| Twin Cities Carry Forum Archive http://www.twincitiescarry.com/forum/ |
|
| Oh jeez, here we go again... http://www.twincitiescarry.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=24&t=14297 |
Page 1 of 2 |
| Author: | 3Crowns [ Mon Oct 05, 2009 2:08 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Oh jeez, here we go again... |
Quote: In a first-of its-kind study, epidemiologists at the University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine found that, on average, guns did not protect those who possessed them from being shot in an assault. The study estimated that people with a gun were 4.5 times more likely to be shot in an assault than those not possessing a gun. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20 ... 121512.htm  Quick without google..What is epidemiologist? 
|
|
| Author: | Scott Hughes [ Mon Oct 05, 2009 2:22 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Oh jeez, here we go again... |
pfft; Philadelphia  pfft...... 
|
|
| Author: | jdege [ Mon Oct 05, 2009 2:23 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Oh jeez, here we go again... |
3Crowns wrote: Quick without google..What is epidemiologist? Someone who's expertise is in things other than inanimate objects. |
|
| Author: | DeanC [ Mon Oct 05, 2009 2:33 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Oh jeez, here we go again... |
3Crowns wrote: What is epidemiologist? The same people who invented the swine flu. |
|
| Author: | Rodentman [ Mon Oct 05, 2009 3:00 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Oh jeez, here we go again... |
I had my family Dr convinced that an Entomologist was an ear, nose, and throat Dr. |
|
| Author: | larryflew [ Mon Oct 05, 2009 3:30 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Oh jeez, here we go again... |
gotta love those dartboard studies. 6% of those involved had a gun and then never explains anything. then: "To identify the controls, trained phone canvassers called random Philadelphians soon after a reported shooting and asked about their possession of a gun at the time of the shooting. These random Philadelphians had not been shot and had nothing to do with the shooting." and that means just what is says they didn't have anything to do with the shooting AND they didn't get shot - good for them ????? really need more places to spend that excess tax money!!!!!!!!! You just can't have enough head banging against the wall for this one.
|
|
| Author: | mmcnx2 [ Mon Oct 05, 2009 3:49 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Oh jeez, here we go again... |
I've got a math minor and I did not have to work to hard to understand they are making these statement based on about 40-41 cases 6% of the 677 cases. Now the tricky part is to determine if that sample is statistically representitive of the population. Again you don't need alot of 'trig' to determine based on the almost 2 million violent crimes committed each year that 41 or even the 677 cases is not a vaild sample. Just once I which these idiots would do the math before they make half brained statements. |
|
| Author: | AGoodDay [ Mon Oct 05, 2009 4:03 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Oh jeez, here we go again... |
Dang it. I can't get a copy of the article without paying for it. Have to wait a couple months before I can. I was curious, and entertained, so I emailed it to my statistics professor for entertainment value and to see if I'm missing something in here. |
|
| Author: | 3Crowns [ Mon Oct 05, 2009 4:08 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Oh jeez, here we go again... |
jdege wrote: 3Crowns wrote: Quick without google..What is epidemiologist? Someone who's expertise is in things other than inanimate objects. haha after I read the article I was like "wait, what? Why is the University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine doing studies about firearms? Maybe they are 4 times as likely to shoot eachother because they dont keep their finger off the trigger... 
|
|
| Author: | AGoodDay [ Mon Oct 05, 2009 4:16 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Oh jeez, here we go again... |
mmcnx2 wrote: I've got a math minor and I did not have to work to hard to understand they are making these statement based on about 40-41 cases 6% of the 677 cases. Now the tricky part is to determine if that sample is statistically representitive of the population. Again you don't need alot of 'trig' to determine based on the almost 2 million violent crimes committed each year that 41 or even the 677 cases is not a vaild sample. Just once I which these idiots would do the math before they make half brained statements. 40 cases is the minimum number considered to produce a statistically significant sample, depending on what shape the results take. The size of the sample after that doesn't really matter except in reducing the margin of error or increasing the confidence level, and size in relation to the population doesn't matter. Now, this is just someone who is taking statistics repeating what I've been taught, so take it for what you paid for it. I paid more for it, so it's worth more to me, but nobody cares but me about that. |
|
| Author: | kimberman [ Mon Oct 05, 2009 6:48 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Philidelphia study disembowled. |
The long disgraced "Kellerman" model "study" applied ham-handedly to shootings rather than murders. Same predictible result, same faults, and the same JUNK SCIENCE. A classic example the truth of the statement that "statistics don't lie but statisticians do." http://volokh.com/2009/10/05/guns-did-n ... n-assault/ |
|
| Author: | Andrew Rothman [ Mon Oct 05, 2009 6:48 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Oh jeez, here we go again... |
I'll see a copy of the complete study tomorrow. |
|
| Author: | Traveler [ Mon Oct 05, 2009 8:30 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Oh jeez, here we go again... |
Why don't these researchers just come out and say definitively that they would like everyone that is confronted with a firearm to just stand there and be shot? It would be very enlightening to just have them state that there is no right to self-defense. All overt illegal actions may not be stopped, stymied, or thwarted. |
|
| Author: | chunkstyle [ Mon Oct 05, 2009 9:10 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Oh jeez, here we go again... |
Quote: 40 cases is the minimum number considered to produce a statistically significant sample, depending on what shape the results take. The size of the sample after that doesn't really matter except in reducing the margin of error or increasing the confidence level, and size in relation to the population doesn't matter. But that assumes no errors in sample selection, and more significantly, no bias in sample selection deliberately induced to skew results to a desired end. This is when science becomes propaganda. |
|
| Author: | Selurcspi [ Tue Oct 06, 2009 7:10 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Oh jeez, here we go again... |
Rodentman wrote: I had my family Dr convinced that an Entomologist was an ear, nose, and throat Dr. If I were you I'd dump this Dr. he obviously didn't go to medical school where the meaning of the composit parts of "otorhinolaryngologist" are taught. |
|
| Page 1 of 2 | All times are UTC - 6 hours |
| Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|