Results 1 to 17 of 17

Thread: why arguing more OC/CC lowers crime is counter-productive

  1. #1
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838

    why arguing more OC/CC lowers crime is counter-productive

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...ghts-movement/


    Because you get opposing conclusions on other studies.

    People when confronted with two opposing studies would find what?

    Its irrelevant if OC/CC diminishes or does not diminish injuries due to guns. Its a right and that's enough said.

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,161

    The Impact of Right to Carry Laws and the NRC Report: The Latest Lessons for the Empi

    Donohue has already impeached himself and his work. Here is the paper, 3 MB, 108 pages Definitely an odd URL but it seems to work


    http://poseidon01.ssrn.com/delivery....124024&EXT=pdf

    http://ssrn.com/abstract=2443681

    Which part of "shall not be infringed" is unclear?
    Last edited by Nightmare; 11-17-2014 at 06:43 AM.
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,161

    Sheriff David Clarke responds! On fighting crime "Get rid of ‘data-driven crap’ TWT

    Milwaukee’s tough-talking Sheriff David Clarke — who once famously told city residents to arm themselves so they could take out any “clown” who entered their homes — now says that communities shouldn’t rely on “data-driven crap” to fight crime. Rather, policing ought to be all about getting law enforcement agents on the ground, so they can lock up criminals, he said during a lengthy interview with Fox News.

    A couple months alter, Sheriff Clarke also told Project Veritas what citizens should do if a “clown” broke into their home. His words: “Know who and what your target is. Point that barrel center mass and pull the trigger.” He then suggested homeowners could call 911 to “get this dead guy out of my house. He’s bleeding out and messing up my carpet,” he said in the interview.

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...e-get-rid-of-/

    http://www.politico.com/magazine/sto...l#.VGIBvvnF-So
    Last edited by Nightmare; 11-17-2014 at 10:11 AM.
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  4. #4
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,273
    If that is all the cops do, "clean up the mess" and then leave the citizen to their own devices, this top cop deserves a free doughnut...with small coffee.
    "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson.

    "Better that ten guilty persons escape, than that one innocent suffer" - English jurist William Blackstone.
    It is AFAIK original to me. Compromise is failure on the installment plan, particularly when dealing with so intractable an opponent as ignorance. - Nightmare

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Tempe, Arizona
    Posts
    189

    why arguing more OC/CC lowers crime is counter-productive

    Because you get opposing conclusions on other studies.
    This is the nature of science and particularly social science. When faced with different studies one then has to actually read and understand them to get to a consensus. Unfortunately most people are not actually equipped to or have the time to do this.

    While I personally agree with a rights based approach, this does make it difficult to discuss with people who don't share one's ethical basis.
    Last edited by PeterNSteinmetz; 11-19-2014 at 03:18 PM.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,161
    Science consensus is an oxymoron.
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  7. #7
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by Nightmare View Post
    Science consensus is an oxymoron.
    Science is fine ... its just not science that's followed.

    You do a study, you say "this study shows this" .. you just came to an untested hypothesis. That's all. You cannot say my hypothesis is proven by the same data that created it.
    Last edited by davidmcbeth; 11-19-2014 at 05:48 PM.

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,161
    And then there are anoxic-morons.
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  9. #9
    Regular Member Jack House's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    I80, USA
    Posts
    2,661
    I prefer using actual stories of successful SD utilizing a firearm. Yes that opens you up to the arguments that "it makes you more likely to get shot," but even if that were true, that's only one small piece of the data set. You then get to point out how everyone even the antis acknowledge that firearms are used successfully in SD far more than they are in crimes/murders. Then it just becomes a conversation about vaccines.

    Vaccines can cause very serious side effects in a very small percentage of people, but you don't stop using them just because there is a 0.0001% chance of serious side effect. So to sum up, guns are like vaccines. You may never need it and in very rare cases they can cause harm, but the good far outweighs the bad.
    Last edited by Jack House; 11-19-2014 at 05:57 PM.

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,161
    You're talking through your ten-gallon hat, no horse.

    The benefits of guns and vaccines are real. The risks from gun use and vaccine use are real. The ratio or comparison personally valuated of those must be considered.

    I have carried a gun for nearly twenty years and know how to mitigate its side effects.

