You seem to be the only one asking that question. Probably because it is completely irrelevant. Counting the number of people killed by terrorism tells use “what we should be focusing on,” because it shows how few lives the War on Terror is actually saving. Lumping in the number of people killed enacting the War on Terrorism (a completey different statistic, which actually makes an inverse argument, if any, to the other statistic) makes no sense, and is completely irrelevant.
2 Likes
That study, reproduced in Quartz, is a perfect example of data presented in a way that pushes an agenda.
Bingo. @nemomeno’s “fairly close correlation” hasn’t been established (that is, there are plenty of other stats and studies that draw the opposite conclusion or don’t support that one).
The fact that lobbyists are pushing their Congresscritters to prevent Federal funding of such extended data correlation research is, on the one hand, sneaky, suspicious, and irritating…buuuut I can’t help thinking that they kind of have a point. Depending on the administration in power, I’m not entirely sure I’d trust a government study that much more than I’d trust one funded by the NRA. Hence my wish that the Pew Research Center would dig in on the whole gun ownership/crime thing.
That said, the three reports they do have at the moment - see here, on their Gun Violence topic page - are a trove of information.
(And while I’m going on about this, the reason I trust Pew over many other sources is because they’re a division of the Pew Charitable Trusts, and I know that name because of the trusts’ frequent sponsorship of public television and public radio programs. They’re non-partisan, but if anything they might lean a bit to the left, so if they come up with data the runs counter to certain narratives, I tend to give it credence.)
1 Like
Markdown uses number signs for different H1 to H4 headerness.
1 Like
and the cops, don’t forget the cops. How many folks have cops shot this year?
2 Likes
Aren’t these the same people that said gay marriage would never happen?
Don’t underestimate the ability of a cultural movement to change the opinion of large swathes of people. Continuing spree killings of children and students, month after month, might very well be that trigger.
A decade or two, it would have been politically impossible for a president to repeatedly stand in front of all America and give a speech about how we had to do something to stop gun violence and acknowledge our continuing lack of political will to do the right thing.
5 Likes
the nvdrs is not the full 50, it collects from 32 states in such a way as to not be statistically representative for the full 50 states so that it won’t be in violation of the ban on firearm studies. the information from that source is suggestive but not conclusive because of statutory requirements.
I was quite surprised to see that there were US Deaths every year from Terrorism? This side of the pond I only hear about the big ones, like the Boston Marathon.
Maybe they’re including (as they should) white supremacist terrorism.
8 Likes
The blocking of funding was a response to the data collected resulting in studies presenting facts that the gun industry disliked, so they shot the messenger. While there is be some risk of bias, the idea that the organization that’s designed to research public health is banned from researching a leading cause of death, or that that organization would be as biased as the NRA is simply ludicrous. CDC researchers certainly have their biases, but they don’t have a carte blanche to lie and drive emotion-driven fact free propaganda like the NRA, since the CDC does empirical research and empirical data would be part of any studies. Deliberately and preventing reliable empirical data and analysis from being gathered by the CDC serves only ignorance and there is no excuse.
4 Likes
Sure, there’s no completely reliable hard data, but the data that’s been gathered shows the obvious correlations:
PEW data on gun ownership:
PEW data on homicides:
Using homicide data rather than gun violence data is cherry-picking, since gun violence is not limited to homicides, improved medical treatment has decreased deaths from gun injuries, and suicides are actually relevant, but even using that data, the correlations are still there (still just correlation, not evidence of causation).
2 Likes
I’ve given up talking to pro-gun people. Whenever I say that I want reasonable gun control, they start attacking me or using meme’s to say I’m stupid (you know the ones that show Sam Elliot most of the time). If they want a Wild West type of country, fine. Just don’t count on me staying around.
3 Likes
To quote Michael Moore/Bowling for Columbine: “Are we a nation of gun nuts or are we just nuts?”
4 Likes
I wish it was like that, from what I’ve seen it’s usually more:
D: we need stricter gun laws
R: our current gun laws are literally fascism, the real problem is that everyone isn’t packing heat.
12 Likes
Gee its almost like half the political landscape turning into lunatics who want the world to be a John Wayne movie have prevented the enforcement of gun laws.
2 Likes
I am not a statistician, but I do have a heavy science background, much of which has been about piles of data. this reminds me of the pitbull study. The CDC published a study showing no relationship between fatal dog attacks and particular breeds. The CDC is a very reputable organization, and one would tend to rely on their studies. But the telling thing, is that the study was political nonsense. Raw information on fatal dog attacks show overwhelmingly that fatal dog attacks are almost always pit bulls or related breeds. The authors were all very active pit bull advocates, with strong published views on the issue both before and after the publication of the study. This was not disclosed in the CDC report. When the issue of the study being flawed started to come up, The authors started a bunch of websites offering supposed nonbiased analysis of the issue, but really reinforcing it’s biases. Now I personally have no stake in the pit bull issue. I have never owned one, never known anyone attacked by one, and do not care it you have one. I just think it is an interesting example of what can happen when someone who is extremely biased on an issue starts to use studies and data to further their political goals. And I am not going to debate dogs on this forum. I just bring up the report as an example of how flawed and biased some studies can be.
3 Likes
Derailing slightly, why is there a Chris Rock copyright notice on a John Oliver quote?
3 Likes
Gun homicide is not the same as mass murder…
2 Likes
I’m a Deep Space 9 man, myself
19 Likes
