winning criminologist vs a blog?

this is a better read on the subject
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/national/longterm/trigger/trigger5.htm
The NRA doesn't fund studies and the rantings from some poorly written propaganda blog, especially one that shows blatant anti rural bigotry with that stupid photo, doesn't quite cut it. I suggest you actually read his work.

Especially when that work earned him the Michael J. Hindelang Award from the American Society of Criminology and a critique from one of the most prominent criminologists, Marvin Wolfgang, as being nearly foolproof. Oh yeah, he is head of the Criminology department at a US university, not funded by the NRA or anyone else.

Marvin Wolfgang, a noted criminologist who was on record favoring a ban on all firearms, even those carried by law enforcement officers, was quoted as saying that the Kleck survey was nearly foolproof, saying: “What troubles me is the article by Gary Kleck and Marc Gertz. The reason I am troubled is that they have provided an almost clear-cut case of methodologically sound research in support of something I have theoretically opposed for years, namely, the use of a gun in defense against a criminal perpetrator…I do not like their conclusions that having a gun can be useful, but I cannot fault their methodology.” Compare that to one of Kleck's detractors, David Hemenway, got a free dinner and a plaque from the Brady Campaign.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joyce_Foundation#Organizations_funded_by_the_Joyce_Foundation
In fact, Hemenway's department is funded by the same foundation that funds gun control groups like Brady and VPC.
The fact remains they were peer reviewed and published in UK Criminology journals. The referthat is my understanding, can't find the exact quote at the momentees certainly do not have any such vested interest. Many of Kleck's detractors have greater have a vested interests. Many of these studies, especially Hemenway, are funded by the same foundation that funds Brady and VPC. Kleck is hardly an NRA shill, he got the results that he got even though he philosophically opposed to what the NRA advocates. The NRA likes Kleck only because they can use his research for their propaganda, that does not mean Kleck had any intention of that happening. The ironic thing is that Joyce funded studies like one by Phil Cook did replicate and got the same results, but spent ten pages explaining why he shouldn't have gotten those results.

When it comes to politics, there is no neutrality. Are you saying the editors and referees of the criminology members were shills for the UK-NRA? The important thing is the science. Either the peer review process filters out shill pieces or it doesn't. If some ER doctor published "guns are bad" in a peer reviewed medical journal as valid and neutral, then a criminologist who publishes in peer reviewed criminology journals have to be taken as seriously. Not that peer review is perfect or a study is the last word on anything, but worth taking a closer look.
https://litigation-essentials.lexisnexis.com/webcd/app?action=DocumentDisplay&crawlid=1&doctype=cite&docid=62+Tenn.+L.+Rev.+513&srctype=smi&srcid=3B15&key=d3a4791293805b95e435d52caa8fdf69
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8201280

that is my understanding, can't find the exact quote at the moment