It doesn't say "equal" at any point in that paragraph.
Yet, I'm the one that people claims sees what they want to see.
Gun Control
- Thread starter larryselbows
- Start date
It doesn't say "equal" at any point in that paragraph.
Yet, I'm the one that people claims sees what they want to see.
I like the part discussing the findings that if you live next to a lot of bad **** then you're more likely to get shot. Even more so if you participate in said bad ****. Insight that rocked my world.
On the contrary. I don't see the point of doing such a survey without discounting any gang related shootings. Don't gangsters carry guns to shoot other gangsters who are armed to shoot back?
Oddly, over and over, I seem to read that civilians need to carry guns to protect themselves from criminals who carry guns. Now, you're saying that a particular subset of them, gangsters, carrying guns makes it more dangerous only for those gangsters, but not for other civilians? Just how many gangsters do you think there are in the city of Philadelphia, that they dominated a study where well over 700 people were shot? Does every gangster carry a gun, and if not, are the gangsters without guns more or less likely to be shot than those that carry?
I don't know the answer to any of those questions, and they certainly could affect the interpretation of the study. However, I don't see where not having the answers is a good reason to dismiss the study, either. It's only one data point, though.
I didn't click the link. Do they differentiate between those carrying a gun legally and those carrying a gun illegally?
The study said that, since it was illegal for people under the age of 21 to carry a gun, people under 21 were excluded from the study. It did not say there were any other exclusions, and my general impression is that people over 21 who were illegally carrying guns were included.
Is it counting those that are carrying a weapon to commit a crime or those that are armed where a crime happens to take place? If it is counting those that injured that used a gun to commit a crime than I see that as a skewed article.
Yeah, that's exactly what I said, put more words into my mouth.
And your questions haven't been answered over 1000 times already.
I believe it is counting both, or at least, I see no indication this is not so. It is also counting both those not carrying a weapon in the commission of a crime and those that are not carrying a weapon where a crime happens to take place in the control group, as best I can tell. So, do you have a good reason to think this skews the article?
Cool. Where?
what we need is a study of people who do studies on guns. How many are carrying prejudices and looking for supporting facts? How many of these have skewed data, and how many have just gone on to another place because there was data there that fit the theory? How many got their grant because they proposed a politically-desired result, or were known from other, previous, work to be inclined to produce the politically-correct result?
Wait, we're still discussing gun control, and still looking for results that can be used to argue that people carrying guns might be choosing a somehow dangerous lifestyle???? How do we set up controls in a study of this that controls for the variable that people who are scared by the neighborhood are more likely to pack heat themselves?
Maybe our tax dollars could be spent on a study of why tools are more often found in workplaces, yah think?
Wait, we're still discussing gun control, and still looking for results that can be used to argue that people carrying guns might be choosing a somehow dangerous lifestyle???? How do we set up controls in a study of this that controls for the variable that people who are scared by the neighborhood are more likely to pack heat themselves?
Maybe our tax dollars could be spent on a study of why tools are more often found in workplaces, yah think?
apparently, on the other side of your blinders.
Yes, the previous 84 pages of this thread.
very soon to be "previous 85 pages". Hey this can rack up meaninglessness just like some other exercises in futility. Cool.
Hold on babe, we've almost got this thing figured out.
Is it safe to say that if you are a good marksman, you have gun control?
Is this the gun control we are talking about. Maybe more classes and ranges to practice so we as a country have more gun control.
Not sure if this point was made in pages 1-86, but I'm always impressed by people with excellent gun control.
I watch that marksman competition show sometimes and am amazed at what they can do.
We need moar control!
Is this the gun control we are talking about. Maybe more classes and ranges to practice so we as a country have more gun control.
Not sure if this point was made in pages 1-86, but I'm always impressed by people with excellent gun control.
I watch that marksman competition show sometimes and am amazed at what they can do.
We need moar control!
Like Larry Pratt says it's not about gun control, it's about government control.
actually it's not even about government control, it's about who controls the government.
PearlWatson
Well-Known Member
Top Shot?