The Cellar  

Go Back   The Cellar > Main > Current Events
FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Current Events Help understand the world by talking about things happening in it

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 08-27-2010, 09:53 AM   #1
Lamplighter
Person who doesn't update the user title
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Bottom lands of the Missoula floods
Posts: 6,402
Quote:
Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce View Post
England did away with guns and the stabbing rates skyrocketed. What's your point?
There are so many "points" in this link, but they almost always fall in the direction that guns do more harm than good, whether in
self-defense
spousal abuse
children killed by accident
suicide prevention
on and on...

37-39. Overestimates of self-defense gun use
We use epidemiological theory to explain why the "false positive" problem for rare events can lead to large overestimates of the incidence of rare diseases or rare phenomena such as self-defense gun use.We then try to validate the claims of many millions of annual self-defense uses against available evidence.
Major findings: The claim of many millions of annual self-defense gun uses by American citizens appears to be invalid.
Lamplighter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2010, 03:40 PM   #2
xoxoxoBruce
The future is unwritten
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 71,105
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lamplighter View Post
There are so many "points" in this link, but they almost always fall in the direction that guns do more harm than good, whether in
self-defense
spousal abuse
children killed by accident
suicide prevention
on and on...

37-39. Overestimates of self-defense gun use
We use epidemiological theory to explain why the "false positive" problem for rare events can lead to large overestimates of the incidence of rare diseases or rare phenomena such as self-defense gun use.We then try to validate the claims of many millions of annual self-defense uses against available evidence.
Major findings: The claim of many millions of annual self-defense gun uses by American citizens appears to be invalid.
Epidemiological theory to explain results they didn't want? There is no need for epidemiological theory when they know what the fuck they are talking about.
Harvard never asked me if I've used a gun to prevent a crime or bodily injury to myself. I've done both but how would they know? Police reports? The police only hear about it if someone gets shot. My roommate was robbed at gunpoint. He handed over his wallet, and when the perp turned and started to walk away my roommate pulled out his gun, took back his wallet, plus the perp's wallet and gun. No police involved. Harvard doesn't know.

How do they count the burglaries, robberies, or assaults that don't happen because the perps aren't sure if I'm armed or not?
__________________
The descent of man ~ Nixon, Friedman, Reagan, Trump.
xoxoxoBruce is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2010, 08:17 AM   #3
TheMercenary
“Hypocrisy: prejudice with a halo”
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Savannah, Georgia
Posts: 21,393
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lamplighter View Post
37-39. Overestimates of self-defense gun use
We use epidemiological theory to explain why the "false positive" problem for rare events can lead to large overestimates of the incidence of rare diseases or rare phenomena such as self-defense gun use.We then try to validate the claims of many millions of annual self-defense uses against available evidence.
Major findings: The claim of many millions of annual self-defense gun uses by American citizens appears to be invalid.
Where in the world did you get that? You believe this? The claims by Gun Grabbers are equally invalid.
__________________
Anyone but the this most fuked up President in History in 2012!
TheMercenary is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2010, 10:50 AM   #4
Lamplighter
Person who doesn't update the user title
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Bottom lands of the Missoula floods
Posts: 6,402
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheMercenary View Post
Where in the world did you get that? You believe this? The claims by Gun Grabbers are equally invalid.
earlier in this thread.
I just did not copy over the list of publications.

Yes, I am inclined to believe data published in peer-reviewed journals that publish their methods and data for others to evaluate.

I'm have not yet seen a basis for claiming these data from Harvard School of Public Health are invalid or biased.
Lamplighter is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:43 PM.


Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.