Guns are not the problem. | The Kill Pete Strategy | Page 2

fickle onyx Mar 30, 2024, 9:03 PM

#

which is the point of those laws

#

there's less gun murder, less gun suicide, less gun death overall which is what those laws set out to accomplish

#

I'm not talking about violent crime, or crime rates or anything like that because as far as I'm concerned when it comes to the gun regulation discussion those are mostly irrelevant

#

what I am talking about purely are gun related deaths

#

and in my opinion when it is harder to get guns less people die from them

#

if you want to make the argument that gun deaths are a necessary price for the freedom to bear arms unrestricted

#

that's a separate argument

#

or if you would rather argue that the ability to get guns isn't what is causing all the gun violence you could also argue that

#

or if you wanted to argue that there's not a strong correlation between violent crime and gun laws then you could

#

but if you want to argue that there's no correlation between gun regulations and gun related deaths I think that's much weaker arguement

#

just based upon the gun death rate to gun regulation ratio

dim rover Mar 31, 2024, 5:19 AM

#

Explain why that tiny sunset of unreliable data should be taken as more or less important than anything else. Because I'm not at all convinced that "gun homicide" is what we should be looking at. And that's not even what you posted from the CDC.

#

Additionally, you completely ignored my first point, which is an important point. Correlation does not equal causation.

#

Additionally, the data provided by the CDC is complete nonsense. They don't explain where the statistics come from at all. We have a lower suicide rate than Canada. Lower, not higher. But Americans often use firearms where Canadians jump in front of trains. Despite that, people still count suicides as firearm deaths, which is more than half the numbers. That's so incredibly dishonest. I genuinely don't understand how people can be so shallow, except that clearly they don't have good statistics to draw from, so they go with the most extreme ones they can create. The point is not to look at data and get a clear picture from it, the point is to mindlessly sift through data until you find a way of presenting it that fits your narrative.

fickle onyx Mar 31, 2024, 9:16 AM

#

I have seen 0 data produce by you

#

Your data is entirely anecdotal

fickle onyx Mar 31, 2024, 9:17 AM

#

dim rover Explain why that tiny sunset of unreliable data should be taken as more or less ...

And I think pretty obviously when talking about the gun issues in America we absolutely should be talking about guns elated deaths

#

Anything else is just not the problem we're addressing

#

Or at least I'm addressing

#

Because I don't think getting rid of guns would solve crime

#

And that's absolutely not the issue I'm trying to resolve

#

And please I yeah duh correlation isn't inherently causation, everyone should know that

#

But saying that

#

Isn't the same as debunking my argument

#

You're just saying it's not caused by that, explain why, give your reason as to why states with stricter gun laws have less gun related deaths

#

If the laws aren't the cause what is

#

I'm also a little convinced you didn't really take that close a look in claiming they don't even give their source for the data

#

They link their wonder database which if you then do further research into firearm mortality for those given years in the database can pretty easily find that they draw from state death certificates

#

Which I would argue are pretty reliable since the cdc is both a government organization and those are public knowledge

#

I mean not that it's any substitute for a source itself but even the Wikipedia article for gun related deaths in the United States cites the cdc database

#

I would argue that there's sufficient enough evidence to suggest it's a valid source for this data

#

Not entirely perfect, literally no data is, and you're not wrong to doubt the data I mean any person thinking critically should question sources

#

But I think that the cdc provides reasonable enough data

fickle onyx Mar 31, 2024, 9:34 AM

#

dim rover Explain why that tiny sunset of unreliable data should be taken as more or less ...

Oh yes and I do admit an error on my part, I said gun homicide several times (I think I watch too much true crime) what I meant was gun mortality.

#

And like I said in the argument of gun control I think that is the most relevant data to pool from

#

My problem with guns isn't anything other than people dying from them

#

The laws I support I don't support because I think they'll end crime or fix society or anything like that

#

There are people dying from guns, a high gun mortality rate, and I want that rate to lower via the state using its power to restrict access to guns

dim rover Mar 31, 2024, 1:30 PM

#

fickle onyx You're just saying it's not caused by that, explain why, give your reason as to ...

Okay, first off, it's not at all obvious that we should be looking at gun-related deaths, so if you could actually explain your reasoning for that, then I'd appreciate it.

Second, you say that correlation does not equal causation, but you're treating the two as the same.

Third, I already explained why the data from the CDC is poor. It includes things that make no sense to include, like suicide deaths. If police shoot a criminal, that adds to the statistics and is treated the exact same as if the criminal shoots an innocent victim. Does that make sense to you? There's no attempt at differentiating the circumstances.

Fourth, there are many, many states with extreme gun culture and lax gun laws that have lower rates of gun deaths than many states with very strict gun control. The CDC's measure of gun control laws is extremely subjective. If you see something that actually explains the reasoning behind their ratings, let me know, because I didn't see that on their website.

fickle onyx Mar 31, 2024, 4:21 PM

#

dim rover Okay, first off, it's not at all obvious that we should be looking at gun-relate...

Okay, first off, it's not at all obvious that we should be looking at gun-related deaths, so if you could actually explain your reasoning for that, then I'd appreciate it.

fair enough, my personal logic, and I've touched on it before, is the problem we are addressing in general when it comes to the question of gun control. That problem is people dying from guns, or otherwise known as gun-related mortality. That's people who die from gun-related suicide, or gun-related violent crime, or school shootings, or gun-related accidents, or any other death from a gun. That is the problem I am trying to address when discussing gun control. Crime is a major socioeconomic issue which can't easily be addressed by gun control, I do not think that there will be less overall crime with gun control laws, I don't think that's any sort of solution to just crime in general. Nor do I think that's any sort of solution to suicide in general, once again it's a very complex issue caused by our society and the state of an individual's mental health, I do not think we can solve the mental health crisis by banning guns. But I cannot emphasize this enough those are not the problems I want to solve. The problem I want to solve is the 48,830 people (approximately 16 September elevenths if we're keeping track) who die every year from gun-related incidents in the United States. This is why I think data measuring how many people die from gun-related incidents, is the most relevant data for tracking if a solution is viable. If you can't see the logic behind "I want fewer people to die from guns so tracking how many people die from guns is a good way of tracking if a given solution is working" then I don't know how to explain it any further.

#

Second, you say that correlation does not equal causation, but you're treating the two as the same.

to be clear "correlation does not equal causation" doesn't mean correlation can't equal causation. The old adage is supposed to make you think critically about how data appears because yes absolutely in truth correlation does not inherently equal causation. There are a lot of factors that lead to and given causation between any given two data sets. But, and I'm getting the impression that you're treating it this way, correlation doesn't automatically mean there's no causation. In fact, a strong correlation between two data sets is a great way of beginning to check if there is causation. For example, there's a correlation between the tilt of the earth and which seasons occur, we can note that when the earth tilts on its access certain areas experience certain seasons at the same time with an intense correlation, this isn't the end all be all of course scientists need to run experiments and write theories and all sorts of things I probably don't understand, but in the end the tilt of the earth does in fact cause the seasons, there is a causal relationship between those two factors, those two factors which correlate. Most importantly I can logically conclude that in the given data sets there is seemingly, and the word here is seemingly because I am no expert statistician nor am I the person which developed this data, but to me there is a seeming connection (and I know this is gonna sound crazy to you) between states where it's hard to get guns and less people dying from guns. In my opinion the connection between states with stricter gun regulations and less gun mortality is beyond mere correlation, in fact I believe there is reasonable data to think that there is a strong causation between the two relationships. I mean you can look at California which is sort of the prime example. Despite no large decrease in crime rates, I believe California remains the 6th in violent crime in the United States, there is a seeming drop in gun related deaths from violent crime. Less people are dying from guns during violent crime despite the fact that violent crime is still occurring. When you compare state with stricter gun regulations they also have proportionally fewer gun related deaths. I think these two factors are reason enough to believe in a causal relationship between these two factors. Most importantly you keep saying that there is no causation and then supplying next to no explanation of an alternative cause. You would rather spend time saying I'm wrong then building upon the basis for why you are right.

fickle onyx Mar 31, 2024, 4:47 PM

#

Third, I already explained why the data from the CDC is poor. It includes things that make no sense to include, like suicide deaths. If police shoot a criminal, that adds to the statistics and is treated the exact same as if the criminal shoots an innocent victim. Does that make sense to you? There's no attempt at differentiating the circumstances.

First off I agree to an extent that deaths from police guns are not very relevant to the data at hand. Although I certainly don't think the police should be going around and shooting people, gun regulations hardly affect that data set. I would argue that since the police don't kill nearly enough people to compare to the rest of the statistics for gun mortality we can reasonably leave that data out. Furthermore, I don't think gun regulations are the solution to police shooting people, I think police reform is, I don't think it relevant to measure the people who die from cops when considering the gun regulation argument because gun regulations will not solve that. So for the sake of all the data we can sort of just subtract any police shootings off. Say 48,830 died from guns in 2022 while 1,097 of those deaths were in police shootings we can just say that the real number we should be paying attention to is 47,733, which I think is still a statistically significant amount of deaths throughout the states and warrants examination. Most importantly if you take anything away police shootings account for such a small minority of those deaths across the board that I would say that they don't reflect negatively on the statistics overall. Now I saw you mention something like this earlier and you did now, you're discounting deaths from suicide in gun mortality, and to that, I don't understand why. People who kill themselves with guns are people who die from guns and therefore it is reasonable to include them in the argument for regulating guns in my opinion. I've said it before and I'll say it again, the problem I am trying to solve with gun regulations is not the problem of suicide, that's crazy, the problem I am trying to solve is people who kill themselves with guns. Guns are a common means for suicide and are to my understanding the most effective means of suicide, I think it completely reasonable to attempt to lessen people who kill themselves with guns by making it harder to get guns. To be clear I'm not saying we just don't solve the suicide crisis, we should absolutely take steps to better the mental health resources in the United States. That solution however does not involve gun regulations, with gun regulations I am simply trying to have fewer people die by guns, that is their purpose. Once again, the CDC data which draws from publicly available death certificates shows that there are fewer gun-related deaths including gun-related suicides in states with stricter gun regulations. More so while you are quick to dismiss my data you are not so quick to provide any data of your own, all of your evidence is entirely anecdotal, I only have your word to go off of. I can support us in critically examining any set of data, I think that is a good practice, and I do not blame you for trying to find holes in my data because that's what you should do, but none of your holes except for the police shootings are that reasonable. People who commit suicide with a gun are people who die from a gun. People who get shot by a criminal are people who die from a gun, people who get shot by their kid in an accident are people who die from a gun, people who die in shootings are people dying from a gun. Those are deaths these laws intend to curve. Any and all deaths by guns with exceptions for the police or say the army which aren't subject to the same regulations, are fair game in my opinion contributing to the gun mortality rate. It's not like people who kill themselves with guns are any less dead than the people who get shot.

