Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
11/22/2017 10:05:29 PM
Posted: 9/17/2004 10:14:43 AM EST
[Last Edit: 9/17/2004 10:22:33 AM EST by garandman]
Our old pals at Emory Universitty are at again. Remember Michael Bellesiles???


userwww.service.emory.edu/~cozden/Dezhbakhsh_01_01_paper.pdf

This study was an evaluation that capital punishment IS a deterrent to crime (Forget that for the moment)

They followed up with the stupefying statement...

"A higher NRA presence, measured by NRA membership rate, seems to have a similar murder increasing effect." (pg 28, under concluding remarks, as measured on a county by county basis)

We can assume, tho they don't say it , they are talking about per capita rates.

Well NO DUH!!!!!!

It seems obvious greater percentages of NRA members are in rural areas - to wit, low per capita areas.

Thus a single murder in a rural area, would have a MUCH higher per capita murder rate than a dozen murders in NYC or Chicago with high per capita areas (where lower NRA membership exists.) They don't provide the NRA membership data by county, that I can tell.

Thus they come to the idiotic conclusion that NRA membership has some correlation to murder rates.

Further, the study ends in 1996 - when high NRA membership states passed CCW laws, and murder rates dropped measurably.

At what point do we conclude these idots are NOT idots by chance, but by choice???

Link Posted: 9/17/2004 10:18:59 AM EST
Numbnut bastards!
Link Posted: 9/17/2004 10:34:29 AM EST
So we're all murderers. What else is new?
Link Posted: 9/17/2004 10:40:05 AM EST
[Last Edit: 9/17/2004 10:42:40 AM EST by Red_Beard]

Originally Posted By garandman:It seems obvious greater percentages of NRA members are in rural areas - to wit, low per capita areas.



ok




Thus a single murder in a rural area, would have a MUCH higher per capita murder rate than a dozen murders in NYC or Chicago with high per capita areas (where lower NRA membership exists.) They don't provide the NRA membership data by county, that I can tell.



Not sure I follow. Can you provide a numerical example of this? Isn't murder rate, murders per person? How can a "single murder" have a rate?

I would think that if NRA membership was more common in rural areas, then a higher number of nra memberships per person would tie with lower number of murders per person.



Link Posted: 9/17/2004 10:41:15 AM EST
[Last Edit: 9/17/2004 11:42:56 AM EST by The_Macallan]
I like this one better:


Average Murder Rates In Counties Won By Gore Or Bush In 2000:

Gore: 6.5 Avg. Murder Rate Per "Gore" County In 2000
Bush: 4.1 Avg. Murder Rate Per "Bush" County In 2000

Thus, the average murder rate is 58% higher in counties that voted for Gore than counties that voted for Bush.





Link Posted: 9/17/2004 10:53:40 AM EST
[Last Edit: 9/17/2004 10:56:41 AM EST by motown_steve]

Originally Posted By Red_Beard:

Originally Posted By garandman:It seems obvious greater percentages of NRA members are in rural areas - to wit, low per capita areas.



ok




Thus a single murder in a rural area, would have a MUCH higher per capita murder rate than a dozen murders in NYC or Chicago with high per capita areas (where lower NRA membership exists.) They don't provide the NRA membership data by county, that I can tell.



Not sure I follow. Can you provide a numerical example of this? Isn't murder rate, murders per person? How can a "single murder" have a rate?

I would think that if NRA membership was more common in rural areas, then a higher number of nra memberships per person would tie with lower number of murders per person.






You have 8,000,000 people living in New York City and 1,000 people living in Podunk Kansas.

Let's say that in an average year you have 700 murders in New Yor City. The murder rate in New York City is 1 murder per 11,428 people.

Let's say you that in an average year you have 1 murder in Podunk Kansas. The murder rate in Podunk Kansas is 1 murder per 1,000 people.

The murder rate in Podunk Kansas is 11x that of New York City.

Let's say that 5% of the people living in New York are members of the NRA and 75% of the people in Podunk Kansas are members of the NRA.

The murder rate in cities with high NRA membership becomes 11x higher than the murder rate in cities with low NRA membership.

NRA members are therefore murderers.
Link Posted: 9/17/2004 10:55:34 AM EST
How did they get NRA membership by county? I doubt the NRA would give out that info.

BTW the Emory Medical School is practically ground-zero for junk science.

GunLvr
Link Posted: 9/17/2004 10:57:11 AM EST
"Ted Kennedy's car has killed more people than my gun."
Link Posted: 9/17/2004 10:58:39 AM EST

Originally Posted By Red_Beard:
Not sure I follow. Can you provide a numerical example of this? Isn't murder rate, murders per person? How can a "single murder" have a rate?

I would think that if NRA membership was more common in rural areas, then a higher number of nra memberships per person would tie with lower number of murders per person.






lets put some made up numbers to it (for illustrative purposes only.)

