statistical proof

PONTIACDM · 03-07-2008, 08:47 PM

A friend of mine, who supports gun rights, but has little interest in guns themselves has been having a hard time with a pro-gun banning liberal. The guy has info out the yin yang on why they should and how much safer this and that, you know the story. All of his sources are supposedly "unbiased" yet anything we bring up is right wing opinion.

here are some examples:
Q&A: Gun Violence in the United States
Deltoid: Kennesaw gun ordinance, yet again
Urban Legends Reference Pages: Australian Guns Stats

If any of these are left wing sites, by all means let me know. also here are some of his quotes.

"The level of denial that some people are in is amazing. You are wrong. Period. Study after study shows that when you ban weapons at the national level, criminals DONT GET THEM. Nations with many classes of guns made illegal show large reductions in gun related crimes. This is not disputable. "

"Also, the rules of statistics are not debatable. The nice thing about math is that one doesnt get to debate the rules or the correctness of the match itself. What the pro gun people did with the statistics is undeniably not a fair treatment of the data."

"Here we see something classic. People repeatedly ignoring FACTS because they dont fit into their preconceived desires. I spent time showing studies and looking up facts and wrote it above, but that doesnt matter. You can easily disprove these things with a simple google search, but that doesnt matter. It doesnt matter what reality says, it just matters what they want. A very disturbing, but common, phenomenon."

Is there a link someone has to undisputed, unbiased statistical fact that gun control doesn't work like liberals would like?

Thanks.

bigbuddy21 · 03-07-2008, 09:33 PM

the first two are liberal left wing sites. the third is pretty good

GlockMeister · 03-07-2008, 09:50 PM

Oh yea, the first one drfinately is, that's good ole' Mayor Bloombergs' sorry butts site. You know, they Mayor of NY.

The second site, I've never heard of so if Big Buddy says it is, then unless I hear otherwise, I'll have to say he's right.

As for the last site, I believe it's just one of those urban legend websites. It being left wing or anti-gun is solely based on who runs and operates it. Generally, if that person is, their site is.

TXplt · 03-07-2008, 09:54 PM

NRA-ILA :: Fact Sheets

If you select on the bottom of the page for topic, you can find statistical and fact sheets.

No matter what the source, you always need to question dogmatic statements like "irrefutable" or "incontrovertable" or "clearly" or "indisputably" etc. These statements are a form of academic browbeating designed to make you feel stupid for questioning the sources' credibility (or usually lack thereof). Statistics of any form can easily be slanted. For example, if you stated that 90% of crime victims knew their attackers this doesn't mean much -- a woman could have had a quick conversation at a bar with someone and been attacked in the parking lot later in the evening. Technically, she "knew" her attacker (although not very long or very well). Likewise, responses to surveys can be skewed (on all sides) by HOW you ask the question (i.e "should everyone have access to quality health care" -- most would say yes -- however, this could imply government sponsored health care with you picking up the tab when the survey group prepares the report).

Good luck !

ArkansasHunter · 03-08-2008, 01:40 PM

This was Interesting Thanks feller.
This is so stupid...Question: Some gun-rights supporters have argued that increasing access to guns reduces crimes. Is there any scientific basis for this theory?
Answer: On average, guns in homes and communities make those places more dangerous, not safer. Research conducted at Harvard University indicates that states with a higher prevalence of gun ownership have more gun-related deaths. Numerous studies have shown that homes with guns are more likely to experience a suicide of a household member than homes without guns. And a recent National Academy of Sciences report concludes that there is no convincing evidence that laws making it easier to carry concealed weapons in public have reduced violent crime.

I don't beleive this for one minute...A.H

AKHunter · 03-08-2008, 02:21 PM

Wow,
"Also, the rules of statistics are not debatable. The nice thing about math is that one doesnt get to debate the rules or the correctness of the match itself. What the pro gun people did with the statistics is undeniably not a fair treatment of the data."

What a contradiction.
So the way I read that is if your anti-gun rights the math is absolute and irrefutable but, if your pro-gun rights then you can't help but distort the (absolute and irrefutable) to suit your needs.

I need to go soak my aching head !

TXplt · 03-08-2008, 03:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AKHunter

What a contradiction.
So the way I read that is if your anti-gun rights the math is absolute and irrefutable but, if your pro-gun rights then you can't help but distort the (absolute and irrefutable) to suit your needs.

I need to go soak my aching head !

Yeah, this type of behavior is typical of neo-intellectuals who are losing their argument. Just like in Japan where the first one to begin raising their voice is losing the argument, so thus are people who claim "irrefutable" or "cannot be questioned" -- as if we are gullable enough to trust their smoke and mirrors.

Common sense sometimes ain't so common !

PONTIACDM · 03-09-2008, 12:33 AM

You guys are awesome!!!LOL

billy · 03-09-2008, 12:50 AM

statistics just get in the way of the TRUTH!
J.F.K.. M.MONROE, ALIEN ANAL PROBES
they all go together

kygunsmith · 03-09-2008, 01:59 AM

Statistics are easily used by propagandists to present a certain view.
I believe a guy named Lott? did some valid statistical studies related to guns and crime much touted by the NRA. What made his stats special is that they cannot be disputed as they can be easily replicated. Much to the chagrin of the left. All they can do now is attack the researcher. Was his study funded by a neo-con ?