fickle onyx Mar 31, 2024, 5:14 PM

#

Fourth, there are many, many states with extreme gun culture and lax gun laws that have lower rates of gun deaths than many states with very strict gun control. The CDC's measure of gun control laws is extremely subjective. If you see something that actually explains the reasoning behind their ratings, let me know, because I didn't see that on their website.
I'll treat this section backwards cause that'll just be easier for me. "The CDC's measure of gun control laws is extremely subjective. If you see something that actually explains the reasoning behind their ratings, let me know, because I didn't see that on their website." The CDC has no measure of gun control laws because that's not what that data is addressing, that data is purely based on gun mortality rates. I am inclined to believe you didn't actually click the CDC link at all because it says a lot that it's just mortality it never once claims to be data on gun regulations. The source I posted with the relevant gun regulations is from wisevoter which compares gun regulations by state to the CDC data. But the CDC has nothing to say about gun regulations in that data set. To address the Wisevoter data on what qualifies gun regulation I will actually concede that the source is sort of poorly marked. They don't have any citations at the end so it is a tad more difficult to assume where they gathered that data. However, if you look through that entire article on many of the states they go into the justification behind their rankings of gun laws. They state many times throughout the article that the rankings are based on Gifford's gun law scorecard, which is in reference to Gifford Law Center which through legal review annually evaluates gun regulations by state and ranks them using a scorecard.
https://giffords.org/lawcenter/resources/scorecard/?scorecard=CA here's a link in case you're curious
In the website for the scorecard they go much more in depth into the actual regulations which inspire the ranking. The website is actually sort of really cool because you can click the scorecard for any given state and view their gun legislation in an easy-to-read format, which I as a person who is not a lawyer, appreciate. However, entirely in your defense, the wisevoter source I provided did not link to this website at all only referencing it and so it would require you to do a little more research yourself and look it up. That is an error on my part I should have paid more attention to the citations for the website.
"Fourth, there are many, many states with extreme gun culture and lax gun laws that have lower rates of gun deaths than many states with very strict gun control."
I sincerely doubt this claim, my research has led me to find the opposite. Of course you have entirely dismissed the CDC data which I think is unreasonable as it is a government entity accessing public records with a transparent interface and a database in which you can personally request access to view their data, and most sources you'll find on the web including big ones like Wikipedia cite. If we don't dismiss the CDC data entirely for the sake of argument, then there's clearly a lower rate of death in states with more regulations like California (9 per 100k) than Texas (15.6) a state I'm sure you would agree has a larger gun culture and fewer regulations. We can even compare it to a more extreme example of say Mississippi, the state with the highest gun mortality rate (33.9) and which has the fewest gun regulations, although since I have spent very little time in that state myself I couldn't tell you personally if it has a big gun culture or not. I have no clue how you have come to the conclusion that states with fewer regulations have a lower gun mortality rates when the data I found so clearly shows they do not.

Giffords

Mike Garrett

GIFFORDS Law Center's Annual Gun Law Scorecard

Every year, we rank and grade state gun laws. And every year, we come to the same conclusion: states with strong gun laws have fewer gun deaths.

#

and most importantly of all

#

although I have supplied sources for most of my data you have not

#

your sources are entirely anecdotal based on your own word

#

which if I'm being honest I won't take as an expert opinion

#

show me the sources and statistics you used to come to the conclusions you have and this debate can continue, I can look into the validity and rebuke or maybe even change my mind if your sources are untouchable.

#

but until then "actually you're wrong because I say so" is not a great argument

#

oh and just to be above the board here's where I got my data for various miscellaneous claims:

crystal oasis Mar 31, 2024, 5:24 PM

#

Rates of firearm homicides among high-income countries with populations over 10 million, 2021. Age-adjusted firearm homicide rates in the US are 19 times greater than they are in France, and 77 times greater than in Germany. The US has 33 times the rate of firearm homicide seen in Australia.

The institute found that in 2019, 5.6 people per 100,000 were killed in the U.S. compared with 0.9 in the EU. In other words, the overall homicide rate in the U.S. was 6.2 times higher than the EU.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://www.healthdata.org/news-events/insights-blog/acting-data/gun-violence-united-states-outlier%23:~:text%3DUS%2520ranks%2520first.-,Rates%2520of%2520firearm%2520homicides%2520among%2520high%252Dincome%2520countries,populations%2520over%252010%2520million%252C%25202021%26text%3DAge%252Dadjusted%2520firearm%2520homicide%2520rates%2520in%2520the%2520US%2520are%252019,firearm%2520homicide%2520seen%2520in%2520Australia.&ved=2ahUKEwiI5IGLgZ-FAxX82QIHHSxXBRMQFnoECA0QBQ&usg=AOvVaw2kPlfiVpavSMlVBGfaP1pU
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://www.wral.com/story/fact-check-is-gun-violence-23-times-higher-in-the-u-s-than-the-eu/20665571/%23:~:text%3DThe%2520institute%2520found%2520that%2520in,times%2520higher%2520than%2520the%2520EU.&ved=2ahUKEwiI5IGLgZ-FAxX82QIHHSxXBRMQFnoECA8QBQ&usg=AOvVaw2gny1wIotZeRn4nmFKo1Tw

#

Seems to be a correlation

fickle onyx Mar 31, 2024, 5:30 PM

#

The problem I want to solve is the 48,830 people (approximately 16 September elevenths if we're keeping track) who die every year from gun-related incidents in the United States
https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/04/26/what-the-data-says-about-gun-deaths-in-the-u-s/
I was admittedly misleading with this one, that number is not per year as it is only for the year of 2021, but the general trend does reflect around the same number of deaths for the surrounding years I've found. I don't think 2021 was an outlier
I mean you can look at California which is sort of the prime example. Despite no large decrease in crime rates, I believe California remains the 6th in violent crime in the United States, there is a seeming drop in gun related deaths from violent crime.
This is admittedly a difficult resource for me to cite because to access this you have to download the summary reporting system data from the FBI database which you need excel to access so I have no really easy way of showing this but rest assured that is where Wikipedia has gotten that ranking from and I'm sure we can all agree that California is by no means a crime-free state, however if you have excel and some time you can pour through the data yourself here. https://cde.ucr.cjis.gov/LATEST/webapp/#
while 1,097 of those deaths were in police shootings
https://www.statista.com/statistics/585152/people-shot-to-death-by-us-police-by-race/
This is also a bit of an error on my part, the 1,097 figure is for 2022 and I was subtracting that from that earlier 48,840 figure which is from 2021, the figure you should use to find the meaningful gun mortality total I was trying to express for police shootings is 1,048 for 2021

Pew Research Center

Abigail Geiger

What the data says about gun deaths in the U.S.

More Americans died of gun-related injuries in 2021 than in any other year on record, according to the latest available statistics from the CDC.

Statista

People shot to death by U.S. police, by race 2024 | Statista

The trend of fatal police shootings in the U.S. seems to only be increasing each year, with 1,097 civilians, 225 of whom were Black, killed by police in 2022.

#

if anyone has any other issues with anything I said and how I came to that conclusion let me know

dim rover Mar 31, 2024, 6:16 PM

#

@fickle onyx Well first of all, thank you for sharing your thoughts. You put a lot of time into answering my questions.

That said, I wouldn't say that you actually addressed the issues I brought up. So I'd like to dive into these questions further, if that's alright.

dim rover Mar 31, 2024, 6:57 PM

#

I'm confused about why you're talking about anecdotes. Did I share some sort of story at some point that I don't remember? I'm looking at the same data you're looking at and pointing out what it's saying and what it isn't saying. The data are poor not because they're inaccurate, but because they're poorly chosen and displayed to be misleading, with a political agenda in mind. I can still look at the CDC data and reach the same conclusions that I'd get looking at other sources.

dim rover Mar 31, 2024, 6:59 PM

#

fickle onyx > Okay, first off, it's not at all obvious that we should be looking at gun-rela...

Sounds like you're worried a lot about guns. Are you worried about deaths? In gun-related deaths, which part concerns you more, the guns or the deaths?

dim rover Mar 31, 2024, 7:06 PM

#

fickle onyx > Second, you say that correlation does not equal causation, but you're treating...

Nothing you have provided has attempted to show causation. Not even a little bit. You haven't presented a single study where people asked the simply questions of "Why?" Why might people here want to purchase firearms? Why might rates be higher? It's been nothing but people saying, "See? There's a correlation!" Just like wiebje over here. No one has ever had a science class. Concluding that because two factors are related, one causes the other, is just an erroneous conclusion. A and B are related. Great. A might cause B. B might cause A. Both might be caused by C with no actual relation to each other. Or it could just be coincidence. But there's no attempt here to make any kind of determination. All the causation is assumed. "There's a link," people say, as if that somehow asks and answers all the questions. That doesn't seem fair at all.

dim rover Mar 31, 2024, 7:13 PM

#

fickle onyx > Third, I already explained why the data from the CDC is poor. It includes thin...

Let me be clear. If someone decides to invade someone's home and gets shot, that seems like a positive outcome. If someone wants to rape someone and gets shot, that's a positive outcome. Aggregating all of those statistics together only makes sense if the goal is to ignore all the distinctions. If you don't care why things are being used, only that they are being used, then you lump everything together. It should be super obvious to want to split the data into legal uses and illegal uses, as well as treating suicide differently, but people aren't doing that. Once you take out suicides and don't choose an abnormally high year, you're looking at 18k deaths, like last year. Now the 1000k police shootings start to look much more significant and much less like you can just ignore them. Then you subtract all the civilian shootings for the same reasons, where life was being defended against criminals. Why would you combine all those numbers if the goal is accurate policy? It's like the goal is to make people safer even when they're in the midst of a serious crime. That shouldn't be a safe thing to be doing.

dim rover Mar 31, 2024, 7:17 PM

#

fickle onyx > Fourth, there are many, many states with extreme gun culture and lax gun laws ...

Finally, don't be an a**. I obviously meant the link you posted that described gun laws.

Did you not look at the data? The states are all over the place. As one example, Idaho's murder rate is one of the lowest in the nation despite 60% firearm ownership, which is one of the highest.

#

https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/gun-ownership-by-state

fickle onyx Mar 31, 2024, 7:18 PM

#

let me know when you're done so I can rebuttle

dim rover Mar 31, 2024, 7:20 PM

#

https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/04/26/what-the-data-says-about-gun-deaths-in-the-u-s/

Pew Research Center

Abigail Geiger

What the data says about gun deaths in the U.S.

More Americans died of gun-related injuries in 2021 than in any other year on record, according to the latest available statistics from the CDC.

#

Dude, knock it off with the bullsh*t rebuttal. It's not a game to see who can pound the other person's arguments into the floor.