Rural, Texas has a pop of 15,700. They have a relatively high NRA membership rate. For a given year, they had 4 murders. Per capita murder rate is 1 in 3925.

Metropolis, Kalifornia has a population of 1,750,000 and had 100 murders . Per capita murder rate of 1 in 17,500, and a much lower NRA membership rate.

These idiots would conclude the high NRA membership rate in Rural, Texas caused the 4.46 times higher (17500 / 3925) murder per capita rate over metropolis, Kalifornia.

Even tho Metro, kali had TWENTY FIVE times more murders than Rural, Tx.

Ahhh, the beauty of stats.
Link Posted: 9/17/2004 10:58:55 AM EST
Correlation does not equal causation. End of discussion.
Link Posted: 9/17/2004 11:01:51 AM EST
[Last Edit: 9/17/2004 11:02:25 AM EST by motown_steve]

Originally Posted By killingmachine123:
Correlation does not equal causation. End of discussion.



[liberal mentality]The numerical statistics provide validation for my preconcieved belief that guns are dangerous and that all NRA members are killers. [/liberal mentality]
Link Posted: 9/17/2004 11:01:56 AM EST

Originally Posted By killingmachine123:
Correlation does not equal causation. End of discussion.




There's not even any correlation.

Link Posted: 9/17/2004 11:06:34 AM EST
So, if your examples are like the real data, then he's not really twisting anything ... he's just pointing out a correlation between nra membership per person and murders per person.



I was under the impression that rural areas had a lower murder rate i.e. fewer murders per person than urban areas. In which case, a higher nra membership per head in rural areas would tie to fewer murders per head.

I'm going to look up real numbers.

Link Posted: 9/17/2004 11:08:04 AM EST
T Mac -


Gota link for that?? One for the archives
Link Posted: 9/17/2004 11:08:44 AM EST

Originally Posted By garandman:

Originally Posted By killingmachine123:
Correlation does not equal causation. End of discussion.




There's not even any correlation.




Yup. They develop six models, and NRA membership only shows a statistically significant correlation in three of them. Or in laymen speak, there is a 50-50 chance that NRA membership (and their posited link to easier gun availability) has nothing to do with murder rates.

Color me shocked.
Link Posted: 9/17/2004 11:10:36 AM EST

Originally Posted By Red_Beard:

I'm going to look up real numbers.





That's the thing - the study doesn't (to my reading) supply the numbers. One is left to guess, Or research himself. YOu and i would do that. The average liberal wouldn't have enuf stamina to get himself a Pepsi in preparation to do the resaearch.

And YES, it is misleading to say there is a correlation between NRA membership rates and per capita murder rates.

Link Posted: 9/17/2004 11:39:18 AM EST
[Last Edit: 9/17/2004 11:42:36 AM EST by The_Macallan]

Originally Posted By garandman:
T Mac -


Gota link for that?? One for the archives

Snopes Go to the bottom of the page for the real stuff. BTW... I made an arithmetical error and it's been fixed. See above.

Link Posted: 9/17/2004 12:19:57 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/17/2004 12:20:30 PM EST by tax_monster]

Originally Posted By Red_Beard:
I was under the impression that rural areas had a lower murder rate i.e. fewer murders per person than urban areas. In which case, a higher nra membership per head in rural areas would tie to fewer murders per head.



Well, you can only kill a guy once...

<­BR>



Edited to add: Unless he's a ZOMBIE! aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah!
Link Posted: 9/17/2004 12:26:19 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/17/2004 12:29:29 PM EST by nightstalker]
How many NRA members are there in Washington DC? Do you have to flunk statistics to graduate from Emory?
Link Posted: 9/17/2004 1:48:05 PM EST


As a stat prof told me once--figures do lie, and liars do figure....

You can prove anything you want with statistics--just gotta cut 'em your way.

Link Posted: 9/17/2004 1:56:03 PM EST

Originally Posted By GunLvrPHD:
How did they get NRA membership by county? I doubt the NRA would give out that info.

BTW the Emory Medical School is practically ground-zero for junk science.

GunLvr



They counted the bumper stickers on the pick up trucks.
Link Posted: 9/17/2004 1:56:30 PM EST
As long as it's the bad guys dying who cares?
Link Posted: 9/17/2004 2:43:25 PM EST

Originally Posted By motown_steve:
<snip>

You have 8,000,000 people living in New York City and 1,000 people living in Podunk Kansas. <snip>




I've been to Podunk, Kansas. It's more like 50 people. Trust me.
Link Posted: 9/17/2004 2:51:33 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/17/2004 2:51:59 PM EST by Janus]
How does this correlate to the study that show Arfcom membership leads to a much higher divorce rate?
Top Top