View Single Post
  #225   Report Post  
Gunner
 
Posts: n/a
Default OT Environmentalists may be in deep Kimchee

On Fri, 05 Dec 2003 10:10:45 GMT, Bert wrote:

Bert wrote:

(Bob Summers) wrote:

On Tue, 02 Dec 2003 14:24:20 GMT, Bert wrote:

Gunner wrote:

On Tue, 02 Dec 2003 10:08:45 GMT, Bert wrote:

Gunner wrote:

Hummm and your state is a hotbed of murders and terror compared to
North Dakota with its 1.1

snip

Perhaps we should compare this to Japans rate of 1.1
Japan has a total ban on any firearm of any sort btw
However...the murder rate in Japan, with weapons other than firearms,
is 3.2 per hundred thousand.

snip

In Japan, the United Nations reports the murder rate is about 1.1 per
100,000. In the U.S., there are about 3.2 murders per 100,000 people
each year by weapons other than firearms. This means that even if
firearms in the U.S. could be magically eliminated, we would still
have three times the murder rate of the Japanese.

If "the murder rate in Japan, with weapons other than firearms,
is 3.2 per hundred thousand" and "in the U.S., there are about 3.2
murders per 100,000 people each year by weapons other than firearms",
how is it that "we would still have three times the murder rate of the
Japanese" if firearms were eliminated?

Good question. Email the author and ask him. Then report back to us.

Nah. I think since you're the one who spewed this inconsistent prose
into the newsgroup, you should report back to us.

3 x 1.1 = ~3.2 looks like a consistent statement to me at 2 digit precision.


True but irrelevant. Let me spell it out for you. The inconsistency is
due to Gunner claiming in one paragraph that "In Japan, the United
Nations reports the murder rate is about 1.1 per 100,000," while in
another paragraph he claims that "the murder rate in Japan, with
weapons other than firearms, is 3.2 per hundred thousand." If it's 3.2
with weapons other than firearms, it can't very well be 1.1 in total,
can it? Maybe Gunner wrote in error in one place or the other, or
maybe he correctly quoted inconsistent sources, but he's not admitting
to either. In any case, the net result is that what he wrote was
inconsistent.


And BTW, that's not the only inconsistency in that particular post. He
also states, for example, that "In the U.S., our combined murder and
suicide rate is about 18 also (7.0 and 11.1, respectively, according
to the Department of Justice)." Two paragraphs later, he says "the
murder rate currently in the US is 5.5." Maybe he had some valid (but
unspecified) reason for citing two different numbers (7.0 and 5.5),
but then again, maybe he's misquoting numbers from memory, or
misinterpreting numbers he read somewhere.


I believe you will find that those figures are in reference to murders
done by firearms and murders done by all means, including firearms.

Folks kill other folks on a regular basis with weapons other than
firearms. Without firearms..the figures may be a bit lower..a smidgen
perhaps..but as was indicated..the murder rate in japan is 1.1 by
firearms, but 3.5 by all other weapons, meaning 2.4 by methods other
than firearms.

As has been noted when firearms were restricted in many states by
waiting period etc..the Suicide by firearms rate went down, but the
suicide by other means went up.

If someone wants you dead, it makes no difference if they shoot you or
cut your throat. You are still dead.



The thing is, Gunner has a propensity to use statistics to bolster his
positions, which isn't a bad strategy in principle, but when he throws
out inconsistent statistics like these it adversely impacts both the
strength of his arguments and his credibility, IMO.

Bert


Quite frankly Bert, your opinion of me is really a non-issue.

Gunner

"No man shall be debarred the use of arms.
The laws that forbid the carrying of arms disarm those only who are neither
inclined nor determined to commit crimes.
Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants.
They ought to be designated as laws not preventative but fearful of crimes,
produced by the tumultuous impression of a few isolated facts, and not by
thoughtful consideration of the inconveniences and advantages of a universal decree."
- Thomas Jefferson