#

That's why you can say something stupid like, "I don't think you looked at the CDC data because they don't discuss firearm laws" when you could easily, spending half a brain cell, conclude that I must have clicked on the other link you posted.

fickle onyx Mar 31, 2024, 7:21 PM

#

no I just mean I don't want to interupt you

#

I want you to get all your points across I don't want to have us both be interrupting each other

dim rover Mar 31, 2024, 7:22 PM

#

Well how about thinking about how to understand what's being said instead of trying to determine how to tear it apart

fickle onyx Mar 31, 2024, 7:22 PM

#

I've been reading your points and I disagree and will be happy to tell you why I disagree and how I came to the conclusion I just want you to finish your thought as a courtesy

dim rover Mar 31, 2024, 7:23 PM

#

You just spent like 5000 words not answering my questions, because you were focused on how you disagree.

fickle onyx Mar 31, 2024, 7:24 PM

#

I thought I had effectively addressed your questions and from what you most recently responded and how you disagree that I have I can also address that

dim rover Mar 31, 2024, 7:25 PM

#

I know you thought that, even though I explicitly stated in my initial response, "I wouldn't say that you actually addressed the issues I brought up."

#

You answered the questions in your own head, not mine.

#

If my questions are unclear, then ask for clarification.

fickle onyx Mar 31, 2024, 7:25 PM

#

dim rover That's why you can say something stupid like, "I don't think you looked at the C...

I apologize for this I understand it would seem like I may have been insulting you but I was merely literally interpreting what you had said I don't want to make assumptions about what you believe or read or how you think

#

I just try not to make assumptions about what you say I try to take what you say for what you literally mean

#

as it's an internet discussion and I can't read your tone

#

nor read your mind

dim rover Mar 31, 2024, 7:26 PM

#

Alright. I said my piece. Feel free to respond now.

fickle onyx Mar 31, 2024, 7:26 PM

#

ok I will

dim rover Mar 31, 2024, 7:28 PM

#

fickle onyx I just try not to make assumptions about what you say I try to take what you say...

I do mean what I say literally. I'm also human, like anyone else, and it's irritating to be called a liar or be accused of not looking at anything just because of a typo.

fickle onyx Mar 31, 2024, 7:29 PM

#

dim rover I do mean what I say literally. I'm also human, like anyone else, and it's irrit...

I understand that, it's just I only have to work with what you literally put down, making assumptions in my opinion is a poor way of facing any discussion or debate and I would rather take you for what you say than what I think you mean

#

I understand that paragraph may have come off as insulting I certainly didn't mean for it to appear that way

dim rover Mar 31, 2024, 7:30 PM

#

fickle onyx I understand that paragraph may have come off as insulting I certainly didn't me...

Alright, I forgive you and won't hold it against you

fickle onyx Mar 31, 2024, 7:33 PM

#

dim rover I'm confused about why you're talking about anecdotes. Did I share some sort of ...

what I say when I say your evidence and data is anecdotal is not the literal definition of what an anecdote is, that being a short personal story, but in fact what I mean to say is that your evidence is from you, as at the time you had provided no resources to back your claims, all of your evidence was coming from you, it was anecdotal evidence. You had failed to provide anything to back up some of your responses at the time. I understand you have my data to use, and if you can use the CDC data to come to a different conclusion than I that's fair enough such a thing is subjective. But there were certain points where you made claims that in my opinion seemed removed from the data I had provided and you had provided no data for. For example

Fourth, there are many, many states with extreme gun culture and lax gun laws that have lower rates of gun deaths than many states with very strict gun control
while my data can account for the lower rates of gun deaths, my data can absolutely not account for what "gun culture" is or means and which states are effected by it. To claim that states with less gun laws and less gun deaths is not at least to me proved by the data I have personally provided, I even gave an example of Texas and Mississippi versus California, California according to my data has the most gun regulations and a significantly lower rate of gun death, while Texas and especially Mississippi both have lax gun laws and a higher gun mortality rate. That is... according to my data, I do not see another way to interpret those data points and come to the conclusion that some states have lax laws and fewer gun deaths. That being so such a claim would need different data in my opinion, data which you did not provide. Similarly the earlier claim
Second, there are many states with lax gun control regulations with lower crime rates than states with extreme regulation, and vise versa
Is also backed up by nothing except your word. This I believe qualifies as anecdotal evidence. That's all I mean when I criticized you for being anecdotal, you had just failed in my opinion to provide sufficient evidence to back your claim up.

fickle onyx Mar 31, 2024, 7:41 PM

#

dim rover Sounds like you're worried a lot about guns. Are you worried about deaths? In gu...

I don't see the point of this question, but the death is of course what I have a concern about, I'm actually pro gun ownership believe it or not, I think every American has the right to own a gun but in my opinion that right should be regulated by the state to address the deaths that guns cause.

fickle onyx Mar 31, 2024, 7:58 PM

#

dim rover Nothing you have provided has attempted to show causation. Not even a little bit...

This is true to an extent, I have failed to produce a study or data to explain the causation of gun-related deaths in America, your example being that I haven't provided a study behind the purchasing intentions of people which is true I have not. I don't know if such a study exists that once and for all proves the cause of gun violence and gun-related deaths. If one does exist I'm sure I would have to rework what I think and how I address this issue, but I've seen there's no conclusive data relating to the exact cause of everyone who dies from guns. All we have are their death certificates and in my opinion, that's probably the best we can get. Census data like that is often difficult to collect and the collecting methods are often subject to large amounts of error and this all on top of the fact that no study could truly be a census. The point is I don't think we could know conclusively why every gun death happens nor could we know conclusively the motivation behind a statistically significant amount of gun-related deaths beyond knowing the death certificates. This is the matter where opinion comes into play, in my opinion when I examine the correlation that does seem to exist between states with stricter gun regulations and fewer gun-related deaths in my opinion I equate causation. I can see such states like California and Washington and New York with more strict gun laws and fewer gun-related deaths and in my opinion believe that there is a positive correlation, I can then use that opinion to state that I think other states should follow suit and that I think similar results would occur. Correlation does not equal causation and even beyond the fact that it can equal causation, correlation isn't nothing, it's not just statistic mumbo jumbo, if there is a significant correlation between two data sets it's reasonable to conclude there might be a causation even if I can't 100% prove that causation. Correlation is actually one of the primary ways we can tell in statistics that there might be causation between two factors and we commonly calculate the correlation in order to make assumptions on whether or not certain data is valid.

#

I think a great example one relevant to this debate itself is this study on firearm related hosptial visits

#

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5801608/

PubMed Central (PMC)

The burden of firearm violence in the United States: stricter laws ...

Increasing firearm violence has resulted in a strong drive for stricter firearm
legislations. Aim of this study was to determine the relationship between firearm legislations and firearm-related injuries across states in the United States.
We performed ...

#

they found a reasonable correlation within 95% confidence between states with fewer gun laws and more gun related hospital visits

#

this is a great table they use to simplify their statistics

#

in which SFL which are stricter firearm law states had fewer firearm trauma injuries than non-sfl

#

the study itself is actually really interesting

#

although I would argue that 95% confidence is not a c-level I would personally use to dictate law and regulation

#

I would much prefer 99% but this is really just to show that there is reasonable evidence to suggest a correlation between firearms and people getting hurt by firearms

#

which you might say isn't relevant and that's sort of fair, injuries are not death

#

but in my personal opinion you can say that there could definitely be a correlation

#

the point is however, that correlation is not nothing, in fact before causation it's about the best we can do in any given statistics

#

we can't go around asking everyone why they shoot eachother and figuring out their motivations

#

that would be prone to error and impractical

#

we can only really use correlation to make conclusions in this sort of situation

fickle onyx Mar 31, 2024, 8:08 PM

#

dim rover Let me be clear. If someone decides to invade someone's home and gets shot, that...

well that is how I treat my process of determining these regulations, I said it before so I won't try to be too repetitive but I am not trying to prevent crime, or prevent death, or rape, or anything else. I am trying to prevent people dying by guns. I am not here to argue morality although if you wanted to we could but that's not been my purpose. 50k people die in our country from gun-related incidents, some of them are criminals, some of them are regular people, some of them are school children. I am trying to lower that number for everyone. I want less people to die from guns, that is the point of this legislation and in my opinion from the data presented it seems like there's a positive correlation, and that we should build upon that in other states.

fickle onyx Mar 31, 2024, 8:11 PM

#

dim rover Finally, don't be an a**. I obviously meant the link you posted that described g...

I am not trying to curve Idaho's murder rate (which yet again I have to remind you you provide no source for and therefore is anecdotal) the gun-related death rate on the CDC data states that it is 16.3, which is higher than states with gun restrictions. whatever Idaho's murder rate is, is irrelevant to a discussion about gun legislation at least on my part, because I am not trying to prevent people being murdered in idaho, I am trying to prevent people dying from guns in Idaho.

#

if your claim is that guns prevent murder, you can make whatever claim you want that's fair enough I guess and also not what I care to argue about, your argument ultimately is that guns are not the problem, and in my opinion if you look at the data I have provided when it is harder to get guns less people die from guns

#

and that's my only purpose with gun regulations

#

to prevent people dying from guns

#

and of course we can argue about the morality of that, the costs of certain freedoms, and the rights of American citizens if that's what you would rather argue, but in my opinion the evidence suggests that guns are in fact the problem, because states without them have less people dying from them.

#

that's all my argument is.

#

that study I posted is actually really interesting I would strongly suggest you give it a read, they found a negative correlation between firearm-related injuries and the brady campaign score which if you look at the data itself has a correlation coefficient of -0.265

#

which I think is personally interesting because I've seen a lot of rhetoric about the brady score in conservative areas I've been in especially when relating to guns

#

so it's interesting to see the data between the correlation

#

but honestly, although the study is informative it certainly isn't conclusive on the gun problem forever

#

I apologize though for introducing new data while trying to address your points I realize that's poor etiquette

dim rover Mar 31, 2024, 10:57 PM

#

fickle onyx I don't see the point of this question, but the death is of course what I have a...

For me, this question is one of the most important, as it defines what actually makes sense to look at and what the end goal is. You see a lot of people with the goal of reducing or banning firearms regardless of whether it's a net good or not.

I'll definitely respond more later. Hanging out with buddies right now.

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 3:39 AM

#

fickle onyx what I say when I say your evidence and data is anecdotal is not the literal def...

Okay, you clearly don't know what anecdotal evidence means. You're misusing the term. Anecdotal literally means in the form of an anecdote. It's not rocket science. You tell a story of one incident and use that as evidence instead of collecting data from multiple events. It has nothing to do with a lack of evidence or claiming something without providing sources.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 3:41 AM

#

dim rover Okay, you clearly don't know what anecdotal evidence means. You're misusing the ...

