General Discussion

Fumesucker

(45,851 posts)

12. You said the numbers always had to divide by population

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 10:10 AM

Dec 2012

Now you are changing your tune.

You advise precision for others but state your case imprecisely.

Perhaps you could find some equation to correlate the story I posted before with this one.

http://www.theatlanticwire.com/global/2012/05/german-police-used-only-85-bullets-against-people-2011/52162/

German Police Used Only 85 Bullets Against People in 2011

According to Germany's Der Spiegel, German police shot only 85 bullets in all of 2011, a stark reminder that not every country is as gun-crazy as the U.S. of A. As Boing Boing translates, most of those shots weren't even aimed anyone: "49 warning shots, 36 shots on suspects. 15 persons were injured, 6 were killed."

Evidently German police are horribly trained, they fired more warning shots than killing ones.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

69 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

On guns, and the way the discussions are conducted. [View all] redgreenandblue Dec 2012 OP

Thanks for the inane advice billh58 Dec 2012 #1

The statistics twisting isn't isolated pipoman Dec 2012 #2

Still trying to ascribe that chart to Brady, huh? Scuba Jan 2013 #46

I can ascribe it to anyone I wish. pipoman Jan 2013 #61

Yes, proper use of statistical data is "inane." Lizzie Poppet Dec 2012 #28

Your post is a long-winded exercise in willful ignorance. Robb Dec 2012 #3

Have you comprehended my post? redgreenandblue Dec 2012 #4

plot this? farminator3000 Jan 2013 #57

Actually, 10,000 gun deaths is 10,000 more than nothing. Iggo Dec 2012 #5

Good point, one that the gun culture misses. Hoyt Dec 2012 #11

Sometimes absolute numbers are interesting and revealing in and of themselves Fumesucker Dec 2012 #6

When something scales up with system size, you need to divide by system size. redgreenandblue Dec 2012 #8

You said the numbers always had to divide by population Fumesucker Dec 2012 #12

"Argumentum ad Logicam" i.e. "Fallacist's Fallacy" redgreenandblue Dec 2012 #16

So you assumed that a group of mostly laymen would have your grasp of statistics immediately Fumesucker Dec 2012 #17

Exactly like the NRA assumes billh58 Dec 2012 #20

There may be a relationship, and I am not in fact claiming that America doesn't have a gun problem. redgreenandblue Dec 2012 #21

No... LP2K12 Dec 2012 #7

Gun huggers hate absolute numbers. 99Forever Dec 2012 #9

Here's an easy enough rule...IF there were no guns, there could be no gun violence. jmg257 Dec 2012 #10

The graph you are looking for is this one: redgreenandblue Dec 2012 #13

Thanks! nt jmg257 Dec 2012 #14

I do love that chart Recursion Dec 2012 #19

Very interesting. redgreenandblue Jan 2013 #55

Linear Corr is too subjective AldoLeopold Dec 2012 #29

It can be revealing despite its limitations Recursion Jan 2013 #58

Excellent post.... ileus Dec 2012 #15

What else do guns do to people? nt Robyn66 Dec 2012 #43

Guns don't do anything to people? ileus Dec 2012 #44

So the gun has nothing to do with people being shot? Robyn66 Jan 2013 #47

OK. DanTex Dec 2012 #18

+1000 billh58 Dec 2012 #22

Thanks. redgreenandblue Dec 2012 #23

I think the comparison to Vietnam is not entirely valid. redgreenandblue Dec 2012 #24

I was there, and you're wrong. billh58 Dec 2012 #30

I think you read my post the wrong way. redgreenandblue Dec 2012 #38

Some fair points, but... DanTex Dec 2012 #32

Great post. Thank you. nt Chorophyll Dec 2012 #34

that's more than OK! farminator3000 Jan 2013 #50

I have a problem with this whole discussion Robyn66 Dec 2012 #25

Statistics are cold, but they are what matters when thinking about policy. redgreenandblue Dec 2012 #26

Then why do you need to use statistics Robyn66 Dec 2012 #33

Because manipulated billh58 Dec 2012 #35

It is often in a person's best interest to be treated as a statistic. redgreenandblue Dec 2012 #39

But you ARE arguing in opposition to billh58 Dec 2012 #42

Can you argue a point without resorting to ad hominem attacks? redgreenandblue Jan 2013 #52

Of course your billh58 Jan 2013 #56

Because "common sense" can lead to wrong conclusions. redgreenandblue Jan 2013 #54

That's great when you arent talking about lives being lost. (nt) Robyn66 Jan 2013 #60

You are kidding, right? redgreenandblue Jan 2013 #64

Ok I give up Robyn66 Jan 2013 #68

I consider any life lost a tragedy. redgreenandblue Jan 2013 #69

Why is per capita so critical, when the U.S. is 10th highest in the world? DirkGently Dec 2012 #27

There you go. billh58 Dec 2012 #31

Among "developed" nations, we are the bottom of the barrel in more ways than one. Chorophyll Dec 2012 #36

Unfortunately, too true. billh58 Dec 2012 #40

I don't think the per capita helps you here dsc Dec 2012 #37

I fear the other driver more than any terrorist or gun, plane crash, robber, home invaders, police, L0oniX Dec 2012 #41

"The fact that over ten thousand people die from guns each year contains zero usable information." Scuba Jan 2013 #45

There is a disturbing trend on this site Robyn66 Jan 2013 #49

Actually, the 2nd Amendment "has nothing to do with hunting"..n/t pipoman Jan 2013 #62

Worst offender: Michael Moore. BULLSHIT spanone Jan 2013 #48

Only those supporting control of firearms are under this kind of scrutiny? Buzz Clik Jan 2013 #51

No. The arguments in favor of gun posession should face the same scrutiny. redgreenandblue Jan 2013 #53

Good! I would love to see.... Buzz Clik Jan 2013 #59

Or the number of billh58 Jan 2013 #63

0.0000000008.25 % of US population killed in Sandy Hook Elementary School Massacre. ehrenfeucht games Jan 2013 #65

No, because this is again an incorrect way to argue with statistics. redgreenandblue Jan 2013 #66

We could talk in absolute numbers. 20 children. 6 women. ehrenfeucht games Jan 2013 #67