OT Environmentalists may be in deep Kimchee

formatting link
"25 States allow anyone to buy a gun, strap it on, and walk down the street with no permit of any kind: some say it's crazy. However, 4 out of 5 US murders are committed in the other half of the country: so who is crazy?" -- Andrew Ford

Reply to
Gunner
Loading thread data ...

Gunner wrote: (clip) 4 out of 5 US murders are committed in the other half of the country (clip) ^^^^^^^^^^^^ You can divide the country in "half" by area, by number of states, or by population. Unless you know the murder rate per capita under the two sets of laws, you can be misled by statistics like this.

Reply to
Leo Lichtman

its pretty clear to me.

Gunner "25 States allow anyone to buy a gun, strap it on, and walk down the street with no permit of any kind: some say it's crazy. However, 4 out of 5 US murders are committed in the other half of the country: so who is crazy?" -- Andrew Ford

Reply to
Gunner

population. Unless you know the murder rate per capita under the two sets of laws, you can be misled by statistics like this.

Statistics are only usefull to law makers trying promote thier own agenda, which in most cases is not in the best interest of the average citizen. Unfortunatly most people will ignore truth in favor of statistics that support the illusion of saftey provided by laws.

Best Regards Tom.

Reply to
AZOTIC

Mr. Ford, if there is such a person, is crazy. 'You want the numbers, or would you rather keep believing a lie and perpetuating it, in good old effective Joseph Goebbel's style?

Oh, what the hell: There are 27 open carry states and they represent 32.95% of the population. They also are the states in which 31.26% of the murders are committed. Those are 2001 figures, US Census and FBI Uniform Crime Reports. I have the Excel workbooks on it if you don't believe it, and you're welcome to them.

If there is an Andrew Ford, and if you know who he is, you can tell him for me that he's either a fool or a liar, or a little bit of both.

Reply to
Ed Huntress

Damn. Here you go again, confusing Gunner with facts. :)

Reply to
Jim Kovar

I am far from a gun nut and cringe every time I say something supporting Gunner but those statistics, on a per capata basis, seem to say that open carry laws have very little to do with murder rates.

Don't you watch Faux News? That is the style of today's conservative reporting. Take an insignificant fact, twist it a little, add a few false assumptions for support and spew it out as "news".

Reply to
Glenn Ashmore

You watch. It won't faze him in the least. He'll keep using it even though he knows it's a crock of bull. He's too much of a True Believer to let the facts stand in the way of a good rant.

Ed Huntress

Reply to
Ed Huntress

That's about the size of it. There seems to be no relationship at all. The contention that 4/5 of the murders occur in non-open-carry states is either looney or a lie, and, of course, it conveniently ignores the populations in those states. I vote for a lie, having done some pro-gun lobbying myself and knowing something about the people who cook up those numbers.

I'm reading a book right now about the psychology of persuasion and propaganda (_Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion_, by Robert Cialidini. Widely acclaimed book; all my friends in advertising and marketing are reading it. ). Although it was written before the latest round of culture wars, you'll recognize today's key players in there, and the common human weaknesses they prey upon.

Reply to
Ed Huntress

Yea but you forgot that California has an open carry law and leads the nation in murders as a state. Of course the population of California is about 20% of the nation as a whole.

I wonder where your figures are if you lump California with the non carry states.

I'll bet your percentages go way way down.

The Independent

Ed Huntress wrote:

Reply to
Jim Dauven

Geesh Ed. I'm considered by y'all as conservative and even I didnt buy that one from Gunner.

Y'all are too worried about guns and not enough of what causes crime in the first place. Lack of education, parental control, poverty, alcohol and substance abuse, inner city BS and the lack of proper punishment.

Lots of things to fix that are at the crux of the biscuit. But, bring up guns in any context and alluva sudden everybody's a statistician of sorts. Gun crimes are easy to cite. The problems I stated are not so easy to track down.

I know you were arguing with Gunner not me. Sowee to step on yer post but thought I might nudge it in another direction. Hope ya dont mind. :)

Bing

Reply to
Bing

Betcha a bagel he doesn't respond at all- that's his way of dealing with anything he can't refute.

-Carl

Reply to
Carl Byrns

not crossposted

On Sun, 30 Nov 2003 14:01:42 GMT, "Ed Huntress" brought forth from the murky depths:

That would reduce his claimed 80% down to 68.74%, not a large drop. (murders outside the totin' area)

I'd like to see those workbooks, please, Ed. (Deslash my email address and insert a 'v'.)

Both. He was a senator in the CONgress. ;)

formatting link
3k hits.

============================================================== Like peace and quiet? Buy a phoneless cord. http://www/diversify.com/stees.html Hilarious T-shirts online ==============================================================

Reply to
Larry Jaques

On Sun, 30 Nov 2003 09:18:08 -0500, Glenn Ashmore brought forth from the murky depths:

Not that I want to stand up for the idiots claiming to be conservatives nowadays, but the "little spin" you just discussed is identical to that used by the liberals & environmentalists. Hard fact is hard to come by.

============================================================== Like peace and quiet? Buy a phoneless cord. http://www/diversify.com/stees.html Hilarious T-shirts online ==============================================================

Reply to
Larry Jaques

Odd. My personal suspicion is this exact reason is why one former poster here departed. He (Peter Albrecht) objected strenuously to the "my view is just as valid is your view" theory of life. And was simply unable to avoid zooming in and stepping on toes when the "valid" view that was being maintained, was simply incorrect.

Fun to watch though. You, however, have a much smoother approach to shooting somebody full of holes, Ed.

Jim

================================================== please reply to: JRR(zero) at yktvmv (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com ==================================================

Reply to
jim rozen

Ed:

So would the Andrew Ford quote be acceptable if it were changed to:

============================================ "27 States allow anyone to buy a gun, strap it on, ^^^^ and walk down the street with no permit of any kind: some say it's crazy. However, **2 out of 3** US murders ^^^^^^^^^^^ are committed in the other half of the country: so who is crazy?" -- ============================================

Reply to
BottleBob

On Sun, 30 Nov 2003 14:44:12 GMT, "Ed Huntress" brought forth from the murky depths:

It's hard to find with a bogus author. (Actually Cialdini, no middle 'i') My library has it and I'll check it out after I finish Niven's "The Mote in God's Eye".

Sounds like my black-sheep cousin (an attorney) could use it, too.

Written in 1985, revised in 1993. I'm sure our weaknesses haven't changed that much.

============================================================== Like peace and quiet? Buy a phoneless cord. http://www/diversify.com/stees.html Hilarious T-shirts online ==============================================================

Reply to
Larry Jaques

I didn't forget. California isn't an open-carry state. It's a "may-issue" state that requires a CCW, just like New Jersey

Right where they are as I reported them, because California IS a non-carry state.

Guess again.

Ed Huntress

Reply to
Ed Huntress

Not at all. Sometimes they can be looked up an measured to see if they're true or not.

You aren't quoting phony statistics at "truth" to put forward your point. You've introduced some things that need investigation. Maybe they can be measured, or maybe they can't. But that's a legit basis for debate. Phony stats are not.

Ed Huntress

Reply to
Ed Huntress

It depends on whether you like propaganda or not. If you find that kind of argument acceptable (and you know why it is or isn't), you, too, may be accepted for a Joseph Goebbels Scholarship at the university of your choice.

However, it would be statistically correct, in the way that propaganda sometimes uses the truth to tell lies. Ford's original quote is a lie itself.

Ed Huntress

Reply to
Ed Huntress

PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.