    I have had a complete schedule of military/foreign service vaccines many years ago. There are twenty-five common vaccines available and I do not regard myself at risk of any of their indications, particularly influenza. We have isolated ourselves, self-quarantined if you will, and even rhinoviruses are insignificant in rate and discomfort for residual resistance.

    http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vac-gen/side-effects.htm
    Last edited by Nightmare; 11-19-2014 at 06:41 PM.
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  11. #11
    Regular Member Redbaron007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    SW MO
    Posts
    1,637
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack House View Post
    I prefer using actual stories of successful SD utilizing a firearm. Yes that opens you up to the arguments that "it makes you more likely to get shot," but even if that were true, that's only one small piece of the data set. You then get to point out how everyone even the antis acknowledge that firearms are used successfully in SD far more than they are in crimes/murders. Then it just becomes a conversation about vaccines.

    Vaccines can cause very serious side effects in a very small percentage of people, but you don't stop using them just because there is a 0.0001% chance of serious side effect. So to sum up, guns are like vaccines. You may never need it and in very rare cases they can cause harm, but the good far outweighs the bad.
    Quote Originally Posted by Nightmare View Post
    You're talking through your ten-gallon hat, no horse.

    The benefits of guns and vaccines are real. The risks from gun use and vaccine use are real. The ratio or comparison personally valuated of those must be considered.

    I have carried a gun for nearly twenty years and know how to mitigate its side effects.

    I have had a complete schedule of military/foreign service vaccines many years ago. There are twenty-five common vaccines available and I do not regard myself at risk of any of their indications, particularly influenza. We have isolated ourselves, self-quarantined if you will, and even rhinoviruses are insignificant in rate and discomfort for residual resistance.

    http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vac-gen/side-effects.htm
    Sooooo....are you arguing against Jack or supporting his comments?
    "I can live for two weeks on a good compliment."
    ~Mark Twain

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,161
    Quote Originally Posted by Redbaron007 View Post
    Sooooo....are you arguing against Jack or supporting his comments?
    Hmm, I didn't realize that I so abused the idiom as to make it unrecognizable.

    http://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/...ng+through+hat
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  13. #13
    Regular Member Redbaron007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    SW MO
    Posts
    1,637
    Quote Originally Posted by Nightmare View Post
    Hmm, I didn't realize that I so abused the idiom as to make it unrecognizable.

    http://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/...ng+through+hat
    Well....Yes or No? Just a simple question.
    "I can live for two weeks on a good compliment."
    ~Mark Twain

  14. #14
    Regular Member Jack House's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    I80, USA
    Posts
    2,661
    Quote Originally Posted by Nightmare View Post
    Hmm, I didn't realize that I so abused the idiom as to make it unrecognizable. http://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/...ng+through+hat
    It's not the idiom, it's that everything you said afterwards backed up my statement and nothing contradicted it.

  15. #15
    Campaign Veteran StogieC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    746
    Nobody who leaves their home armed thinks "I'm going to lower the crime rate in my community today". Carry (whatever the flavor (OC or cc)) is about Self/family defense, not community statistics. It is an individual right, not a public policy calculation.

  16. #16
    Campaign Veteran StogieC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    746
    That said, the public policy should not impair the individual right.

  17. #17
    Campaign Veteran marshaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia
    Posts
    11,487
    Quote Originally Posted by Nightmare View Post
    Donohue has already impeached himself and his work. Here is the paper, 3 MB, 108 pages Definitely an odd URL but it seems to work


    http://poseidon01.ssrn.com/delivery....124024&EXT=pdf

    http://ssrn.com/abstract=2443681

    Which part of "shall not be infringed" is unclear?
    They discredit themselves absolutely with the following argument:

    But an alternative explanation is that the crack cocaine problem drove up crime... The regression would identify a relationship between higher crime and the failure to adopt a shall-issue law when the real cause would have been the influence of crack.
    This is why I reject the entire field of quantitative sociology on its face. It's literally the only branch of the "sciences" (applied or otherwise) where you can, with all seriousness, posit absurd political scaremongering as legitimate causation without a shred of empirical evidence (or without even offering a convincing mechanism for the causal effect), and folks will grant you credence.

    What they did there is fundamentally a (rather well-disguised) appeal to emotion. Folks have an emotional reaction to the "crack cocaine epidemic" and so they reflexively assign credence to the "confounding factor", despite the fact that it's utterly without foundation in empiricism or even reason.

    The "crack cocaine epidemic" was nearly entirely a fabrication of profit-driven media and agenda-driven politicians. Advancing it as fact without first offering an attempt to justify it and then doing the same for the equally unsubstantiated causal relationship between crack cocaine and crime is grounds for automatic and complete disqualification from credibility.

    (By the way, speaking of agenda-driven...)
    Last edited by marshaul; 11-23-2014 at 04:26 AM.

Posting Permissions

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