You can enjoy a quick video instead, of this and related blog articles . And most recent ideas here & here. Shared by Bloomberg and other media. Joining 150 thousand Statistical Ideas blog followers is easy to do, through e-mail, @salilstatistics, facebook, LinkedIn.
It’s so obvious, yet we have become so debilitated with political paranoia that only ¾ of people will concede that a gun is even involved in a gun-homicide! One tactlessly uncomfortable week, after the record mass-shooting in Las Vegas. 58 innocent Americans indiscriminately mowed down; 23 of his 47 rifles found in the Mandalay Bay suite. Yet some insist guns generally have nothing to do with anything. Nothing here. The more guns floating around, the better. And especially the concert goers; they should have done something. Or listen to the advice of candidate Donald Trump after the then-worst mass shooting in American history. This is not great. For the sake of the actual risks at hand, to innocent civilians all over this country (in every demographic, socio-economic status, political ideology, in every major city, and in all 50 states), we show a set of critical data here, all from official government and peer-reviewed sources. Remember, dozens are so expediently gunned down day after day, after day.
Only exceptionally bad things happened to real people when the NRA blocks assault rifle bans
>20 guns typically jammed into any gun-owning New York household. Hey, how many did Stephen Paddock have again?
1 in 12 child deaths is from gun-homicide. 1 in 11 gun murders is of an innocent child: >1 in 7 of these are also an accident of a legal gun owner. But who needs math...
What’s the more brave plan to reduce the number of all these gun murders? More bump stock? Even less regulation? How about having it at the same level you insist every foreigner applying for a travel visa to the U.S. gets? Or maybe you can kindly ask the families of the 58 victims of last week's Vegas massacre, or about the same number of victims every single day. All over the country.
It’s so obvious, yet we have become so debilitated with political paranoia that only ¾ of people will concede that a gun is even involved in a gun-homicide! One tactlessly uncomfortable week, after the record mass-shooting in Las Vegas. 58 innocent Americans indiscriminately mowed down; 23 of his 47 rifles found in the Mandalay Bay suite. Yet some insist guns generally have nothing to do with anything. Nothing here. The more guns floating around, the better. And especially the concert goers; they should have done something. Or listen to the advice of candidate Donald Trump after the then-worst mass shooting in American history. This is not great. For the sake of the actual risks at hand, to innocent civilians all over this country (in every demographic, socio-economic status, political ideology, in every major city, and in all 50 states), we show a set of critical data here, all from official government and peer-reviewed sources. Remember, dozens are so expediently gunned down day after day, after day.
Only exceptionally bad things happened to real people when the NRA blocks assault rifle bans
Overall homicide rate is higher in states with higher gun
ownership
>20 guns typically jammed into any gun-owning New York household. Hey, how many did Stephen Paddock have again?
1 in 12 child deaths is from gun-homicide. 1 in 11 gun murders is of an innocent child: >1 in 7 of these are also an accident of a legal gun owner. But who needs math...
What’s the more brave plan to reduce the number of all these gun murders? More bump stock? Even less regulation? How about having it at the same level you insist every foreigner applying for a travel visa to the U.S. gets? Or maybe you can kindly ask the families of the 58 victims of last week's Vegas massacre, or about the same number of victims every single day. All over the country.
While I agree that bump stocks should be an easy sell, ongoing attempts to disarm the world will meet with failure, since it will not happen. However, from a statistical standpoint- "some common sense gun laws" are anything but. I found an interesting article regarding another statisticians views about this, who realized, as i did, that these "simple solutions" would in actuality do nothing to change the situation. By Leah Libresco:
ReplyDeletehttps://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/i-used-to-think-gun-control-was-the-answer-my-research-told-me-otherwise/2017/10/03/d33edca6-a851-11e7-92d1-58c702d2d975_story.html?utm_term=.00e88bc1c31b
Please review and offer your thoughts, as there appears to be a slight difference of opinion.
Hi Barry Newman, thanks just now looked into Leah's Washington Post op-ed along with other media making the rounds. For those unaware, Leah is a recent policy graduate who used to work at 538. In any case, these are obviously highly complicated set of tens of thousands of individually unique cases, and her mathematical approach is broadly different and multiple somewhat defective circular logic. She's including things like suicides in her sample, which taints >60% of her sample. Also no statistical reasoning for her strong interest in limiting "sub-types" of people and NOT types of weapons, while jointly stating these same sub-types would anyway steal their desired weapons if we don't restrict them.
DeleteFeel free to take this poll: https://twitter.com/salilstatistics/status/917174491553452032
Could you please cite the source of your data? I didn't see it in the graphs/article.
ReplyDeleteHello, and thanks for writing in! Have tried to note throughout here and on other social media that these are all official government sources, and personally modeled off such. Some of the data and images are also copied directly from the source as well, and so that attribution is directly in the image.
Delete