03-07-2008, 08:47 PM	#1
PONTIACDM Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: OHIO Posts: 618	statistical proof A friend of mine, who supports gun rights, but has little interest in guns themselves has been having a hard time with a pro-gun banning liberal. The guy has info out the yin yang on why they should and how much safer this and that, you know the story. All of his sources are supposedly "unbiased" yet anything we bring up is right wing opinion. here are some examples: Q&A: Gun Violence in the United States Deltoid: Kennesaw gun ordinance, yet again Urban Legends Reference Pages: Australian Guns Stats If any of these are left wing sites, by all means let me know. also here are some of his quotes. "The level of denial that some people are in is amazing. You are wrong. Period. Study after study shows that when you ban weapons at the national level, criminals DONT GET THEM. Nations with many classes of guns made illegal show large reductions in gun related crimes. This is not disputable. " "Also, the rules of statistics are not debatable. The nice thing about math is that one doesnt get to debate the rules or the correctness of the match itself. What the pro gun people did with the statistics is undeniably not a fair treatment of the data." "Here we see something classic. People repeatedly ignoring FACTS because they dont fit into their preconceived desires. I spent time showing studies and looking up facts and wrote it above, but that doesnt matter. You can easily disprove these things with a simple google search, but that doesnt matter. It doesnt matter what reality says, it just matters what they want. A very disturbing, but common, phenomenon." Is there a link someone has to undisputed, unbiased statistical fact that gun control doesn't work like liberals would like? Thanks.

03-07-2008, 09:33 PM	#2
bigbuddy21 Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: new albany in. Posts: 974 Images: 5	the first two are liberal left wing sites. the third is pretty good __________________ LAND OF THE FREE BECAUSE OF THE BRAVE!

03-07-2008, 09:50 PM	#3
GlockMeister Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Northern Illinois Posts: 5,493	Oh yea, the first one drfinately is, that's good ole' Mayor Bloombergs' sorry butts site. You know, they Mayor of NY. The second site, I've never heard of so if Big Buddy says it is, then unless I hear otherwise, I'll have to say he's right. As for the last site, I believe it's just one of those urban legend websites. It being left wing or anti-gun is solely based on who runs and operates it. Generally, if that person is, their site is. __________________ I'd rather be tried by 12 than carried by 6!

03-07-2008, 09:54 PM	#4
TXplt Lost in the Ozone Again Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Fort Worth, TX Posts: 2,832 Images: 4 Blog Entries: 2	NRA-ILA :: Fact Sheets If you select on the bottom of the page for topic, you can find statistical and fact sheets. No matter what the source, you always need to question dogmatic statements like "irrefutable" or "incontrovertable" or "clearly" or "indisputably" etc. These statements are a form of academic browbeating designed to make you feel stupid for questioning the sources' credibility (or usually lack thereof). Statistics of any form can easily be slanted. For example, if you stated that 90% of crime victims knew their attackers this doesn't mean much -- a woman could have had a quick conversation at a bar with someone and been attacked in the parking lot later in the evening. Technically, she "knew" her attacker (although not very long or very well). Likewise, responses to surveys can be skewed (on all sides) by HOW you ask the question (i.e "should everyone have access to quality health care" -- most would say yes -- however, this could imply government sponsored health care with you picking up the tab when the survey group prepares the report). Good luck ! Last edited by TXplt; 03-07-2008 at 09:57 PM.

03-08-2008, 01:40 PM	#5
ArkansasHunter Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: South Arkansas Posts: 10,709	This was Interesting Thanks feller. This is so stupid...Question: Some gun-rights supporters have argued that increasing access to guns reduces crimes. Is there any scientific basis for this theory? Answer: On average, guns in homes and communities make those places more dangerous, not safer. Research conducted at Harvard University indicates that states with a higher prevalence of gun ownership have more gun-related deaths. Numerous studies have shown that homes with guns are more likely to experience a suicide of a household member than homes without guns. And a recent National Academy of Sciences report concludes that there is no convincing evidence that laws making it easier to carry concealed weapons in public have reduced violent crime. I don't beleive this for one minute...A.H Last edited by ArkansasHunter; 03-08-2008 at 01:47 PM.

03-08-2008, 02:21 PM	#6
AKHunter Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Alaska Posts: 899	Wow, "Also, the rules of statistics are not debatable. The nice thing about math is that one doesnt get to debate the rules or the correctness of the match itself. What the pro gun people did with the statistics is undeniably not a fair treatment of the data." What a contradiction. So the way I read that is if your anti-gun rights the math is absolute and irrefutable but, if your pro-gun rights then you can't help but distort the (absolute and irrefutable) to suit your needs. I need to go soak my aching head !

03-09-2008, 12:33 AM	#8
PONTIACDM Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: OHIO Posts: 618	You guys are awesome!!!LOL

03-09-2008, 12:50 AM	#9
billy spiritual counselor Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: a secret lab on the shores of lake titicaca Posts: 12,157 Images: 9 Blog Entries: 146	statistics just get in the way of the TRUTH! J.F.K.. M.MONROE, ALIEN ANAL PROBES they all go together __________________

03-09-2008, 01:59 AM	#10
kygunsmith Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Kentucky Posts: 144	Statistics are easily used by propagandists to present a certain view. I believe a guy named Lott? did some valid statistical studies related to guns and crime much touted by the NRA. What made his stats special is that they cannot be disputed as they can be easily replicated. Much to the chagrin of the left. All they can do now is attack the researcher. Was his study funded by a neo-con ?