Guns in America

  • RyuJin
  • Offline
  • Master
  • Master
    Registered
  • The Path of Ignorance is Paved with Fear
More
8 years 5 months ago #205106 by RyuJin
Replied by RyuJin on topic Guns in America
the biggest problem with statistics is that 99% of the time they are !00% right, and the other 1% of the time they are 50-50%....unless you find them on the internet, then they are NEVER wrong :silly:

Warning: Spoiler!

Quotes:
Warning: Spoiler!

J.L.Lawson,Master Knight, M.div, Eastern Studies S.I.G. Advisor (Formerly Known as the Buddhist Rite)
Former Masters: GM Kana Seiko Haruki , Br.John
Current Apprentices: Baru
Former Apprentices:Adhara(knight), Zenchi (knight)
The following user(s) said Thank You: Alethea Thompson

Please Log in to join the conversation.

  • Visitor
  • Visitor
    Public
8 years 5 months ago - 8 years 5 months ago #205200 by
Replied by on topic Guns in America

Alethea Thompson wrote: It suggests that these are the only two causes of death. Which is inaccurate. Heart disease only accounts for 19% of deaths in 2013 (2,596,993 was the number of recorded deaths in 2013). You are are at greater risk to die of literally anything than you are Heart Disease. Since only 11.3% of the adult population is diagnosed with heart disease, you are left with the conclusion that unless you are diagnosed with heart disease, you are IN FACT more likely to die from a car accident.


I do believe this is the primary disconnect we are experiencing in our discussion. Technically speaking ALL people are suspeptible to heart disease just like severe auto accidents. 11.3% of all people suffer from a heart disease episode in their lifetime. The other statistic needed to allow you to use statistics to "say" that your more likely to die of an auto accident is what percentage of people suffer a severe injury causing auto accident in their lifetime.

Essentially the hangup here is that you read "11.3% of people experience heart disease" and mis-read that as "only 11.3% of the population can or will experience heart disease" which is not the same thing. I think this also brings us to the point about making statistics state whatever you want. While I wouldn't agree that you can do any such thing, this case does demonstrate that you can structure a statistic in such a manner to improve the likelihood of people mis-interpreting the statistic. An example of this was when Jamie and Mad Hatter were discussing earlier in this thread arguing about statistics. Jamie posted a news source that claimed 900 victims, while Mad Hatter had a document demonstrating roughly 400 dead. The difference? The specific language of "victim" vs "dead", "victim" meaning possibly "injured AND killed persons."

The problem with statistics is that people look to them and think they are good. But they will believe whatever they want, because people will bend the stats to the picture they want to paint, rather than looking through the various stats themselves. When they do, they'll find a very different picture.

Do you really need to worry about dying in a car accident? Sure, if you aren't very good at driving, decide to drink and drive or are non-attentive to the drivers around you. But I think it is safe to say that when you look at the numbers of people in the US vs. the mortality rate, you don't have too much to worry about on average unless you're in a high risk job and/or do not make an honest effort take care of your body by giving it proper nutrition.


People often use statistics in ethics arguments, which means you are trying to blunt force logic through something that ultimately is anchored in a few set core emotions from which all else emanates. If someone for example is operating on the foundation principle that "violence of any sort is wrong" (a principle many Europeans feel for example) then demonstrating through numbers that guns are really such a minor factor effecting crime rates that you cannot prove their effect either way is a wasted gesture. They don't really care if removing guns will make things better or not, they "know" that "all violence is wrong" and therefore "people should not have access to tools of violence for any reason." In truth you can see that while we are discussing reasons constructed to support this foundation stance (accusing guns of causing violence) we are not resolving the core issue.

My main points with statistics in this thread was to lay em out there for the people who do not have completely incompatible foundations, but instead are on the anti gun side due to observational differences (believing guns cause violence problems, but not having a problem with self defense and "just" violence.)

RyuJin wrote: the biggest problem with statistics is that 99% of the time they are !00% right, and the other 1% of the time they are 50-50%....unless you find them on the internet, then they are NEVER wrong


"Science is never 100% accurate" -unknown researcher. We can't ever be 100% perfect but we can get pretty close.

I think the biggest problem with all this data is finding a credible peer reviewed researcher. The FBI is a good one, but I also remember pulling research out of my college's library on illegal immigrants and violence. The research showed that US Hispanic communities actually insulate themselves against trends towards violence (Hispanic communities in the US by and large are more safe than surrounding communities) but of course most everyone in the conservative community which I unfortunately belong to stated "I would contest that data." Such an infuriating stance of ignorance. I wanted to scream "Who the fuck are you to contest a university peer reviewed study done by professionals? Are you a researcher? Nope? Do you have a doctorate? What are you basing your opinion on!!!@!!??!!"

While science can never be 100% accurate, this tendency to choose to side with your feelings over patent proven fact is just absolutely infuriating.... And before you point a finger at me, I had at one point had to admit that banning guns does not cause spikes in criminality and violence because the data didn't support it.
Last edit: 8 years 5 months ago by .

Please Log in to join the conversation.

Moderators: ZerokevlarVerheilenChaotishRabeRiniTavi