tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14815894.post5147864593059349915..comments2024-03-27T06:52:45.545-04:00Comments on Bayblab: Epidemiology of Gun Violence in the City of Brotherly LoveKamelhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15548259062576527751noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14815894.post-90892937012198015632010-01-18T10:27:04.766-05:002010-01-18T10:27:04.766-05:00Cool post as for me. It would be great to read mor...Cool post as for me. It would be great to read more concerning that matter. Thank you for posting that data.<br />Joan Stepsen<br /><a href="http://gadgetproducts.com/" rel="nofollow">Buy gadget</a>Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14815894.post-48120513222510853162009-10-06T18:57:42.386-04:002009-10-06T18:57:42.386-04:00Forget all that - check out these photos of other ...Forget all that - check out <a href="http://www.digitalpicturezone.com/digital-pictures/30-colorful-examples-of-high-speed-bullet-photography/" rel="nofollow">these photos</a> of other damage a gun can do in your house. Won't somebody think of the vegetables?Kamelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15548259062576527751noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14815894.post-25850812201098449722009-10-06T18:31:00.128-04:002009-10-06T18:31:00.128-04:00"To me that sounds a bit out of touch with th..."To me that sounds a bit out of touch with the realities of someone who feels that they live in circumstances where owning a gun is desirable."<br /><br />Or perhaps it's in line with the realities of numerous other studies that show that you're more likely to be shot by a gun that's owned by yourself, a friend or relative; that for every successful self-defense use there are many more accidental shootings; that having a gun in the home triples the likelihood of a family member being killed.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14815894.post-16524127092432348922009-10-06T11:35:18.155-04:002009-10-06T11:35:18.155-04:00I'm always packin' my Uzzi,
so when I hea...I'm always packin' my Uzzi, <br />so when I hear about them bitches at MIT utter the words "string theory"<br />I give them a lesson in bullet probability. <br /><br />You say possession can make me a victim, <br />but you haven't heard the MC hawking dictum,<br />You'll be dead before you can shoot me, <br />Even if I have to violate temporal causality.MC Hawkingnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14815894.post-70433932314983162002009-10-05T22:58:41.115-04:002009-10-05T22:58:41.115-04:00No, they looked at people who weren't assaulte...No, they looked at people who weren't assaulted and were/weren't armed as well.<br /><br />The case participants were those who were shot in an assault, the control participants were those who weren't shot at all (from a random dialing sample). Then they looked at who was carrying and who wasn't. Sorry if that wasn't clear.<br /><br />From there you can look at who was packing and was shot, who was packing and wasn't, who wasn't armed and was shot, and who was unarmed and un-assaulted.<br /><br />They found when comparing these groups that people who carried firearms were roughly 4.5 times more likely to be the victims of gun violence.<br /><br />As pointed out in the OP, by rob and now by you, one of the problems with this study (and a problem with the case-control method in general) is that you can't really separate "people who carry guns and get shot" from "people who are likely to be shot and therefore carry a gun".<br /><br />BUT from the data in the paper, at the very least, it seems that 1) carrying a gun is an indicator of risk even if not the source of said risk and 2) carrying a firearm does not seem to be protective. And again, yes the study is flawed and one better designed to answer the questions that you and Rob bring up would be preferable.Kamelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15548259062576527751noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14815894.post-22840066608387611752009-10-05T22:45:38.717-04:002009-10-05T22:45:38.717-04:00I'm kind of confused. The study compares only ...I'm kind of confused. The study compares only people who were assaulted in the first place, armed or not?<br /><br />What about all the people who didn't get messed with because they were packing? Or the people who didn't get shot at because they shot the other bastard first? Isn't that kind of the point of defensive armament?<br /><br />Maybe that's another question that should have been asked here? Of people who choose to arm themselves, how many avoid violent attack vs those who do not pack heat?<br /><br />It's the other side of the issue. Would address Rob's point and would probably be of greater interest to people who feel the need to defend themselves from the dangers of their hood.Baymanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03436172198266062229noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14815894.post-26655514963479217832009-10-05T14:52:11.245-04:002009-10-05T14:52:11.245-04:00As you mention ignoring the location is a fatal fl...As you mention ignoring the location is a fatal flaw for trying to suggest causation.<br />Additionally, instead of trying to blame the victims of gun violence for being shot, which is the tone of this post, because they carry a gun, perhaps the conclusion of this research should be that work needs to be done to eliminate the causes of gun ownership. As you suggest these may include things like neighbourhood concentrations of low income and illicit drug trafficking. Addressing these issues would decrease legitimate gun owner intentions and those who own guns for criminal purposes.<br />Otherwise I think that you could paraphrase this research by saying,"Research, done in collaboration with the police, say that you shouldn't own a gun, for your own safety." To me that sounds a bit out of touch with the realities of someone who feels that they live in circumstances where owning a gun is desirable.Robhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11878582460269426199noreply@blogger.com