I think you're probably right I probably was using it incorrectly but my point really does stand that you are just saying things and providing no actual source

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 3:44 AM

#

Second, that doesn't make sense, because I was referring to the sources that you provided. Why on earth would you ask me to provide different sources than what you gave? Does that not seem a little stupid to you? "I failed to provide anything to back up my responses." Give me a break. Are you saying you failed to notice what your own links contained? Your links describe gun laws of various states, and have gun deaths for each state. How could my statements be disconnected from the sources you provide? That makes no sense. It doesn't matter if I state what "gun culture" is or not. You've literally got the source that you provided to look at.

#

All you have to do is look at the data, and you see plenty of states mixed in with each other. It's not all states on one end and all states on the other end.

#

You're not asking me to provide different data, you're asking me to point out more clearly what's already in your own data. You could look at the same if you bothered, but instead of simply asking for clarification, you accuse me of making claims without data. That's on you, not me.

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 3:49 AM

#

fickle onyx I am not trying to curve Idaho's murder rate (which yet again I have to remind y...

"Which I have to remind you you provide no source for."

I posted two links. Is this something you just ignore on purpose, or did they not display for you or something?

Additionally, it is criminally easy to just look it up. It's one state and the quickest Google search you could ever do. It's also in the data that you already provided, if you bothered to look. Idaho has a very low murder rate, very lax gun law rating.

#

You claim to care about deaths. Well then, why aren't you looking at deaths? Why are you looking at "gun deaths"?

#

People who don't look at their own data, don't look at what other people post, and then whine and complain about other people not doing Google searches for them really bug me sometimes. You're not careful. You haven't actually paid attention to the studies you're looking at. You see absolutely zero attempt at assessing causes, and assume that's just fine. I can think of a dozen ways these studies could easily be done, if people actually cared about the answer. The reality is that it hasn't been done because it's not a question people want to answer. Answering the why would be detrimental to the cause, when the why is supposed to be simply "guns," and that's it.

#

Is there a single study in the ones you looked at that even bothers to control for other variables? That's like statistics 101. That should be a huge red flag for you, unless you couldn't care less about actually understanding the problem you're trying to solve.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 4:24 AM

#

then clarify

#

oml

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 4:25 AM

#

dim rover Second, that doesn't make sense, because I was referring to the sources that you...

Because you're making different claims

#

you're saying claims that are counter to mine

#

and I don't understand how you're coming to that conclusion

#

you say all I have to ask for is clarification

#

so fuckin clarify

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 4:27 AM

#

dim rover "Which I have to remind you you provide no source for." I posted two links. Is ...

you posted fuckin a link to gun related deaths and gun ownership

#

that's not a fuckin murder rate

#

in fact

#

Idaho's murder rate is actually not included in any of my data

#

because I don't fuckin care

#

because, and it seems you are having a really hard time understanding this, I am not trying to solve murder

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 4:28 AM

#

dim rover You claim to care about deaths. Well then, why aren't you looking at deaths? Why...

like in this statement

#

why are you looking at gun related deaths when you're discussing gun regulations

#

are you fuckin kidding me

#

can you not see how that is a clear marker

#

more importantly have you just ignored the 50 times I have said that I am not trying to solve anything but gun related deaths

#

that is literally the problem I am addressing

#

people are dying from guns

#

and I want less people to die from them

#

obviously

#

the data I'm going to pull from is people who die from guns

#

that goes without fucking saying

#

you would think

#

idaho btw

#

if we're talking about it

#

has a higher rate of gun related deaths

#

it doesn't matter what the murder rate is

#

it is not relevant to what I am discussing

#

I am not trying to solve murder I am not trying to solve crime I am trying to make less people die from guns

#

and from these two main sources

#

that being the CDC data which shows states and their gun mortality

#

compared to states with gun regulations

#

I think there is a reasonable correlation

#

even more so if you read in depth to the gun injury data I posted there's even more evidence in this study to suggest a negative correlation between the brady score and gun injuries

#

but what frustrates me the most by far about your cocky display of just ignoring what I'm saying and calling me stupid

#

is that's all you're doing

#

calling my sources bad and disagreeing with me in a very uncourteous manor

#

you say that I lack good causation

#

ok what is good causation

#

you say my data is bad

#

what is good data

#

show me something instead of just disagreeing with

#

you insulted me by claiming all I was doing was coming up with ways to "defeat" you

#

when all I'm doing is providing what I think is evidence to support my claim

#

all you've done is try to dismiss my evidence

#

supply anything

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 4:37 AM

#

fickle onyx that's not a fuckin murder rate

Apparently it's too hard for you to actually read the sources I post after you whined about not getting them. Out of the goodness of my heart, I'll copy and paste the paragraph that was too much trouble for you to find.

The results are somewhat different when looking at gun murder and gun suicide rates separately. The places with the highest gun murder rates in 2021 included the District of Columbia (22.3 per 100,000 people), Mississippi (21.2), Louisiana (18.4), Alabama (13.9) and New Mexico (11.7). Those with the lowest gun murder rates included Massachusetts (1.5), Idaho (1.5), Hawaii (1.6), Utah (2.1) and Iowa (2.2). Rate estimates are not available for Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont or Wyoming.

#

You're really something man. Learn to read.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 4:37 AM

#

dude fuck you

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 4:37 AM

#

Right back at you

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 4:37 AM

#

I have really tried to remain courteous and treat you with respect

#

I apologized earlier for accidentally insulting you that wasn't my purpose

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 4:38 AM

#

No, you've tossed out lots and lots of hidden insults

#

And kept doing it

#

And then had the nerve to not even bother looking at the sites I posted after you asked for them

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 4:38 AM

#

I apologize if you interpret that way I can not express to you enough that is not what I meant

#

but you are being outwardly hostile

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 4:39 AM

#

Yeah, well now you've gone and been outwardly hostile yourself.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 4:39 AM

#

which is not motivating me to engage with you on any grounds for discussion

#

yeah

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 4:39 AM

#

Stop wasting my time.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 4:39 AM

#

because you can only be called stupid so many times before you get tired of it

#

jesus dude

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 4:39 AM

#

If you're going to ask for sources, then look at them when I give them.

#

It's not hard

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 4:40 AM

#

dim rover Apparently it's too hard for you to actually read the sources I post after you w...

this is actually crazy that you think this helps your case

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 4:40 AM

#

"Hey man, I don't see the murder rate. Is it in the article you posted?" Instead of this whining about how I haven't posted anything because you're too good to read through the thing.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 4:40 AM

#

it clearly states mississippi louisianna and alabama as having high gun murder rates

#

and these are all states with severely lax gun regulations

#

Idaho is an outlier to this data set

#

but not to the prior cdc data set which has the overall gun death rate

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 4:41 AM

#

Dude, it's not an argument. It's just looking at the data and pointing out the obvious.

#

They don't address outliers at all.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 4:41 AM

#

there are outliers to that data that is true

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 4:41 AM

#

That's not how you do an effective study.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 4:41 AM

#

one for instance is utah

#

new mexico is also a strange outlier

#

in having a very high gun death rate for its size

#

despite being ranked a c+ by gifford law center

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 4:42 AM

#

You're just trying to win a case. You don't actually care about the topic.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 4:42 AM

#

I care deeply about this topic

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 4:42 AM

#

No, you clearly don't

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 4:42 AM

#

I am like you an american

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 4:42 AM

#

If you cared, you'd ask why.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 4:43 AM

#

what do you mean

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 4:43 AM

#

What do you mean, what do I mean?

#

You dismissed the entire idea of causation.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 4:43 AM

#

what would I ask why to

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 4:43 AM

#

You don't care why.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 4:43 AM

#

I do care why

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 4:43 AM

#

Then why did you dismiss the why?

#

Causation is literally the why.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 4:43 AM

#

I don't thinks relevant to a discussion on gun regulations in my opinion

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 4:44 AM

#

See what I mean?

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 4:44 AM

#

but I do care about why people are committing gun crimes

#

I don't think whatever is ultimately causing gun crimes can be solved by gun regulations

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 4:44 AM

#

If you don't know the why, you sure as hell can't create any regulation that will have a useful impact.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 4:44 AM

#

well we do know why

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 4:44 AM

#

Do we?

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 4:45 AM

#

I mean idk who we is

#

but I think I know why

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 4:45 AM

#

When there's no causation anywhere on anyone's mind?

#

That's a bold statement.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 4:45 AM

#

I don't think it's that bold

#

I mean I didn't say I know why

#

I said I think I know why

#

there's a ton of wiggle room in that statement

#

I think I know why but I think a lot of things and can be wrong

#

I mean I'm wrong all the time it happens to the best of us

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 4:46 AM

#

Why isn't anyone attempting to study causation?

#

Why did not a single study actually ask any questions relevant to that topic?

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 4:46 AM

#

because in my opinion causation isn't exactly relevant to the regulation itself

#

people are dying from guns

#

for a lot of reasons

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 4:47 AM

#

You can't possibly claim that you care about why and also claim causation is irrelevant.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 4:47 AM

#

suicide, crime, accidents, all sorts

#

I want to prevent those deaths

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 4:47 AM

#

That's so ridiculous.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 4:47 AM

#

I want those deaths to be less

#

so I support laws that limit guns

#

because in certain states it's seemingly effective

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 4:47 AM

#

fickle onyx I want to prevent those deaths

No you don't. If you did, you'd care why they are happening, because that's necessary for preventing them

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 4:47 AM

#

it's true gun regulation laws are reactionary

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 4:48 AM

#

It's also true that they aren't thought out at all

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 4:48 AM

#

I think it's reasonable in such a crisis to attack from both ends

#

we should solve the systemic failures

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 4:48 AM

#

And they aren't identifying a problem and actually trying to solve the problem, because they don't care about why.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 4:48 AM

#

which if you're arguing that these states don't solve those problems I tend to agree with you

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 4:48 AM

#

fickle onyx we should solve the systemic failures

We should care about why.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 4:49 AM

#

I mean california is crime ridden and poverty struck in many areas

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 4:49 AM

#

dim rover We should care about why.

I agree

#

that's my argument for gun regulation

#

we do both

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 4:49 AM

#

Do you? Because you just said multiple times that you didn't think it was relevant.

