Results 1 to 16 of 16

Thread: Anti-Gunners trying to cause fear again.

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Centralia, MO
    Posts
    144

    Anti-Gunners trying to cause fear again.

    http://www.foxnews.com/health/2014/0...tcmp=obnetwork

    Just came across this and had to laugh, from what I gather from it I have a six fold increase since I own two guns....Lol.

  2. #2
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    11,104
    Bogus "study."

    "Weapons that are stored unloaded and outside of the household seem to pose the lowest risk of suicide and homicide," they wrote. "As such avenues must be made available to promote this option, thereby focusing on the safety of the household and all members of the household."
    Well, there ya go. Have your local LEA store your firearm for you, and they can bring it with them, to your home, so that you can defend yourself.

    The flip side is not addressed because they were not attempting to address the reality of a firearm in the home preserving life. They will not subvert their agenda. Their agenda only needed some pliable statistics to validate their limited view of the world.

    If those nitwits were my kids, I'd be demanding my money back from their respective "institutions of higher learning."

  3. #3
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    11,104
    How about this?.....garbage in garbage out.

  4. #4
    Regular Member WalkingWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    11,728
    Like I should give a poop how and why someone decides to end their life. Japan has a higher suicide rate than us, yet they are not allowed guns. Hmmmmmmm?
    It is well that war is so terrible otherwise we would grow too fond of it.
    Robert E. Lee
    The patriot volunteer, fighting for country and his rights, makes the most reliable soldier on earth.
    Thomas Jonathan "Stonewall" Jackson
    What separates the winners from the losers is how a person reacts to each new twist of fate.
    President Donald Trump

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Williamsburg, VA
    Posts
    230
    "from what I gather from it I have a six fold increase since I own two guns"

    i'm doomed...

  6. #6
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    11,104
    You are doomed only if you use two guns at the same time.

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Williamsburg, VA
    Posts
    230
    ok, cool. i feel better now...

  8. #8
    Accomplished Advocate color of law's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    3,529
    Quote Originally Posted by Nightmare View Post
    The United States ranks thirty-third (33) of WHO's 110 nations. I'm sure that some of those (110-33=) 77 nations with lower suicide rates than US are not allowed guns either, a poor correlation. Japan has a very different cultural attitude towards suicide, one that we might benefit from, particularly some less than useful members here and in Washington D.C.

    http://www.who.int/mental_health/pre...cide_rates/en/

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...y_suicide_rate
    United Nations' figures!!!!! Give me a break.

  9. #9
    Campaign Veteran MSG Laigaie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Philipsburg, Montana
    Posts
    3,112
    I have a great bunch of guns.......I must have dies years ago.

  10. #10
    Regular Member Eeyore's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    on the move
    Posts
    547

    Devil in the details, as usual

    I heard an in-depth discussion on the radio about this study last week. The author being interviewed was much less hysterical than the media coverage. Like any study, it's important to take a close look at where their data is coming from. Once you know that, a lot of the conclusions won't be surprising.

    In this case, they were looking at successful suicides. The key finding is that suicide is often an impulsive act. If your method is slow-acting, it gives time to reconsider, or for others to intervene, making it less likely to succeed. If your method travels at about 1000 ft/sec, not so much. This is common sense. "'The lethality of the weapons drives the increased risk of suicide and homicide completion,' they wrote. 'Firearms have very high case fatality rates, particularly in the case of suicide. Guns leave very little room for reconsideration of the choice to end a life.'" In other words, people who attempt suicide with a gun succeed more often than those who try other methods. Voila, we arrive at the conclusion that just having a gun increases your risk of [successful] suicide. This is arguably true, although it ignores a lot of other relevant issues. It's a logical extension that anything that would slow a person down would give more opportunity for reconsideration or intervention; having guns locked up and unloaded would definitely slow the person down. They weren't advocating that weapons not be stored in the home, they were just pointing out the logical connection.

    The conclusions of this study aren't newsworthy in and of themselves, but they're vague enough that the antis can take it and run with it, making all sorts of assertions well beyond what the study's authors may have intended. The headline of the linked article ("Gun ownership tied to three-fold increase in suicide risk") is a great example of this; it's a hyped-up oversimplification. It makes it sound like guns somehow radiate evil that convinces people to commit suicide, but that's not at all what the study reported.

    Also from the article: "Anglemyer's team also found about a two-fold increased risk of death from murder among people who had access to a gun, compared to those without access to firearms. For women, the increased risk of being killed was even higher." (emphasis added) Ask yourself, what sort of women might disproportionately possess a gun? Answer: women in danger (from abusive exes or stalkers, living in high-crime areas, working high-risk jobs, etc.) Did the studies consider this? Probably not. Would it affect the results? Probably, but we can't know if it wasn't in the study. Catch-22.

    Like so many studies, the danger isn't from the study itself, it's what ideologues and ignorant policymakers might do with it.
    Guns don't kill people. Drivers on cell phones do.

  11. #11
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    12,802
    Based on your next to the last paragraph, we should also ask, does the increased rate of gun possession cause an increased risk of murder, or does the already existing increased risk of murder, cause and increased rate of gun possession?

    Correlation says nothing about causation. Overly emotional people tend to jump to conclusions regarding causation when they learn of a correlation.

