- Brady Bunch
- Exchanger
Offline - Registered: 1/29/2015
- Posts: 862
Re: Connecticut's strict gun law linked to large homicide drop
Goose wrote:
Also, couldn't the same thing be said about Bloomberg and the people who performed the study? Aren't they advocates for gun control legislation?
Did Bloomberg do the study?
I thought it was Johns Hopkins. I wouldn't put them in the same class as the CPRC.
They may not be in the same class as CPRC, but they also have an agenda. Just a quick look at their website and it is easy to see they are proponents of gun control policies.
I am fine with that, but I think it should be known that is the policy position they are coming from.
- Rongone
- Sentient Being
Offline
- From: Keeping Calm, Sailing On
- Registered: 1/31/2015
- Posts: 2,872
Re: Connecticut's strict gun law linked to large homicide drop
Why is it difficult to accept the fact that, if you remove/limit one of the major aspects of a problem situation, it may lead down a path to solving the problem?
- Goose
- Cogito ergo sum
Offline
- Registered: 1/29/2015
- Posts: 13,427
Re: Connecticut's strict gun law linked to large homicide drop
The CPRC's mission is to argue against gun laws.
So, you know exacly how they are going to react to any study, anywhere that shows that a law might have a psoitive effect. There is no honest scholarship. Their minds are closed.Understood. But as they pointed out, homicide rates by guns were falling for several years before the law was even implemented. And if they had counted stats for several years after 2005, the study would have had a different outcome.
I am merely pointing out that this study was selective in the data it used, presumably to get the outcome they wanted.
As a statistician friend of mine is fond of saying, So what?
That's a bit of foul play right there. The CPRC is criticizing the study that documented a 40% in gun murders by pointing out that the murder rate had fallen in the two years prior to passage of the gun law.
They are trying to get you to conclude that, since the rate had fallen in the past, it was going to continue to fall no matter what was done, and thus "proving" the law didn't have anything to do with it.
How does that work? Because a rate fell over two years, am I to conclude that it was going to continue to fall in the future, just because it is? That is faulty logic. It would be like saying that, if the stock market falls 10% this year it will be guarranteed to fall 10% next year.
10% less rain this year means 10% less next year?
There is absolutely no reason to conclude that the rate was going to continue to fall.
This is not a valid means of analyzing the study. Typical MO of the CPRC.
We live in a time in which decent and otherwise sensible people are surrendering too easily to the hectoring of morons or extremists.
- •
Thread Starter- Brady Bunch
- Exchanger
Offline
- Registered: 1/29/2015
- Posts: 862
Re: Connecticut's strict gun law linked to large homicide drop
The CPRC's mission is to argue against gun laws.
So, you know exacly how they are going to react to any study, anywhere that shows that a law might have a psoitive effect. There is no honest scholarship. Their minds are closed.Understood. But as they pointed out, homicide rates by guns were falling for several years before the law was even implemented. And if they had counted stats for several years after 2005, the study would have had a different outcome.
I am merely pointing out that this study was selective in the data it used, presumably to get the outcome they wanted.So what?
That's a bit of foul play right there. The CPRC is criticizing the study that documented a 40% in gun murders by pointing out that the murder rate had fallen in the two years prior to passage of the gun law.
They are trying to get you to conclude that, since the rate had fallen in the past, it was going to continue to fall no matter what was done, and thus "proving" the law didn't have anything to do with it.
How does that work? Because a rate fell over two years, am I to conclude that it was going to continue to fall in the future, just because it is? That is faulty logic. It would be like saying that, if the stock market falls 10% this year it will be guarranteed to fall 10% next year.
10% less rain this year means 10% less next year?
This is not a valid means of analyzing the study. Typical MO of the CPRC.
Murder rates by guns did continue to decrease, nationwide during that timeframe. Murder rates had been on the decline before they enacted the law, both in CT and nationwide and have continued that downward trend.
It is convenient that they stopped the study at 10 years and didn't go to 15 years, when it would have shown the rate dropped in CT dropped 12.5% between 1995 and 2010. Meanwhile from 1995 and 2010, the US firearm homicide rate fell by 39% and the Northeast firearm homicide rate fell by 31%. This would have completely changed the narrative of the study and the effectiveness of gun control regulations.
My point is, you must be able to analyze all facts and understand the bias everyone brings to this, including the authors of the study and Bloomberg and also CPRC.
