>If no analysis of other potentially causative factors is done, I think it's >entirely defensible to say that these raw data don't support the contention >that an event in 1976 or 1977 caused a decrease--certainly not any >*lasting* >decrease.
Just to be clear, the data seem even *less* supportive of the hypothesis that 1976 or 1977 caused any increase in the homicide rate, as many pro-gun writers have implied.