#

I don't think you care about why at all.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 4:49 AM

#

it's not relevant to the discussion of gun regulations in my opinion

#

or at least it's not relevant to the discussion I was having

#

which I was just trying to show a correlation between the two

#

not trying to show a causation

#

I do think the cause is important

#

I wasn't addressing it because it's a very big problem and not what I was focusing on

#

I understand what you are saying now

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 4:50 AM

#

Cause is everything

#

Not just a small part that you can just ignore until you've created all the legislation

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 4:51 AM

#

absolutely

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 4:51 AM

#

That's such a backwards, rotten approach.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 4:51 AM

#

those regulations are no replacement for the systematic change necessary to prevent those deaths from occuring

#

but I don't see the two as mutually exclusive

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 4:51 AM

#

Those regulations aren't designed to address any issues that we have

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 4:51 AM

#

I think of it a lot like a wound

#

a cut

#

those regulations are like the bandage that goes over the cut

#

it doesn't heal it

#

but it stops the bleeding for the moment

#

so that we can handle the larger problem

#

that in my opinion is the purpose

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 4:52 AM

#

They don't stop bleeding.

#

They aren't over a cut.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 4:52 AM

#

well that's what my whole argument is about

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 4:52 AM

#

They aren't trying to solve a problem.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 4:52 AM

#

dim rover They aren't trying to solve a problem.

no they aren't

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 4:52 AM

#

They have no purpose related to the problem, because they don't care about the why.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 4:53 AM

#

I thought I had said that

#

their only purpose is to curve the deaths that happen from guns

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 4:53 AM

#

That means the purpose isn't stopping the bleeding.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 4:53 AM

#

to make it so there are less deaths from guns

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 4:53 AM

#

They don't actually do that

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 4:53 AM

#

so does california not actually have a lower gun death rate?

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 4:54 AM

#

Do I need to explain causation and correlation to you?

#

Because you're making a statement about causation

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 4:54 AM

#

what is the death rate to guns in california?

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 4:54 AM

#

And we both know that's not a thing you can do based on the data.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 4:54 AM

#

the data isn't about the cause

#

it isn't addressing that

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 4:54 AM

#

Exactly

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 4:55 AM

#

once again they're not mutually exclusive

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 4:55 AM

#

But you're pretending it is

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 4:55 AM

#

these laws aren't addressing the cause

#

we both agree on that

#

I just don't think they are trying to

#

in my opinion that is not their purpose

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 4:55 AM

#

You're pretending that correlation is causation.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 4:55 AM

#

no I'm not

#

I have said now these laws don't address the cause

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 4:55 AM

#

You just did

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 4:55 AM

#

I have said the data doesn't address the cause

#

I have said that the cause isn't relevant to this discussion in my opinion

#

I have no misconception about my data and argument in relation to cause and affect

#

I am purely remarking on correlation

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 4:56 AM

#

"So does California not actually have a lower gun death rate?" Implying that the gun laws in California caused a lower death rate.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 4:56 AM

#

no

#

I actually didn't imply that

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 4:56 AM

#

You're relying on data about correlation to make statements about causation.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 4:56 AM

#

because I didn't say that

#

don't assume I say things I don't

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 4:57 AM

#

Then what was the purpose of asking the question?

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 4:57 AM

#

to show correlation

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 4:57 AM

#

What were you trying to say?

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 4:57 AM

#

california has a lower gun death rate than other states

#

california has strict gun regulatiopns

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 4:57 AM

#

Yeah, and I was saying "they don't do that." Which is a statement about causation.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 4:57 AM

#

those are two statements

#

there is no causal implication unless yo do that yourself

#

in my opinion there is a correlation between the two

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 4:58 AM

#

You don't seem to understand the difference. Why would you make a statement about correlation in response to my statement about causation?

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 4:58 AM

#

ok I'll try rephrasing then

#

why does california have a lower gun death rate?

#

in your opinion

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 4:59 AM

#

Is there something about "they don't do that" that says "the factors are unrelated?"

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 4:59 AM

#

I think we're getting very caught up in definitions which itself is hindering the progress of any actual conversation

#

why does california have a lower gun death rate in your opinion?

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 5:00 AM

#

There are many possible factors. It hasn't really been studied.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 5:00 AM

#

well you disagree very very strongly that it is correlated with the strict gun laws

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 5:00 AM

#

I never said that

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 5:00 AM

#

oh I thought that's what you were saying that's my bad

#

text isn't a perfect medium for discussion

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 5:01 AM

#

Yeah, I know

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 5:01 AM

#

then I will make a claim

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 5:01 AM

#

You really, really need to learn the difference between correlation and causation.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 5:01 AM

#

in my opinion california's lower gun death rate correlates with its regulations

#

do you disagree

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 5:02 AM

#

That's not a matter of opinion

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 5:02 AM

#

right

#

so there is a correlation

#

a statistical relationship between the two

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 5:02 AM

#

Sure

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 5:02 AM

#

then I will say in my opinion that relationship is also causal

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 5:03 AM

#

That's not something the data show.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 5:03 AM

#

that's true the data doesn't show that

#

that's my opninion

#

do you disagree?

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 5:03 AM

#

Yes, I disagree with that.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 5:03 AM

#

why?

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 5:04 AM

#

Well, for starters, DC has always had the strictest regulation and the worst crime. It's not that simple. There are many, many factors to these things.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 5:05 AM

#

in my opinion DC is a bad example as it is purely only a city and not an entire state, it is bound to have a higher gun mortality rate.

#

I think it's bad for comparison

#

to play devils advocate I think Utah is a much better statistical outlier

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 5:06 AM

#

Perhaps. But then I can point out that the majority of California gun ownership is rural areas. I'm willing to bet that the crime areas don't match up with areas where gun ownership is higher.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 5:07 AM

#

dim rover Perhaps. But then I can point out that the majority of California gun ownership ...

I'm unaware if that is true or not and would need to see data to support that

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 5:09 AM

#

fickle onyx I'm unaware if that is true or not and would need to see data to support that

Shame. In depth data like that isn't something people care about. It would certainly be useful for painting a more accurate picture.

#

I doubt it's easy to find.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 5:11 AM

#

in truth there are in my opinion several outlier to my argument that sort of make it seem weaker

#

primarily Utah and New Mexico

#

which sort of break my established notion that there's a strong correlation

#

but I think there's reasonable explanations for both

#

for one with New Mexico's gun laws are less in depth than the gifford law center has reasoned

#

which is actually a fair critique of that ranking system

#

I think it also includes proposed gun legislation

#

which I think is an error because it can harm reflecting a current idea of their gun legislation

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 5:15 AM

#

https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1999-oct-25-me-26125-story.html

Los Angeles Times

County Has Higher Gun Ownership

A Times Poll finds residents here are more likely to have a firearm than those in Los Angeles. The trend also is seen in sales.

#

This article seems to address the issue at least somewhat.

#

It does support what I said about ownership.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 5:17 AM

#

that's true

#

for orange county and los angeles county though

#

which I couldn't say for sure is indicative of the entire state

#

although it's not unreasonable to assume so

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 5:18 AM

#

Tell me, honestly now. If you looked at statistics on deaths and found that all of our deaths were firearm related, but that we had fewer deaths than anywhere else, would you still be concerned about the firearms and hope to reduce them?

If we had thousands of suicides and they were all by firearm, but everywhere else had more total suicides, would you be trying to remove the firearms from people?

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 5:19 AM

#

maybe

#

is my honest answer

#

I don't really have enough to go off of

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 5:19 AM

#

It's a hypothetical. But it's a rather clear hypothetical.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 5:20 AM

#

it's sort of a weird hypothetical

#

I would say probably??

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 5:20 AM

#

No it's not.

#

What makes it weird?

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 5:20 AM

#

well from what you described

#

I can only reasonable conclude there is a correlation

#

not an actual causation

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 5:21 AM

#

Well yes.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 5:21 AM

#

which in this given situation isn't enough for me to say for certain

#

I don't live in this hypothetical earth so I don't really know what's at play

#

if everywhere had more death and we had less but they were all firearm related

#

it seems rash to just immediately assume in this hypothetical that the reason we have less suicides overall has something to do with the firearms

#

I would need to know more about this hypothetical in order to say for sure

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 5:23 AM

#

It's pretty simple. Convert all our murders to firearms. Convert all suicides to firearms. Everyone else has more murders, but they aren't firearms. They have more suicides, but they aren't firearms.

It's not really a statement on the cause. Maybe we're just at a prosperous time and everywhere else is suffering or something. Doesn't have to be causation either way.

#

But the point is that all our deaths are firearm related. So do you go after the firearms?

#

Obviously our gun-death statistics would be off the charts, way higher than other places.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 5:24 AM

#

it's hard for me to answer this because it is just a really really strange world that doesn't seem like it could exist

#

so I don't know how to answer

#

why are all of our deaths from guns

#

do we just not have car crashes

#

that's strange

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 5:25 AM

#

It's the same question as before. Are you interested in the "gun" part of "gun deaths," or the "deaths" part.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 5:25 AM

#

I see what you're getting at

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 5:25 AM

#

The answer to this question is really easy. If you're interested in the deaths, that is.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 5:26 AM

#

I do care about the deaths overall

#

that is my primary care

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 5:26 AM

#

Then why not look at overall deaths?

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 5:26 AM

#

because I'm not trying to solve every problem

#

I'm trying to regulate guns to prevent a certain type of death

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 5:26 AM

#

Ah, so you're not trying to solve the deaths problem.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 5:26 AM

#

related to guns

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 5:26 AM

#

You're trying to solve the gun problem.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 5:26 AM

#

I'm trying to solve the gun deaths problem

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 5:27 AM

#

You have to realize that this makes you interested in the "gun" part of gun deaths, rather than the deaths.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 5:27 AM

#

I don't just love taking away guns

#

I don't get off on it

#

people are dying from guns

#

I am trying to lessen those deaths

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 5:27 AM

#

Look, if you're not trying to solve the problem of deaths, then you're not.

#

You're making assumptions and running with them.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 5:28 AM

#

50k people a year die from gun-related deaths

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 5:28 AM

#

They seem like flawed assumptions, and it would seem really pertinent to look at overall effects instead of just direct effects.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 5:28 AM

#

in our country

#

about that's not perfect

#

I should actually probably round down to 40k

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 5:29 AM

#

Well, I mean, if you take the outlier year after covid.

#

Tell me, if guns cause those deaths, then why do the deaths keep going down?

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 5:29 AM

#

I don't think guns cause those deaths I think people with guns cause those deaths

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 5:30 AM

#

Do you ever ask yourself how it's possible for the rate of gun ownership to constantly increase across the board, but somehow death rates keep decreasing?

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 5:30 AM

#

and in my opinion if you want people with guns to stop killing people with guns a way you can do that (not the best way but a way) is to take away those guns

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 5:30 AM

#

You're only taking them away from people who follow the law.

#

Every year, more and more people own guns. Ownership rates keep rising. Shouldn't that cause deaths to increase?

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 5:31 AM

#

I think the general trend is increasing

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 5:31 AM

#

It isn't.

#

The rate has been consistently decreasing.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 5:31 AM

#

I'm struggling to find data past 2021

#

so if you have some that would be helpful

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 5:31 AM

#

Gotta search for it directly.

