In the last 5 months there have been at least 71 kids killed by guns. Average just under 6 years old

[Pholus]

289. Actually, we are now discussing innumeracy. Yours. Among other failings.

Last edited Mon May 13, 2013, 09:45 PM - Edit history (1)

If the OP numbers are right, 71 one children in five months is 140 children per year. That is actually low but they're biasing towards little kids and not counting teens. Given that there are approximately 74 million children the odds are more like one in 500000, not one in a million. So first off, you lose points on sloppiness.

Using these numbers there is a 499999/500000 chance that a given kid makes it through one year. "Surprisingly small" as you have said so smugly...

Of course, and to put this in terms that your "peerless" knowledge of gun control issues should mean you are aware of the "Russian Roulette" effect as well. More than one trigger pull (even spinning the cylinder between shots) lowers your overall chance of survival. I take your self-proclaimed brilliance about these matters as an indicator I don't have to explain the calculation but take those annual odds over 18 years and there is now a 29999/30000 chance a given kid is still around. That number seems solid given the 1996 National Research Council numbers placing the adult lifetime odds at 1 in 3074 that you "get capped" at some point (to use those fancy terms you know *so* much better than I).

One in 30000 don't make it to 18. So, Mr. Expert is that a "big" or "surprisingly small" number? I guess you think it's small since it simply follows from the last one.

But let me now explain that in the terms that *I* understand. In my children's smaller urban school district I should expect 2 fatal shootings involving their classmates to occur while they are attending school there. We beat the odds at this point in that we've only had one. Yay for us. But before we break out the bubbly my kids are only halfway to 18 so actually we're right on track.

It's also why I am so interested in that simple question you are WAY too gutless to answer. Come on, "surprisingly small" COMPARED TO WHAT? As a scientist, I don't get "surprised" at anything under a factor of 10 so I am simply trying to see how far down the rabbit hole you are. After how many shootings in my school district do I get your oh-so-important permission to be upset with just cause?

But you desperately don't want to answer. You want the narrative to be that I am the "emotional, abusive and often ignorant" one though all I have done is point out the full implications of your apparently uninformed statement that you STILL refuse to quantify properly. And now we're on to the part of the show you trot out the well-worn accusations of "waving dead kids like props" to hope the topic changes.

It's not going to. Worse, you just made another ignorant statement. As opposed to what exactly? What's your counter plan? Sounds like it is to bury them by the light of the moon, speak of them in hushed whispers if at all and pretend that it's all okay.

Simply awesome!