Gun Control & RKBA

Kang Colby

(1,941 posts)

5. Nonsense.

Wed Oct 14, 2015, 08:27 PM

Oct 2015

The article repeatedly cites David Hemenway who refers to gun owners as "wusses" along with few other academic achievements. This guy's entire academic career has been devoted to gun control advocacy. That's all OK with me, yet he refuses to acknowledge countless DGUs where injury or death did not occur, thus under representing the benefit of gun ownership for self defense purposes in the net benefit equation. Why would he purposefully underrepresent the benefits...oh because he has devoted his career to the belief that "guns suck".

The other studies have issues with reverse causality, e.g. people who plan to commit suicide or domestic violence go out and buy a gun. Reverse causality positively skews the association with gun ownership and death. People don't care about blips in positive correlation within the entire population, they want to know what is their risk. Due to the number of variables it is not possible with the methodology commonly used in these "studies" to adequately assess whether access to a gun increases the risk of death at the individual level. This is even more complicated when you attempt to factor in the benefit of gun ownership in terms of DGUs.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

37 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Buying a gun for protection is usually for the mathmatically challenged [View all] Quixote1818 Oct 2015 OP

Given the astronomical amounts that are wagered each year, guillaumeb Oct 2015 #1

Owned by frightened citizens? GGJohn Oct 2015 #6

I did not say every gun owner. guillaumeb Oct 2015 #7

Maybe he just read your comment here and extrapolated from that. stone space Oct 2015 #20

If you are going to use statistics, Snobblevitch Oct 2015 #2

however, the writer fails to cite the gejohnston Oct 2015 #3

K&R libodem Oct 2015 #4

Nonsense. Kang Colby Oct 2015 #5

And what of the studies that show that households with guns guillaumeb Oct 2015 #8

you mean studies that show that there are more gejohnston Oct 2015 #9

First, we should combine these two posts and save time. guillaumeb Oct 2015 #10

So "eliminating the object" is your goal? virginia mountainman Oct 2015 #11

It's never about saving lives, y'notice that? It's always a gun-boner. Like they have a fetish... nt Decoy of Fenris Oct 2015 #12

My goal, and it should be the goal of everybody, guillaumeb Oct 2015 #13

That is my goal as well.. virginia mountainman Oct 2015 #14

The obvious follow up question is: guillaumeb Oct 2015 #15

out of the 30K gejohnston Oct 2015 #18

From the CDC guillaumeb Oct 2015 #29

I used last years FBI figures gejohnston Oct 2015 #31

Understood on the numbers. Agreed on "progress". guillaumeb Oct 2015 #32

So anything that kills 30,000 people annually is open? Nuclear Unicorn Oct 2015 #25

there are two sides of the ledger gejohnston Oct 2015 #17

Simple solution that ignores complexity of overall issue beardown Oct 2015 #24

Your post was thoughtful and not at all insulting. guillaumeb Oct 2015 #30

Yes. beardown Oct 2015 #35

Agreed. And like the DUI example, a nice analogy by the way, guillaumeb Oct 2015 #36

It's complicated, bro. Kang Colby Oct 2015 #16

Please see responses 35 and 36. eom guillaumeb Oct 2015 #37

Odds. Straw Man Oct 2015 #19

Thanks anyway, I trust myself more than your stats. ileus Oct 2015 #21

...Hemenway... discntnt_irny_srcsm Oct 2015 #22

Probability and Stats sure takes the mystery out of gambling beardown Oct 2015 #23

What about gamblers who can count the cards in a shoe? Nuclear Unicorn Oct 2015 #26

I didn't read the rest of the post beyond the title.. But really??? darkangel218 Oct 2015 #27

I actually won't trash this thread. darkangel218 Oct 2015 #28

It is an unfortunate that some "liberals" use a presumed intellectual prowess... Eleanors38 Oct 2015 #33

Yes. I've always found it strange ... Straw Man Oct 2015 #34