#

https://www.thetrace.org/2023/12/data-gun-violence-deaths-america/

The Trace

Gun Violence by the Numbers in 2023

The United States may have moved past the devastating surge of gun violence sparked by the pandemic, with preliminary data suggesting that homicides in 2023 declined by a record amount. Gun injuries have also dropped, and a growing list of states now have tighter laws on gun sales, which are at a four-year low. Still, […]

#

There are other factors that are more powerful. Covid had a pretty big impact.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 5:33 AM

#

covid did have a large impact

#

people not being around each other didn't kill eachother as much

#

huh we were looking at the same source that's funny

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 5:34 AM

#

I mean covid was horrible for crime

#

#

You can see it just spike up in 2020.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 5:34 AM

#

yeah we should lock everyone up and run an authoritarian state more often

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 5:35 AM

#

To increase crime?

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 5:35 AM

#

no to get rid of it

#

I'm just making a joke

#

it's not like a serious thought

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 5:35 AM

#

I mean okay, but the murder rate spiked up

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 5:36 AM

#

yeah it wasn't like a serious thought

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 5:36 AM

#

But beyond that, you can see that the numbers before the spike were trending down.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 5:36 AM

#

but yeah gun related deaths have lowered in the last two years

#

they are still much much higher than say 2010

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 5:36 AM

#

And they're still trending down. This despite a general rise in gun ownership.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 5:37 AM

#

I mean this data is brand new we can't really determine a conclusive trend as of 2024 for gun violence lowering

#

it has gone down for the past two years but that can be caused by other factors

#

but it can also be caused by gun ownership that's possible

#

but also more gun regulation laws have been signed into effect in the last two years

#

that's also a possible cause

#

although I couldn't personally say for certain

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 5:39 AM

#

You've also got states passing constitutional carry like crazy.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 5:39 AM

#

that's true

#

that's another thing that is happening

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 5:39 AM

#

Over half the country now

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 5:40 AM

#

I don't think either of us can really make a conclusive claim about why there has been a slight decrease in gun related deaths

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 5:40 AM

#

I think I might be wrong on ownership. I think it's more or less stayed the same percentage of households.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 5:40 AM

#

in 2022 it was a 1.5% decrease

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 5:40 AM

#

I mean I can make one for sure

#

Covid caused a spike. Now it's chilling out.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 5:41 AM

#

there's also lower gun sales every year since 2020

#

2020 saw a large peak in gun sales and then it's been lower every year by a decent amount

#

although I didn't write that article I actually think that's what the article is trying to present with their data

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 5:41 AM

#

After the spike? I mean it's not like you turn them in after you buy them.

#

They still own them.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 5:42 AM

#

that's true

#

but gun sales did lower

#

less people were buying

#

but that's also true less people were buying because they might have already had guns

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 5:42 AM

#

Predictably. Instability always drives sales.

#

That and democrats.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 5:42 AM

#

once again all of this data being really recent makes it hard for me to make any giant claim

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 5:42 AM

#

Everyone buys a lot more firearms when democrats are in control.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 5:43 AM

#

I do not have access to the actual survey data nor am I a good enough statician

#

but this seems all like a giant tangent

#

to answer what I think was your question a decade ago

#

I care more about the deaths

#

and I actually probably agree with you to an extent

#

I do not generally support reactionary legislation

#

because gun control is only a bandage on a deep wound

#

it only stops the bleeding in my opinion but it doesn't solve the problem

#

that's why despite california having a lower rate of gun related deaths they still have a higher rate relative to say developed countries of similar size, population, and gdp

#

because gun control really isn't addressing the underlying factors of say poverty

#

or mental health

#

I'm sure we can at least agree these laws are reactionary

#

but where I disagree is that I still think they are somewhat effective

#

not for treating the underlying societal problems

#

but for curving death rates

#

and as I said before the two aren't mutually exclusive

#

I think the best solution would be one in which we regulate guns to lower death rates then address these underlying issues to get these death rates to a reasonable level

#

at which point I think we can discuss removing these regulations

#

because I'm actually pretty pro-gun myself

#

I think we should have a right to them

#

I just think that right we have is far too unregulated and causing a major crisis of gun related deaths

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 5:50 AM

#

The issue with regulations is that they aren't trying to solve a specific problem. They're just trying to reduce the number of guns around. That doesn't seem like targeting the problems at all.

#

What regulations are you even interested in seeing?

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 5:51 AM

#

universal back ground checks

#

wait times

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 5:51 AM

#

Why?

#

Both sound terrible

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 5:52 AM

#

I think it's reasonable to have the state regulate such dangerous personal property

#

I mean you can kill someone with one of those things

#

we should be making sure you're not a crazy person

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 5:52 AM

#

No I mean what are those supposed to accomplish, not why you think it should be allowed

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 5:53 AM

#

they're supposed to accomplish stopping criminals and crazy people from being able to easily acquire firearms

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 5:53 AM

#

Do you think the federal government should have a record of every firearm in existence in the country?

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 5:54 AM

#

Idealy?

#

idk that's not what I was talking about

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 5:54 AM

#

You really don't think so?

#

How do you accomplish universal background checks without a registry?

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 5:54 AM

#

that's true

#

I see the relevance

#

anyways yes

#

idealy

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 5:55 AM

#

People often say these fancy buzzwords and have no idea what it actually entails.

#

A registry seems incredibly dangerous.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 5:55 AM

#

why do you think so?

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 5:55 AM

#

They do those before gun confiscations.

#

It's happened many times in history.

#

And then they kill a bunch of people.

#

Since I'm not in favor of the government killing a bunch of people, I'm strongly against them knowing who has what.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 5:57 AM

#

which is a big reason why I said idealy but that may not be clear

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 5:57 AM

#

As a reminder, the current party in power just called the opposing political party enemies of the state in his state of the union address. That was recent. The FBI, CIA, and ATF are routinely used for political purposes.

#

This is not really a theoretical at this time.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 5:58 AM

#

yeah but the leader of the opposing party also posted a picture of the current president tied up in the trunk

#

said that on his first day in office he's going to "act like a dictator"

#

and has made the argument that the president should be allowed to execute people

#

so idk

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 5:58 AM

#

I don't care at all about people criticizing someone in power.

#

I care a lot about the person in power calling half the country enemies of the state.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 5:59 AM

#

I mean

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 5:59 AM

#

Those aren't even remotely equal

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 5:59 AM

#

it's not like republicans don't call democrats godless commies who hate america

#

one side calling the other an enemy of the state is not like a new thing

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 5:59 AM

#

That's not really true

#

There's a difference

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:00 AM

#

both sides do it to each other whether in power or not

#

yeah there is I guess

#

one dude said that repbulicans are dangerous

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:00 AM

#

You don't do it openly and officially on national television.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:00 AM

#

the other dude said he's going to be a dictator

#

there does seem to be a little difference

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:00 AM

#

Not during the speech where you're supposed to be bringing people together

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:00 AM

#

donald trump says crazy things during speeches all the time

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:01 AM

#

He's not a politician

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:01 AM

#

that's a strange thing to say

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:01 AM

#

Is it?

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:01 AM

#

yeah

#

because he is

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:01 AM

#

Why?

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:01 AM

#

because he's in politics???

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:01 AM

#

Because he was elected? He doesn't possess the attributes of a politician.

#

That's what people normally mean when they say someone isn't a politician

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:02 AM

#

the attributes of a politician are someone who is involved in politics professionally

#

which he is

#

he was a president

#

he could be again

#

he's currently campaigning

#

politicians campaign

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:02 AM

#

fickle onyx the attributes of a politician are someone who is involved in politics professio...

I think you're confusing the definition of politician with the qualities of a politician

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:02 AM

#

well in my defense

#

you said he wasn't one

#

so I would think the definition of what is one

#

is sort of relevant

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:03 AM

#

Right, because he's a celebrity businessman

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:03 AM

#

a celebrity businessman who is

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:03 AM

#

He doesn't have the normal qualities of a politician

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:03 AM

#

involved in politics professionally

#

I don't see like being a politician as like a really high bar

#

or that politicians are like evil or good or anything

#

it's just a description of a person involved in politics

#

it's not like a value statement

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:04 AM

#

So you disagree that there are certain qualities most politicians share.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:04 AM

#

Joe Biden is a politician as was George Bush and Abraham Lincoln and George Washington

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:04 AM

#

You don't think there's anything they typically have in common.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:04 AM

#

dim rover So you disagree that there are certain qualities most politicians share.

no

#

but you're not saying "trump isn't like other politicians"

#

you're just saying he isn't one

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:05 AM

#

That's exactly what I was saying

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:05 AM

#

which by my definition

#

isn't the case

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:05 AM

#

dim rover That's exactly what I was saying

no

#

it's not exactly what you were saying

#

it was what you meant

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:05 AM

#

Yes, because I'm the one talking. You're the one misinterpreting what I was saying.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:06 AM

#

dim rover He's not a politician

yeah I guess I really misinterpreted this

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:06 AM

#

Maybe if you tried listening, you would get what I meant instead of getting bogged down

#

It's really not that hard unless you're trying to be difficult.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:06 AM

#

see what you meant by that was "donald trump isn't like other politicians" and what I clearly misinterpreted was the literal meaning of what you said

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:06 AM

#

Exactly

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:07 AM

#

well here's the draw back of a text based app like discord

#

I am not in the room with you and cannot hear how you say words

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:07 AM

#

Yes, but I also clarified immediately

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:07 AM

#

I can only interpret literally what you say

#

yeah I see that you clarified he doesn't have the attributes of one

#

which I would disagree with I think he does

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:08 AM

#

I mean fine, but he doesn't possess many of the attributes that other politicians possess.

#

The attributes he does have still work for him

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:09 AM

#

I don't know I see him as just another politician who's just good at what he does

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:09 AM

#

Politicians are polished. They don't make mistakes in their speech very often. They choose their words carefully.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:10 AM

#

he has a really clear brand that appeals to his target market perfectly and hes really good at radicalizing his base to support him

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:10 AM

#

Trump is a businessman. He uses every day speech, heavily favoring exaggerations and figures of speech that can't be taken literally.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:10 AM

#

he's also really good at appealing to the specific voter market that gets him the good votes

#

I would say he's just a sort of good republican politician that said the right things to become one of the better ones at getting elected

#

but we'll see the effectiveness in this next election

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:11 AM

#

I mean as long as people don't change and ignore the rules just before the election

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:12 AM

#

yeah I'm really surprised this is where this conversation went

#

could have never seen this coming

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:13 AM

#

The fact that we have firearms provides an extremely robust check on the federal government's ability to impose its will by force.

#

I'm not willing to give that up lightly.