Last edited by Brady Bunch (6/13/2015 12:45 pm)
- Goose
- Cogito ergo sum
Offline
- Registered: 1/29/2015
- Posts: 13,427
Re: Connecticut's strict gun law linked to large homicide drop
Yea, if you are willing to jump between state rates and regional rates, use the past as a guarrantee of the future, and otheriwse mix apples and oranges, you can argue anyway you want. But, it's not particularly useful for increasing understanding..
Why do you keep coming back to Bloomberg like a dog with a bone?
We live in a time in which decent and otherwise sensible people are surrendering too easily to the hectoring of morons or extremists.
- •
Thread Starter- Goose
- Cogito ergo sum
Offline
- Registered: 1/29/2015
- Posts: 13,427
Re: Connecticut's strict gun law linked to large homicide drop
Here's a study of the effects of Missouri repealing their handgun licensing law.
We live in a time in which decent and otherwise sensible people are surrendering too easily to the hectoring of morons or extremists.
- •
Thread Starter- Goose
- Cogito ergo sum
Offline
- Registered: 1/29/2015
- Posts: 13,427
Re: Connecticut's strict gun law linked to large homicide drop
Now, I guess that we can continue to pretend that no regulations ever imagined could affect the rate of deaths by firearms - that firearms are completely unlike anything else on the planet, cars, planes, building materials, fire codes, etc, etc.
There's just nothing that could ever be done,,,,,,,,,
We live in a time in which decent and otherwise sensible people are surrendering too easily to the hectoring of morons or extremists.
- •
Thread Starter- Brady Bunch
- Exchanger
Offline
- Registered: 1/29/2015
- Posts: 862
Re: Connecticut's strict gun law linked to large homicide drop
Yea, if you are willing to jump between state rates and regional rates, use the past as a guarrantee of the future, and otheriwse mix apples and oranges, you can argue anyway you want. But, it's not particularly useful for increasing understanding..
Why do you keep coming back to Bloomberg like a dog with a bone?
Like a dog with a bone? Come on, I mentioned everyone has a side they are trying to support, including CPRC, the authors at Johns Hopkins and Bloomberg. It isn't like I only mentioned Bloomberg.
- Goose
- Cogito ergo sum
Offline
- Registered: 1/29/2015
- Posts: 13,427
Re: Connecticut's strict gun law linked to large homicide drop
Yea, if you are willing to jump between state rates and regional rates, use the past as a guarrantee of the future, and otheriwse mix apples and oranges, you can argue anyway you want. But, it's not particularly useful for increasing understanding..
Why do you keep coming back to Bloomberg like a dog with a bone?
Like a dog with a bone? Come on, I mentioned everyone has a side they are trying to support, including CPRC, the authors at Johns Hopkins and Bloomberg. It isn't like I only mentioned Bloomberg.
Why?
Are you suggesting that Bloomberg cooked the numbers in the study?
If there is evidence of academic misconduct at Hopkins, let's see it.
Last edited by Goose (6/13/2015 1:10 pm)
We live in a time in which decent and otherwise sensible people are surrendering too easily to the hectoring of morons or extremists.
- •
Thread Starter- Brady Bunch
- Exchanger
Offline
- Registered: 1/29/2015
- Posts: 862
Re: Connecticut's strict gun law linked to large homicide drop
Yea, if you are willing to jump between state rates and regional rates, use the past as a guarrantee of the future, and otheriwse mix apples and oranges, you can argue anyway you want. But, it's not particularly useful for increasing understanding..
Why do you keep coming back to Bloomberg like a dog with a bone?
Like a dog with a bone? Come on, I mentioned everyone has a side they are trying to support, including CPRC, the authors at Johns Hopkins and Bloomberg. It isn't like I only mentioned Bloomberg.
Why?
Are you suggesting that Bloomberg cooked the numbers in the study?
No, what I am saying is Bloomberg is for gun regulations. They wouldn't have had interest in a study that doesn't show gun regulations show a postive result. I'm saying if the authors would have done the study for the 15 year period and shown that the result was different, Bloomberg wouldn't be involved.
I don't have an issue wih them being pro-gun regulation, but if they present a study we have to understand they have a side they are trying to promote. If someone has an idea they are trying to promote, I don't think we should take what they say at face value and should investiagte. This goes for both sides of an argument.