Quantcast
  1. Sign up now and join over 35,000 northwest gun owners. It's quick, easy, and 100% free!

Background checks cause a 38% decrease in domestic abuse homicides...

Discussion in 'Legal & Political Archive' started by tiggers97, Feb 23, 2014.

  1. tiggers97

    tiggers97 United States Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    870
    Likes Received:
    790
    Or, how to stretch statistics to make a mole hill look like a mountain.

    One recent number that I've been hearing of late from the gun-control advocates is something along the lines of "In states that require background checks for all handgun sales: The rate of women murdered by an intimate partner with a gun in 2010 was 38% lower than in other states, while the rate of those murdered by other means was nearly identical". This was from the signed testimony by Penny Okamota and Elise Gautier of Cease Fire, Oregon.

    Where did this number come from? Their written testimony points to Mayors Against Illegal Guns, supra note 4, citing U.S. Department Justice, FBI, Supplementary Homicide Reports, 2011. Ok, I don't see where they get their numbers from on the FBI page, but it sure looks and sounds official.

    So I keep sleuthing as I'm determined to understand what "38%" really means. I finally find my answer under a digital rock in the farther reaches of the internet wasteland in a Mayors Against Illegal Guns, Gun Laws and Violence Against Women report. There's the 38%, on page 3.

    So how do they get such a huge drop? Surely it must be the background checks in place, as they claim it is... let's see. The data is collected from 2010.
    For non-firearm homicides, it is "nearly identical", per Cease Fire's own testimony. (3.08 vs 3.54, no background check vs background check states).
    For firearm homicides, there is a 38% decrease from 5.09 to 3.17... out of every 1,000,000 females in the population.

    Wait, what? Backing up for a second... Did I just say out of 1,000,000 (one million)? Yes I did. Or rather the MAIG report did. Check out the y-axis of the last graph of the report.

    To put that in perspective, a typical paperclip is ~1 millimeter (mm) thick. Perfectly stack 5 paperclips. Now make another stack next to it with 3 paperclips. Now make a final stack with 1,000,000 paperclips next to the first two stacks. I hope you have a ladder because that's about a 0.62 mile high stack! Or around 3,200 ft, where people jump out of planes to go skydiving!

    To an engineer, statistician, machinists, carpenter, filing up the car with gas, etc, that also could easily be considered "nearly identical", don't you think?

    I sure wish I knew which states they choose for this latest "fact". I'd like to see if it holds true for 2008, 2009, 2011, 2012. Or maybe 2010 just gave them the roll of the dice numbers they needed to make their point.

    Note: the MAIG report does mention other statistics, but I choose to focus on the "Background checks" portion of it as that is what's currently in the legislature. Needless to say, most of those other homicides in the report happen in situations that already have a history of either domestic abuse, gang or drug activity, or other than domestic abuse criminal records (something around 60-85%).
     
    Last edited: Jun 22, 2014
  2. Jamie6.5

    Jamie6.5 Western OR Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    4,192
    Likes Received:
    4,380
    That's the same math they use when they talk about the increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide.
    Taken in terms of the Co2 increase alone, it looks rather significant.
    When measured against the total volume of atmospheric gasses, it amounts to next-to-nothing.

    And for those able to recognize such things, it will remain in the domain of the Spin-Meisters, out to sell an agenda.
     
    RK600 and (deleted member) like this.
  3. GunRightsCoalition

    GunRightsCoalition Vancouver Well-Known Member 2015 Volunteer 2016 Volunteer

    Messages:
    658
    Likes Received:
    412
    What I see is that domestic abuse homicide's with firearms are not nearly as prevalent as they would like us to believe. The rate is somewhere around 0.00000317 to 0.00000509 percent. (actually I see another problem here as they are only counting females) These numbers are so small that they would normally be tossed out due to a lack of having enough data to use them for anything definitive. This difference can just as easily be attributed to increased awareness and actually may be more responsible than the background checks for this change.
     
    rocky3 and (deleted member) like this.
  4. Stomper

    Stomper Oceania Rising White Is The New Brown Silver Supporter

    Messages:
    12,894
    Likes Received:
    19,470
    I wonder what's the score on how many women were beaten to death, strangled or stabbed, etc? Of course THAT doesn't matter because it's not within the paradigm they're shooting for. (No pun intended)
     