#

Certainly not for those who aren't willing to look into causation in their studies.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:15 AM

#

lord man I thought we had moved past that

#

those studies don't look for causation nor is that the problem I am trying to solve

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:15 AM

#

Just bringing it back 😁

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:15 AM

#

I thought I had explained that well at least my side

#

gun regulations are reactionary they don't treat the underlying problems

#

and I don't think we should only do those regulations

#

I think we should do loads of other things as well

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:16 AM

#

All the more reason to oppose them

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:16 AM

#

I disagree

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:16 AM

#

If someone wants to take the time to do decent research, then they could design regulations that make sense

#

Universal background checks require a gun registry. This is too high a price to pay. It would cost many lives.

#

Wait times deprive law abiding citizens of firearms while doing very little to prevent crime. The hot-headed purchase argument is often cited, but it never really seemed all that convincing. There are many cases where there's an immediate threat and a reasonable desire to defend yourself right away.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:19 AM

#

well I can at least agree there's a trade off

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:19 AM

#

Ex-boyfriend murders woman while she's waiting on a firearm is a common story.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:20 AM

#

dim rover Ex-boyfriend murders woman while she's waiting on a firearm is a common story.

yeah that's why you posted a link to one instead of just saying it's common and expecting me to believe you

#

but like I was saying there's a trade off

#

restricted access to fire arms

#

that's what we're trading

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:20 AM

#

https://www.google.com/amp/s/fox17.com/amp/news/local/woman-killed-while-waiting-for-gun-permit-for-protection

WZTV

Woman Killed While Waiting for Gun Permit for Protection

A New Jersey woman waiting to get her handgun permit permit was found stabbed to death outside her home this week, allegedly by the very person she was trying to get a gun to protect herself against.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:20 AM

#

yeah but it's common right

#

so you go ahead and post all the others for this common occurance

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:21 AM

#

You're not listening very well.

#

I didn't say it was common.

#

I said it was a common story.

#

Don't twist my words.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:21 AM

#

ok what do you mean by it being a common story

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:21 AM

#

A story that is often repeated when discussing the topic.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:21 AM

#

oh

#

that's not at all what I thought you meant

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:22 AM

#

It's okay, English is ambiguous sometimes.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:22 AM

#

you meant it's common in rhetoric not that it's a common thing that happens

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:22 AM

#

dim rover It's okay, English is ambiguous sometimes.

no yeah definitely

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:22 AM

#

Correct. I don't actually know how common it is.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:22 AM

#

which is why it may seem like I'm using too many words

#

but in fact I'm just trying to make sure all of my words make the most sense and are the least ambiguous

#

so that you misunderstand what I say as little as possible

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:23 AM

#

Fair enough

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:23 AM

#

this however all goes back to my data before as to why I believe what I believe

#

I see there is a correlation (with a few outliers) between states with gun regulations and fewer gun related deaths

#

I don't want the gun regulations

#

they're not perfect and I want the populous to be well armed

#

but there are a lot of people dying a year

#

and so that's the trade off I am willing to make

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:24 AM

#

Are the regulations even useful? Who's to say the correlation isn't due to completely unrelated factors?

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:24 AM

#

you

#

you would be the one to say that

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:25 AM

#

Yes, indeed. There aren't really data that show a change following the implementation of regulations.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:25 AM

#

you disagree with me so you're the one who needs to show me reasonable arguments to convince me that there is not a strong correlation

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:25 AM

#

Such data are really sketchy at best, when the natural variation is already so high.

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:25 AM

#

fickle onyx you disagree with me so you're the one who needs to show me reasonable arguments...

I think we already discussed correlation.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:26 AM

#

I discussed why I believe it's a effective means

#

I don't know if you've discussed why you believe it isn't

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:26 AM

#

Right, but that has nothing to do with correlation

#

Things can be correlated without causing each other.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:27 AM

#

yeah that's true

#

things can also be correlated and be causal

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:27 AM

#

Wait times can be implemented and have zero effects, but rates can still be lower due to completely unrelated things.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:27 AM

#

ok

#

what are the unrelated things

#

there is a correlation so explain why it isn't a causation

#

instead of just saying it's not

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:28 AM

#

That's not really how that works.

#

The data aren't there to support causation.

#

They show correlation. No attempt was made to go beyond that.

#

I don't know why delaying someone's purchase prevents them from being able to use it for unlawful purposes.

#

It certainly hinders their ability to use it for lawful purposes.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:30 AM

#

because they might need to do the unlawful thing immediately

#

it hinders their ability to do the unlawful thing

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:30 AM

#

In which case they can get the gun unlawfully as well

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:30 AM

#

that's true

#

I've asked this before and I don't recall if you answered

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:31 AM

#

They are much better at getting a gun unlawfully for unlawful purposes than law abiding citizens are at getting around a wait time

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:31 AM

#

but why do you think california has less gun related deaths?

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:32 AM

#

When the rioters were burning down California in the name of BLM, they came to Placerville, where my buddy lives. There, they met the locals, out in force, open carrying. They moved on and didn't harm that neighborhood.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:32 AM

#

now that

#

is anecdotal evidence

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:32 AM

#

Yes

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:33 AM

#

you'll forgive me for dismissing it

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:33 AM

#

So based on my anecdotal, personal evidence, I'd say it's because people still own firearms in California, even if the laws are strict.

#

You didn't ask for data. You asked for my opinion.

#

That's the difference

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:33 AM

#

your opinion can be backed up by data

#

mine is

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:33 AM

#

No, it isn't.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:34 AM

#

yeah it is

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:34 AM

#

Your opinion is on causation.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:34 AM

#

you can disagree with my use of that data

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:34 AM

#

The data is correlation.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:34 AM

#

yeah it isn't

#

well it is

#

my opinion is the causation

#

the data represents the correlation

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:34 AM

#

We talked about this before. You agreed that the data don't show causation.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:34 AM

#

yeah but that's the purpose of data, data is bad at showing causation

#

but good at showing correlation

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:35 AM

#

It's only bad at it if it's not designed for it.

#

There are many, many methods to determine causation.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:35 AM

#

that's the purpose of the correlation coefficient to show mathematically within whatever standard deviation if there is a relationship between two independent data points

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:36 AM

#

That purpose is correlation, yes. Which has nothing to do with causation.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:36 AM

#

correlation is important for showing relationships

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:36 AM

#

Things can be completely unrelated to each other and still correlate.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:36 AM

#

which is why it's so relied on in statistics

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:37 AM

#

fickle onyx which is why it's so relied on in statistics

That doesn't make sense.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:37 AM

#

it is all the time

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:37 AM

#

You're still treating correlation as if it's causation.

#

That's just not the same thing.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:37 AM

#

causation like I've said before is an extremely difficult thing to measure

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:37 AM

#

fickle onyx causation like I've said before is an extremely difficult thing to measure

Especially if you don't try

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:37 AM

#

dim rover That's just not the same thing.

you aren't really paying attention to what I'm saying

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:37 AM

#

I am though.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:37 AM

#

here I'l just end it once and for all then

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:37 AM

#

And you're trying to imply that you've got causation where there is none

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:38 AM

#

causation is what causes a relationship correlation is the value of that relationship

#

I am saying that since there is a high correlational value for this given relationship

#

it implies causation to an extent

#

that is the part that is my opinion

#

my opinion is of causation

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:38 AM

#

And that's precisely the thing that is pure opinion and horrible statistics.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:38 AM

#

it's not pure opinion

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:39 AM

#

Yes, it actually is

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:39 AM

#

I have a really strong correlation to look at

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:39 AM

#

The data do not show causation.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:39 AM

#

yes it doesnt

#

ok ok ok

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:39 AM

#

You have nothing but correlation.

#

And you're treating it as causation

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:39 AM

#

show me the data that shows causation

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:39 AM

#

Let me rephrase your question for you.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:39 AM

#

yeah instead of answering it

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:39 AM

#

"How might one determine causation?"

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:40 AM

#

no that's not my question

#

I didn't ask how you determine causation

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:40 AM

#

I'm not doing another Google search for you.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:40 AM

#

I asked you to show me the data that does

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:40 AM

#

Answer your own question with your own search. You're the one claiming causation.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:40 AM

#

my argument is that data, if it does exist, isn't very good for this

#

so I am showing correlative data

#

you disagree with me

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:41 AM

#

Which has nothing to do with causation

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:41 AM

#

which means the burden of proof falls on you to disporve me

#

so show me the causal data that disproves my claim

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:41 AM

#

That's not how it works.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:41 AM

#

because it clearly exists

#

so show it

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:41 AM

#

The data objectively do not show causation.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:41 AM

#

yes it doesn't

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:41 AM

#

They show correlation.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:41 AM

#

in my opinion that correlation implies causation

#

in your opinion it doesn't

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:41 AM

#

That's it. Proof done.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:41 AM

#

show me why

#

don't just disagree with me

#

show me the proper data to convince me otherwise

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:42 AM

#

You're claiming A causes B. B can also cause A.

#

It's really not hard.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:42 AM

#

it could

#

but I'm not claiming that it does

#

I'm claiming restricted access to guns leads to fewer gun related deaths, I'm not claiming the inverse

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:42 AM

#

You're claiming correlation implies causation, as if you've never taken stats 101

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:43 AM

#

I haven't taken stats 101 I took an AP stats course and highschool which qualified me for stats 201 in college

#

so that is actually true

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:43 AM

#

fickle onyx I'm claiming restricted access to guns leads to fewer gun related deaths, I'm no...

I guess you skipped the causation part.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:43 AM

#

I don't think I did

#

I also don't think it was called stats 201 it had like a different name

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:44 AM

#

The things that lead to people implementing gun control could be the very things that lead to fewer deaths, for example. You'd have to actually control for variables.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:44 AM

#

because the college I went to didn't like do the 101 201 scheme

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:44 AM

#

dim rover The things that lead to people implementing gun control could be the very things...

what things, show me

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:45 AM

#

For example, more affluent people might tend to get idealistic and want to create utopia.

#

But it's their income that causes fewer deaths, not the gun control.

#

California is rich. So is New York, Illinois, Connecticut.

#

The states at the bottom of the list for the most part are poorer.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:46 AM

#

that's true

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:46 AM

#

This should be an obvious thing to control for, but they didn't bother.

#

Because they have a political agenda.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:46 AM

#

I actually agree with you that poverty is a significant cause for gun violence

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:47 AM

#

dim rover This should be an obvious thing to control for, but they didn't bother.

why would they have to control for that in a study specifically targeting gun related deaths

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:47 AM

#

Violence in general, not just gun violence

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:47 AM

#

they weren't running a survey

#

they weren't running an expiriment

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:47 AM

#

fickle onyx why would they have to control for that in a study specifically targeting gun re...

