ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
He wandered the dusty roads of the Holy Land with His apostles carrying swords
i'm thinking they would have left them behind if they hadn't thought they might need them
New Zealand gunmen kill 49 people at two mosques
- Thread starter The Berean
- Start date
He wandered the dusty roads of the Holy Land with His apostles carrying swords
i'm thinking they would have left them behind if they hadn't thought they might need them
:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/10328765/GUN_SCATTERPLOT_2x.png)
It would appear that based on the data, America would rank last in terms of its approach concerning guns in society that New Zealand would want to follow!
Correlation doesn't necessarily prove causation. In fact, with the exception of the US, there doesn't even seem to be a real correlation. It is very hard to sort out social issues like this. To me one thing is clear: there is something horribly wrong in US society.
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
Idolater
"Foundation of the World" Dispensationalist χρ
Actually what I did was turn your own reasoning right around on you and shot you with it. I shot you with your own gun.
You're only a doctor of law, so bear with me. I'm not a doctor of the philosophy of statistics, but I learned from a doctor of the philosophy of statistics, and have also read about a dozen different statistics texts. I'm a competent practitioner, but not a doctor, so I'm not sure that I'll be able to instruct you beyond stating as plainly as I can where your statistical reasoning is wrong.
Statistics in a way can be said to rest upon the 'null hypothesis.' Every statistical analysis begins with the null hypothesis, which in the example of two sets of matched data, is that the data are random and uncorrelated. The data that I have is from 172 countries, with murder rates, civilian gun ownership, population, and land area (for calculating population density), all from non partisan sources.
When we consider the matched data of number of civilian owned guns per country, and murder rates in those countries, the null hypothesis is not denied, which means that the number of civilian owned guns has Nothing to do with murder rate. That's what the null hypothesis means.
Your claim is that more gun control will lead to fewer murders. I reasonably interpret gun control as the inverse of civilian owned guns per capita, since the logical extrapolation of gun control is fewer guns in the hands of civilians.
Then you contend that it's not the number of guns, but the type of guns, that leads to more murder. So I proffer New Hampshire as a counter point. Then you accuse me of cherry picking data, but the reality is that New Hampshire positively denies your claim. I can say this definitively because population density also has no correlation to murder rate; the null hypothesis is not denied in that statistical analysis either, so the claim that New Hampshire is an outlier because of its lower population density is also therefore wrong. New Hampshire is a perfectly good and valid statistical sample to serve as an example in order to instruct you.
New Hampshire is awash in precisely the weapons that you wish to ban. Furthermore as I've pointed out, in New Hampshire the police will not bother you for merely carrying around an assault weapon openly as you go about your business, nor a handgun or handguns, carried in a holster, or carrying concealed. You don't need a permit or license in New Hampshire to carry guns however you'd like to do it.
And the murder rate in New Hampshire is not only the lowest in the United States of America, but its murder rate rivals the safest of our western industrialized democracy cousins. New Hampshire is the safest place on the earth, iow. And New Hampshire is awash in assault weapons that can be carried openly, with maximum capacity magazines, and even with silencers, bump stocks and binary triggers.
And it is the safest place on earth.
So you're just wrong. You're a doctor of the law, and not a doctor of the philosophy of statistics. You're not even a competent practitioner.
As a parallel, a doctor of medicine, isn't therefore a doctor or a competent practitioner of any other discipline.
'Gun deaths' includes suicides. While I am against suicide, it is unjust to meddle in the gun market (which is where innocent people get their guns) to lower suicides. While suicides voluntarily commit suicide, we all possess the inalienable right to defend ourselves and our neighbors and loved ones from attempted murderers and rapists, and whether or not suicides commit suicide is no reason to endanger the lives of innocent people who are not going to commit suicide.
Supra.
You do not understand the philosophy of statistics. You conclusion is invalid. That's not the same as wrong, but your premises do not support your conclusion.
And, supra, regarding New Hampshire.
In as much as more gun control leads to less civilian gun ownership, yes it is the issue.
New Hampshire. Supra.
Not even remotely true. While the matched data shows no statistically significant correlation between gun control and murder rate, if there is a correlation in there, it's that the more civilian owned guns (the less gun control), the lower the murder rate.
But that's not the argument I'm making. I'm saying the null hypothesis is not denied when comparing gun control with murder rates the world round.
And additionally, as e.g. Ok Doser has pointed out, there is a statistically significant dramatic increase in the risk that black men have of being murdered, as compared with all other demographics. In the analysis I read, whites and Latinos were not separated (Latinos are included as white), but there's every chance that the risk to Latino men is similarly statistically significantly higher than it is for white men to be murdered.
This issue has nothing to do with gun control, including the types of guns that you wish to ban. It has to do with a problem in the black and Latino communities. If we can isolate the murders committed between blacks and Latinos from the other murders, I suspect that the murder rate in the US is much closer to the murder rates in all those other Western Industrialized democracies you keep comparing us with.
Idolater
"Foundation of the World" Dispensationalist χρ
There is nothing Christlike about sitting on your hands while your neighbor, whom you're supposed to love, is raped or murdered or both.
Nothing.
Idolater
"Foundation of the World" Dispensationalist χρ
I've made a decision. I'm just going to call things '666' when what I've previously meant is some form of the '-ubar' word, or the R word. We'll see how it goes.
You seem to be a gentleman with simple explanations for complex problems. Do you have a simple solution for this as well?
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
get rid of the negroes? :idunno:
Idolater
"Foundation of the World" Dispensationalist χρ
Opioids know no boundaries wrt New Hampshire. Same problem there as in many other states nowadays.
Correct. If we're going to obey the Constitution, then we can't meddle in gun markets = can't harass gun dealers from selling service rifles and carbines to innocent civilians.
The Colonials kept and bore the very same weapons that the British soldiers did. Today, those weapons are called service rifles and carbines. In the US, that's the M-16 and M-4.
Semiautomatic clones are strictly for civilian use. They wouldn't even exist if it weren't for Unconstitutional meddling in gun markets.
Idolater
"Foundation of the World" Dispensationalist χρ
That's 666.
Who qualifies as a "negro"? What do you propose to do with them?
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
the ones who turn white seem worth keeping - how about working to turn them all white?
You seem to confuse skin color with socioeconomic class.
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
Doesn't have anything to do with skin color, it's all about values, morality and culture
...and yet you used the term "negro"...
Here you go again, using "negro" to mean a type of culture, when the term is a racial one related to skin color.