  5. GunRightsCoalition

    GunRightsCoalition Vancouver Well-Known Member 2015 Volunteer 2016 Volunteer

    Messages:
    658
    Likes Received:
    412
    It's in the figures above. There was an 8% increase in deaths without firearms if you use the same math used for firearms which is not "nearly identical" if you treat both figures the same as they are doing with firearms. Now if you treat them the same using their first set of guidelines where they say the figures are almost identical then this would also apply to both sets as well. I.E. They are almost identical for both firearm and non-firearm related homicides using the first criteria. This is typical misperception and data manipulation. What should be most striking (and is something we already know) is that they must resort to this to try to make their argument sound valid.
     
  6. Stomper

    Stomper Oceania Rising White Is The New Brown Silver Supporter

    Messages:
    12,894
    Likes Received:
    19,470
    Which proves the point that IF someone is determined to perpetrate deadly violence upon another person they will in on form or fashion regardless of the law.

    If we just specifically banned murder, think of all the lives that would be saved! ;)
     
  7. ZigZagZeke

    ZigZagZeke Eugene Silver Supporter Silver Supporter 2015 Volunteer

    Messages:
    2,697
    Likes Received:
    3,511
    What they are doing is quoting scientifically insignificant results as if they were scientifically significant. It's popular to believe that statistics is a fuzzy science that can be made to say anything one needs to be said. That's not true. Statistics is a very mathematically precise science, and the results are mathematically dependable, IF YOU DON'T LIE ABOUT THEM.

    The resultant numbers in this case have roughly a 90% chance of being the result of random variation. Reputable researchers don't report anything having a chance of being the result of random variation that is higher than either 5% or 1%, depending on the type of research being done. In other words, they are citing junk science.
     
  8. Stomper

    Stomper Oceania Rising White Is The New Brown Silver Supporter

    Messages:
    12,894
    Likes Received:
    19,470
    So, you DO admit that they used SCIENCE... The science has been settled, and if you support the 2A (or disagree with what I say) then you are a pedophiliac, racist, flat- earther full of hate... And there is no place for you here.

    ;)
     
  9. GunRightsCoalition

    GunRightsCoalition Vancouver Well-Known Member 2015 Volunteer 2016 Volunteer

    Messages:
    658
    Likes Received:
    412
    Summed it up well. With the exception of the first I've been called all of these and bunch more. To me it just means I'm winning the argument because they can't come up with anything better.
     
    Stomper and (deleted member) like this.
  10. Riot

    Riot Benton County, Washington Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    3,031
    Likes Received:
    1,718
    I hear marrige is the leading cause of divorce...

    :banana:
     
    Stomper, Morpheus, accessbob and 3 others like this.
  11. 2506

    2506 Seattle Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,368
    Likes Received:
    735
    perspective!

    graph.jpg

    graph.jpg
     
  12. ZigZagZeke

    ZigZagZeke Eugene Silver Supporter Silver Supporter 2015 Volunteer

    Messages:
    2,697
    Likes Received:
    3,511
    I had an argument with a man-made global warming believer the other day. His circular argument went like this:

    1. Anyone who presents evidence against man-made global warming is a "denier".
    2. "Deniers" have no credibility.
    3. Therefor, any evidence presented to refute man-made global warming isn't credible.

    His other argument is that studies refuting global warming aren't peer reviewed.

    My answer was that I'm pretty sure that in the time of Galileo and Copernicus all the peer reviewed, government (royally) funded studies clearly proved that the world was flat and that the sun revolved around the earth. So voting on something doesn't determine the reality of the situation.

    I place the blame for this squarely on our educational system, which discourages critical thinking instead of teaching it.
     
  13. Stomper

    Stomper Oceania Rising White Is The New Brown Silver Supporter

    Messages:
    12,894
    Likes Received:
    19,470
    Brilliant example of a squirrel on a wheel!
     
  14. Onramp

    Onramp Renton, Wa Member

    Messages:
    46
    Likes Received:
    28
    Lies, damn lies and statistics...
     
    Riot and (deleted member) like this.