Because they were trying to show a link between two variables.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:47 AM

#

they were just compiling causes of death and creating a rate at which gun violence occurs

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:47 AM

#

If you control for other variables, you split out where the link actually is.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:48 AM

#

you don't need to account for those variables in such a method of data collection

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:48 AM

#

You might show 95% correlation, but 80% of that is explained purely by income.

#

You literally do and should.

#

Otherwise you're showing correlation that is meaningless and more importantly misleading.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:48 AM

#

I think you are under the misunderstanding that that CDC data was an argument

#

or expiriment

#

that CDC data is just data, just a compiling of data

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:49 AM

#

The CDC data is simply a way of displaying data.

#

The method chosen for displaying it was very poor.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:49 AM

#

displaying data based upon death certificates

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:49 AM

#

And thus leads many to inappropriate conclusions

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:50 AM

#

they took the certificates of people who died in states, found the ones that were related to guns, and then created a neat little map to show us

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:50 AM

#

I don't understand why you keep getting off on these death certificates.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:50 AM

#

because I'm trying to explain the data collection method

#

it wasn't a survey

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:50 AM

#

People died, it was related to firearms. I'm not sure where the big excitement is in that.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:50 AM

#

nor an experiment

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:50 AM

#

You don't need a survey or experiment to get better data.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:50 AM

#

you are trying to claim my data is bad so I am trying to explain how it was collected and why I disagree

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:51 AM

#

No. Listen better.

#

I claimed the data was displayed poorly.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:51 AM

#

how so

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:51 AM

#

In a misleading way.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:51 AM

#

why?

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:51 AM

#

Because you're not controlling for appropriate variables.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:51 AM

#

it's not an experiment there are not variables like that to control for

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:52 AM

#

You're missing a lot

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:52 AM

#

it's compiling data

#

that's the purpose of it

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:52 AM

#

Let me illustrate this.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:52 AM

#

to collect data from public records and compile it

#

you don't need to account for causation

#

because that's not the point

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:52 AM

#

You're wrong

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:52 AM

#

the point also isn't correlation either

#

btw

#

the point isn't anything like that

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:52 AM

#

Shut up and let me talk

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:52 AM

#

it's just showing you who died from what in what state

#

and then showing you the rate

#

all of that correlation stuff is done by me

#

it's my opinion

#

and some other stat people

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:53 AM

#

fickle onyx all of that correlation stuff is done by me

Causation, not correlation.

#

You're so bad at this

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:53 AM

#

stop saying that

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:53 AM

#

Just shut up a moment

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:53 AM

#

Oh my lord

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 6:54 AM

#

There was a university that had data related to admission rates. It compared men to women. It found that women had a much lower chance of being admitted than men.

#

When they looked further into it, they found that women had higher rates of admission in every single field, across the board. But because the fields that the majority of women applied for were more competitive, they were overall less likely to be enrolled.

#

This is an example of properly displaying data. You can show a bias against women or one against men, depending on what you choose to portray. It has nothing to do with doing an experiment.

#

It has nothing to do with surveys.

#

All you're doing is taking a more in depth look at the data.

#

Not accounting for additional factors leads you to paint the opposite picture from reality. You'd think that would be important.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 6:58 AM

#

ok

#

explain to me the error in this data after I explain the method of collection

#

the CDC accessed public databases for death certificates, collected the ones that were related to guns as the cause of death, and then displayed that rate out of 100,000 per state

#

at no point did they make a claim like "the states with less laws have more death"

#

they just collected the data and showed it

#

what is your problem with that data in it of itself

#

not my particular use of it

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 7:02 AM

#

https://medium.com/@dexter.shawn/how-uc-berkeley-almost-got-sued-because-of-lying-data-aaa5d641f571

Medium

How UC Berkeley Almost Got Sued Because of LYING Data…

Using data at its face value to drive decision making can be dangerous… Very dangerous!

#

In case you thought I was just making it up.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 7:02 AM

#

I didn't

#

you didn't name any actual figures so I figured it was just a metaphor

#

at most a real example

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 7:03 AM

#

fickle onyx what is your problem with that data in it of itself

The fact that no other factors are taken into account. So there's all sorts of things that you can't say with the data, but people are trying to say it anyway.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 7:03 AM

#

the data is not making a claim

#

it is just presenting deaths based on guns as rates in those states

#

it's not saying the cause other than that those deaths are related to guns

#

it's not data exploring the causal relationship

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 7:04 AM

#

I mean my issue wasn't really with that data.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 7:04 AM

#

I thought it was

#

that was what I was trying to get

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 7:04 AM

#

No, it was with the correlation established. That's what we were talking about.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 7:04 AM

#

dim rover The method chosen for displaying it was very poor.

your words

#

did not make this clear

#

when you said the method chosen was very poor

#

I see the misunderstanding

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 7:05 AM

#

I still think it is. It should actually split everything up. It should show criminal vs non-criminal. There are a lot of things that it could show differently.

#

But really, my main issue is with how the correlation is displayed.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 7:06 AM

#

in your opinion the data should differentiate between criminal versus non criminal

#

this is an opinion

#

this is not in fact the purpose of that dataset

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 7:06 AM

#

Data isn't supposed to have a purpose

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 7:06 AM

#

that's not true

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 7:06 AM

#

The way it is displayed has a purpose.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 7:06 AM

#

I mean what do you mean by that

#

data should try not to be biased

#

but people who collect data do it for a reason

#

they do it to find something out

#

it does have a purpose

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 7:07 AM

#

The people have the purpose

#

The data just is

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 7:07 AM

#

the people are the ones collecting the data

#

the data isn't the word of god

#

it's not the objective truth

#

it has a purpose just as much as the people who collect it

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 7:08 AM

#

Yes. And they have a purpose. They are collecting data in hopes that the data supports their purpose.

#

That doesn't mean that data has a specific purpose.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 7:08 AM

#

data should strive to be as close to objective as possible

#

is what I think you mean by what you're saying

#

but everything has a purpose nothing happens for nothing

#

objective data has a purpose

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 7:08 AM

#

Maybe you're misunderstanding what I'm saying

#

It's a bit ambiguous

#

Data collection serves a purpose. People have a purpose.

#

But if the data could speak, it wouldn't say, "This is my purpose."

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 7:09 AM

#

fuckin obviously

#

that's all I meant

#

data should strive to be objective but in its collection it has its purpose

#

and thats all data

#

that's all I mean

#

and no data is objective btw

#

all data is subject to the collection method and the biased humans collecting

#

but this is so not what we should be talking about

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 7:11 AM

#

I mean the data are still valid, that just makes them incomplete

#

The reason they didn't split between criminal and non-criminal is because they wanted to lump everything together and make it equally bad.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 7:12 AM

#

that could be true

#

but that's not what they displayed

#

and once again they make no claim

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 7:12 AM

#

They wanted to display the problem as extreme as possible.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 7:12 AM

#

they are showing specific data

#

you have a problem with my argument

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 7:13 AM

#

Thru had a purpose behind how they selected the data for display

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 7:13 AM

#

my argument being criminal and non criminal are irrelevant as they're both still gun deaths

#

and I want to curve them both

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 7:13 AM

#

They don't need to make a claim to show data in a misleading way

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 7:13 AM

#

I think they literally have to make a claim in order to mislead you

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 7:13 AM

#

But most people aren't interested in curving non-criminal deaths.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 7:13 AM

#

I think you have to claim something in order to mislead someone about that claim

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 7:13 AM

#

fickle onyx I think they literally have to make a claim in order to mislead you

That's not true at all

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 7:14 AM

#

then how are they misleading you

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 7:14 AM

#

People mislead themselves just fine when presented with data

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 7:14 AM

#

they didn't claim anything

#

they said heres people who died from guns

#

and then showed you the numbers

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 7:14 AM

#

Why would they need to claim anything to mislead anyone?

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 7:14 AM

#

how is that misleading

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 7:15 AM

#

Because when people say "gun deaths," others hear "murder"

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 7:15 AM

#

yeah

#

but they didn't say murder

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 7:15 AM

#

They forget suicide exists.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 7:15 AM

#

they said gun deaths

#

if someone heard that and assumed murder

#

that's on them

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 7:15 AM

#

And yet it's still misleading

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 7:15 AM

#

how

#

explain it

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 7:16 AM

#

People are misled by it. They forget suicide exists. They don't think about criminals getting shot by police or private citizens.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 7:16 AM

#

people can be mislead by anything

#

that doesn't meant that thing is trying to mislead them

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 7:16 AM

#

If people knew 1000 criminals were shot while trying to rape people, they would cheer and want more guns.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 7:16 AM

#

if you looked at that graph and assumed it was all murders that's on you man

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 7:16 AM

#

If they think those same 1000 are murders, they want the opposite.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 7:16 AM

#

I looked at that graph, read it

#

and knew what it was talking about

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 7:17 AM

#

And I looked at the graphs and immediately recognized that a lot of people would misread the numbers

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 7:17 AM

#

you assumed that I guess

#

I didn't though

#

I'm a big believer in people looking at graphs and reading the values and understanding what it means

#

if you disagree I guess you have less faith in our fellow humans

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 7:18 AM

#

Lol, you really actually have faith in the general population's ability to read graphs?

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 7:19 AM

#

not really but I suppose I had faith in your ability

#

which is who I'm arguing with

#

you

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 7:19 AM

#

These same graphs are going to be used as is by politicians trying to convince people that gun crime is a huge problem.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 7:19 AM

#

that would be relevant were that what we were discussing

#

I'm talking to you right now

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 7:20 AM

#

Right now we're discussing how the graphs are misleading and why I feel that way

#

Because that's the question you asked me

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 7:20 AM

#

you think my data is bad or misleading I disagree

#

I think you can reasonably look at that data and understand what it is trying to convey

#

but most importantly we both now should know what it is trying to convey

#

you might think the CDC is trying to lie to people and they might be I wouldn't know

#

but what we both do know is that data

#

do you disagree with that data in that you think it is innacurate?

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 7:22 AM

#

Tell me, what do you see when you type "gun crime" into Google?

#

Anything on gun crime? Or is it all "gun violence"?

#

People interested in gun crime are going to be fed these graphs and not necessarily pick up on the difference right away.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 7:23 AM

#

they might

#

I am not interested in discussing the conspiracy to mislead people about gun crimes by the CDC

#

I am interested in talking about this data

#

do you think this data is innacurate

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 7:24 AM

#

The CDC data are poorly displayed because they mix deaths I view as positive with ones I view as negative.

#

Additionally, they mix in suicides, which gives the impression of a firearm problem even if our actual suicide rate is lower than comparable countries.

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 7:24 AM

#

see what youre talkin about is morality

dim rover Apr 1, 2024, 7:24 AM

#

Aren't you?

fickle onyx Apr 1, 2024, 7:25 AM

#

not particularly

#Guns are not the problem.