- Messages
- 457
- Reactions
- 583
So let this be the thread. It isn't enough to respond here with: "Well, obviously the study is funded by Bloomberg so of course it is bull$$!". That is the height of intellectual laziness. We need a place where we can print off members mathematical analyses to these studies that are proliferating everywhere in the media and social media, and show friends, family, even repost in comments (with permission) on news articles, social media, etc.
What we need in this thread:
(1) People skilled in mathematics, particularly statistics, to look at individual studies and show how either the math is wrong or is cherry picked to further a particular agenda. We need someone to show -- logically -- why the particular study in question is flawed or is doubtful there is enough information to draw sweeping conclusions from.
(2) People who are scientifically literate to understand different research methodologies, the strengths and weaknesses of each, etc. to cast enough doubt to discredit the study.
So let's begin the intellectual battle. As new studies are pushed out by the anti-gun crowd, feel free to add the link to the actual study here. If it is behind a paywall let us know. Some of us may have researcher access to these articles.
Here is one I think we should discuss:
Violence Policy Center
Firearm Justifiable Homicides and Non-Fatal Self-Defense Gun Use An Analysis of Federal Bureau of Investigation and National Crime Victimization Survey Data
Published JUNE 2015.
Brief summary of VPC findings: "Guns are rarely used to kill criminals or stop crimes. In 2012, across the nation there were only 259 justifiable homicides involving a private citizen using a firearm reported to the Federal Bureau of Investigation's Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program as detailed in its Supplementary Homicide Report (SHR). That same year, there were 8,342 criminal gun homicides tallied in the SHR. In 2012, for every justifiable homicide in the United States involving a gun, guns were used in 32 criminal homicides . And this ratio, of course, does not take into account the tens of thousands of lives ended in gun suicides or unintentional shootings that year."
What we need in this thread:
(1) People skilled in mathematics, particularly statistics, to look at individual studies and show how either the math is wrong or is cherry picked to further a particular agenda. We need someone to show -- logically -- why the particular study in question is flawed or is doubtful there is enough information to draw sweeping conclusions from.
(2) People who are scientifically literate to understand different research methodologies, the strengths and weaknesses of each, etc. to cast enough doubt to discredit the study.
So let's begin the intellectual battle. As new studies are pushed out by the anti-gun crowd, feel free to add the link to the actual study here. If it is behind a paywall let us know. Some of us may have researcher access to these articles.
Here is one I think we should discuss:
Violence Policy Center
Firearm Justifiable Homicides and Non-Fatal Self-Defense Gun Use An Analysis of Federal Bureau of Investigation and National Crime Victimization Survey Data
Published JUNE 2015.
Brief summary of VPC findings: "Guns are rarely used to kill criminals or stop crimes. In 2012, across the nation there were only 259 justifiable homicides involving a private citizen using a firearm reported to the Federal Bureau of Investigation's Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program as detailed in its Supplementary Homicide Report (SHR). That same year, there were 8,342 criminal gun homicides tallied in the SHR. In 2012, for every justifiable homicide in the United States involving a gun, guns were used in 32 criminal homicides . And this ratio, of course, does not take into account the tens of thousands of lives ended in gun suicides or unintentional shootings that year."
Last Edited:
