In terms of the practical effects . . . snip...
Oregon Crime Rates 1960 - 2014
Washington Crime Rates 1960 - 2014
Kleck and Tart did an analysis of the data from the National Crime victimization surveys from 1992 to 2002.
Kleck analyzed the various possible self-protective actions, their absence or the absence of any self-protective action taking place during a rape, attempted rape and other sexual assaults.
The report online says
"This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice."
It was paid for with a grant by the DoJ and afterwards, to the present apparently, not published by the DoJ. However, in the ideal of providing "better customer service," the NCJRS has placed the study results on the web.
It seems however likely, that, although the numbers of those who took the actions of attacking with a weapon or brandishing a weapon are fewer than ten in the study, the dramatic difference in rape subsequent to taking the self-protective action of gun or other weapon brandishing or use compared to say, screaming, is due to the use or threatened use of the weapon.
finished the ham....now there is nothing in this rambling of words which i snipped down to get rid of the extraneous material which says a point, or counter point, or what point you were even trying to make.
so you posted the the cite to the OR & WA crime rates w/o a single reference or discussion for comparison???
so you posted the same cite twice from a 'research' grant so two PhD candidates attending FL State could qualify for their masters. it is common practice for candidates as part of the educational process to apply for grant money to subsidize their education. that the U.S. Department of Justice didn't publish it should be insight their management thought the report sucked!!
btw, the report found on the internet does not constitute being published!!
final note on the report...ethically the investigators are bound to advise readers if there is any financial conflicts of interest ~ which they did.
1) to discuss the comparative crime rates of Oregon with other states with knife laws
and
2) to discuss the success rates of various forms of self-protective actions in the cases of rape.
failed misrably since you didn't discuss a bloody thing
the study by Kleck was paid for by the Dept of Justice, which means, you and me as taxpayers. The NCJRS then decided not to formally publish the thing in print but to put the study research and conlusions online only, for the sake of customer service and the education of the public.
"We" paid for the study and Kleck happens to believe that weapons use or brandishing is effective in stopping or detering a lot of crimes. His research on other topics was quoted by the Supreme court in the Heller decision.
Kleck doesn't seem to own the copyright . . .
This report has not been published by the U.S. Department of Justice.
To provide better customer service, NCJRS has made this Federally funded
grant final report available electronically in addition to
traditional paper copies.
I could be wrong, but I have a suspicion that the gov does not sue "you" for quoting the reports it pays for and publishes for public education, if "your" use of it is for public education. There are four main criteria in helping to determine if a use is fair use. One of them is the use you are putting to the material you are using, whether educational, commercial or other. Another of them is whether or not you or I reduce the economic sale value of the copyrighted work which is being excerpted or used in some way.
Two of two in my favor . . . in terms of fair use.
z
as for your last point the FL State report, while DoJ grant money funded their research, as stated...the DoJ doesn't want a thing to do with the document and even if they did ~ ownership, unless contractually negotiation as intellectual property transfer remains with the investigators.
so it wouldn't be the gov who would sue you for misuse of the unpublished report the the investigators.
so since you are keeping score...revise it to zero!!
ipse
