|
The real truth about gun laws, ownership and crimes and death
|
The real truth about gun laws, ownership and crimes and death
On Tue, 15 Jan 2013 12:51:36 -0500, iBoaterer wrote:
http://factcheck.org/2012/12/gun-rhetoric-vs-gun-facts/ Yup, no causal relationship. Thanks. More Guns = More Gun Homicides, Statistically Speaking In 2008, we explored the issue of whether more gun ownership meant more or less gun violence. What we found, and it still holds true, was that some studies had shown a statistical relationship between those factors areas with a higher prevalence of guns had higher prevalence of gun homicides and homicides in general. But studies **havent been able to show a causal relationship** that the mere presence of guns, as opposed to other factors, caused the higher rates of gun violence. Its doubtful, however, that a study could ever beyond-a-doubt prove a causal relationship. [Asterisks added] Salmonbait -- 'Name-calling'...the liberals' answer to a lost argument! |
The real truth about gun laws, ownership and crimes and death
On Tue, 15 Jan 2013 13:35:29 -0500, iBoaterer wrote:
In article , says... On Tue, 15 Jan 2013 12:51:36 -0500, iBoaterer wrote: http://factcheck.org/2012/12/gun-rhetoric-vs-gun-facts/ Yup, no causal relationship. Thanks. More Guns = More Gun Homicides, Statistically Speaking In 2008, we explored the issue of whether more gun ownership meant more or less gun violence. What we found, and it still holds true, was that some studies had shown a statistical relationship between those factors ? areas with a higher prevalence of guns had higher prevalence of gun homicides and homicides in general. But studies **haven?t been able to show a causal relationship** ? that the mere presence of guns, as opposed to other factors, caused the higher rates of gun violence. It?s doubtful, however, that a study could ever beyond-a-doubt prove a causal relationship. [Asterisks added] Salmonbait Funny, you cherry pick a few words..... so the rest of the text means nothing to you? If so, no wonder you are so ignorant and narrow minded. The rest of the text says basically the same thing. Go read it, or have ESAD read it for you. Salmonbait -- 'Name-calling'...the liberals' answer to a lost argument! |
The real truth about gun laws, ownership and crimes and death
On 1/15/2013 2:34 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 15 Jan 2013 12:51:36 -0500, iBoaterer wrote: http://factcheck.org/2012/12/gun-rhetoric-vs-gun-facts/ This is probably the most valid statement in the whole article. "researchers are left with statistical models, which are “very fragile,” says Charles F. Wellford, who was chair of the committees that authored a lengthy 2004 report on this topic by the National Research Council of the National Academies. These models are subject to what control variables researchers use" Basically it means the statistics are so ambiguous that they may not be relevant ... for either side. I do see one statistic that we should pay more attention to, particularly when you look at Zimmerman. Almost as many people are killed by unarmed assailants every year than rifles and shotguns (including all of those assault rifles) combined (FBI UCR murder by weapon) 528 by long gun, 841 by bare hands. http://gfretwell.com/ftp/murder%20weapon.htm You can search 10shrtbl08 on the FBI web page to see it first hand in an XLS file It's a good thing Zimmerman had a gun. Otherwise he might have been killed. |
The real truth about gun laws, ownership and crimes and death
In article ,
says... On Tue, 15 Jan 2013 12:51:36 -0500, iBoaterer wrote: http://factcheck.org/2012/12/gun-rhetoric-vs-gun-facts/ This is probably the most valid statement in the whole article. "researchers are left with statistical models, which are ?very fragile,? says Charles F. Wellford, who was chair of the committees that authored a lengthy 2004 report on this topic by the National Research Council of the National Academies. These models are subject to what control variables researchers use" Basically it means the statistics are so ambiguous that they may not be relevant ... for either side. I do see one statistic that we should pay more attention to, particularly when you look at Zimmerman. Almost as many people are killed by unarmed assailants every year than rifles and shotguns (including all of those assault rifles) combined (FBI UCR murder by weapon) 528 by long gun, 841 by bare hands. http://gfretwell.com/ftp/murder%20weapon.htm You can search 10shrtbl08 on the FBI web page to see it first hand in an XLS file Yep!! Typical, cherry pick one item, to hell with the rest! If that's the way that you learn, I'm sure glad I'm not a teacher trying to teach you something. Math must be pure hell for you if you cherry pick one thing that works for you and call the rest bull****! |
The real truth about gun laws, ownership and crimes and death
In article ,
says... On Tue, 15 Jan 2013 13:35:29 -0500, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Tue, 15 Jan 2013 12:51:36 -0500, iBoaterer wrote: http://factcheck.org/2012/12/gun-rhetoric-vs-gun-facts/ Yup, no causal relationship. Thanks. More Guns = More Gun Homicides, Statistically Speaking In 2008, we explored the issue of whether more gun ownership meant more or less gun violence. What we found, and it still holds true, was that some studies had shown a statistical relationship between those factors ? areas with a higher prevalence of guns had higher prevalence of gun homicides and homicides in general. But studies **haven?t been able to show a causal relationship** ? that the mere presence of guns, as opposed to other factors, caused the higher rates of gun violence. It?s doubtful, however, that a study could ever beyond-a-doubt prove a causal relationship. [Asterisks added] Salmonbait Funny, you cherry pick a few words..... so the rest of the text means nothing to you? If so, no wonder you are so ignorant and narrow minded. The rest of the text says basically the same thing. Go read it, or have ESAD read it for you. Salmonbait No it doesn't. |
The real truth about gun laws, ownership and crimes and death
In article ,
says... On Tue, 15 Jan 2013 16:05:42 -0500, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Tue, 15 Jan 2013 12:51:36 -0500, iBoaterer wrote: http://factcheck.org/2012/12/gun-rhetoric-vs-gun-facts/ This is probably the most valid statement in the whole article. "researchers are left with statistical models, which are ?very fragile,? says Charles F. Wellford, who was chair of the committees that authored a lengthy 2004 report on this topic by the National Research Council of the National Academies. These models are subject to what control variables researchers use" Basically it means the statistics are so ambiguous that they may not be relevant ... for either side. I do see one statistic that we should pay more attention to, particularly when you look at Zimmerman. Almost as many people are killed by unarmed assailants every year than rifles and shotguns (including all of those assault rifles) combined (FBI UCR murder by weapon) 528 by long gun, 841 by bare hands. http://gfretwell.com/ftp/murder%20weapon.htm You can search 10shrtbl08 on the FBI web page to see it first hand in an XLS file Yep!! Typical, cherry pick one item, to hell with the rest! If that's the way that you learn, I'm sure glad I'm not a teacher trying to teach you something. Math must be pure hell for you if you cherry pick one thing that works for you and call the rest bull****! You pick more cherries than a Guatemalan immigrant Nice. You must try a lot harder to be as bigoted as John though... |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:09 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com