  12. #12
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    11,104
    If all buildings and parking structures were no more than 12' tall there would be a very very very very very dramatic decrease in deaths from jumping off buildings. The study is crap, everybody knows this, and I suspect that the "owners" of the study know this. It is nothing but a liberal anti-liberty study conducted by three lawyers with a fax machine.

  13. #13
    Campaign Veteran Cavalryman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Anchorage, Alaska
    Posts
    297
    Quote Originally Posted by Eeyore View Post
    I heard an in-depth discussion on the radio about this study last week. The author being interviewed was much less hysterical than the media coverage. Like any study, it's important to take a close look at where their data is coming from. Once you know that, a lot of the conclusions won't be surprising.

    In this case, they were looking at successful suicides. The key finding is that suicide is often an impulsive act. If your method is slow-acting, it gives time to reconsider, or for others to intervene, making it less likely to succeed. If your method travels at about 1000 ft/sec, not so much. This is common sense. "'The lethality of the weapons drives the increased risk of suicide and homicide completion,' they wrote. 'Firearms have very high case fatality rates, particularly in the case of suicide. Guns leave very little room for reconsideration of the choice to end a life.'" In other words, people who attempt suicide with a gun succeed more often than those who try other methods. Voila, we arrive at the conclusion that just having a gun increases your risk of [successful] suicide. This is arguably true, although it ignores a lot of other relevant issues. It's a logical extension that anything that would slow a person down would give more opportunity for reconsideration or intervention; having guns locked up and unloaded would definitely slow the person down. They weren't advocating that weapons not be stored in the home, they were just pointing out the logical connection.

    The conclusions of this study aren't newsworthy in and of themselves, but they're vague enough that the antis can take it and run with it, making all sorts of assertions well beyond what the study's authors may have intended. The headline of the linked article ("Gun ownership tied to three-fold increase in suicide risk") is a great example of this; it's a hyped-up oversimplification. It makes it sound like guns somehow radiate evil that convinces people to commit suicide, but that's not at all what the study reported.

    Also from the article: "Anglemyer's team also found about a two-fold increased risk of death from murder among people who had access to a gun, compared to those without access to firearms. For women, the increased risk of being killed was even higher." (emphasis added) Ask yourself, what sort of women might disproportionately possess a gun? Answer: women in danger (from abusive exes or stalkers, living in high-crime areas, working high-risk jobs, etc.) Did the studies consider this? Probably not. Would it affect the results? Probably, but we can't know if it wasn't in the study. Catch-22.

    Like so many studies, the danger isn't from the study itself, it's what ideologues and ignorant policymakers might do with it.
    Very nicely summarized, Eeyore! As a mental health professional, I have been following this issue for several years and your analysis is spot-on.

  14. #14
    Campaign Veteran Cavalryman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Anchorage, Alaska
    Posts
    297
    Quote Originally Posted by eye95 View Post
    Based on your next to the last paragraph, we should also ask, does the increased rate of gun possession cause an increased risk of murder, or does the already existing increased risk of murder, cause and increased rate of gun possession?

    Correlation says nothing about causation. Overly emotional people tend to jump to conclusions regarding causation when they learn of a correlation.
    This issue has been studied and it is pretty clear that people with lifestyles which put them at risk of being murdered almost universally own firearms whereas firearm ownership in the population at large is a minority. When you compare like-to-like populations (i.e., white middle-class gun owners with white middle-class non-gun owners, or even inner city gun-owning gangbangers with inner city non-gun-owning gangbangers), the difference disappears.

  15. #15
    Regular Member papa bear's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    mayberry, nc
    Posts
    2,224
    it's hard to figure out what they mean. do they mean if you are a happy person you will suddenly get depressed and want to kill yourself. or are they saying if you are depress and will kill yourself any way you can find . you are more successful if you have a gun?

    suicide Darwinism in action
    Luke 22:36 ; 36Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one.

    "guns are like a Parachute, if you don't have one when you need it, you will not need one again"
    - unknown

    i you call a CHP a CCW then you are really stupid. period.

  16. #16
    Regular Member solus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    here nc
    Posts
    6,258
    a critical review of the original work,

    it is interesting to note in this Meta analysis study the researchers started with 6.9K references and after removing 2.9K duplicates and 2.8K ‘clearly irrelevant references’ (no reference what constituted irrelevant), the researchers then closely reviewed 3.4K of ‘titles and abstracts’ (not the actual body of work) then selected 70 articles for full text review and then picked 15 observational studies which met their inclusion criteria. (pg 102)

    The researcher’s review showed: “All but 1 of the 15 studies identified…reported significantly increased odds of death associated with firearm access.” (pg 105)

    I am more concerned the researchers claim: “Furthermore, the National Research Council has acknowledged the difficulty in establishing firearm ownership in studies because of privacy and questionable legality concerns (28). As such, it recommended that researchers receive adequate access to data to trace firearms (28).” (pg 109).

    not sure i believe researchers should be granted the ability to access data to trace firearm ownership.

    a further comment regarding the studies they reviewed...some date back >15 years.

    and eeyore, i am not sure how the article you referenced leap to some of their conclusions off the main research document.

    ipse
    Last edited by solus; 01-30-2014 at 08:58 PM.
    "He who pays the piper calls the tunes..." (OBE as Grape called melody!!)

    Please do not get confused between my personality & my attitude. My personality is who I am ~ my attitude depends on who you are and how you act.

    Remember always, do not judge someone because they sin differently than you do!

    Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please. Mark Twain

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •