Skip to main content

View Diary: First gun show accident of 2014 continues avg. 1-per-month streak into 3rd year: GunFAIL LVII (150 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  No, we should make sure handguns are much harder (6+ / 0-)

    ... to obtain.

    Getting a gun is insanely easy in the U.S.

    We are the outlier, by far, among civilized nations. And we have the gun violence to prove it.

    "Bob Johnson doesn't have special privileges, because really, why would I entrust that guy with ANYTHING?" - kos, November 9, 2013

    by Bob Johnson on Wed Feb 19, 2014 at 02:38:04 PM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  LOL, you made a funny because we're not civilized (5+ / 0-)

      nosotros no somos estúpidos

      by a2nite on Wed Feb 19, 2014 at 02:56:31 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  That's what the leader of RKBA here told me. (6+ / 0-)

        That's why he packs heat.

        "Bob Johnson doesn't have special privileges, because really, why would I entrust that guy with ANYTHING?" - kos, November 9, 2013

        by Bob Johnson on Wed Feb 19, 2014 at 03:24:58 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  We're not civilized because of the 2nd amendment (5+ / 0-)

          There is no such thing as a good guy with a gun.

          nosotros no somos estúpidos

          by a2nite on Wed Feb 19, 2014 at 03:33:38 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Guns are sacred! (6+ / 0-)

            You know that.

            "Bob Johnson doesn't have special privileges, because really, why would I entrust that guy with ANYTHING?" - kos, November 9, 2013

            by Bob Johnson on Wed Feb 19, 2014 at 03:38:34 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  Of course not. (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Kasoru, FrankRose

            Those millions of defensive gun uses don't count.

            •  Millions. heh How large was that telephone (4+ / 0-)

              survey?  Repeat: telephone survey.

              "But I do apologize, JVolvo, for you are arbiter of all that can and cannot be discussed and I bow down to your supremacy when it comes to what can be written on this website." WinSmith 1/22/2014 - "OK" JVolvo 1/23/2014 (sorry, Clive)

              by JVolvo on Thu Feb 20, 2014 at 04:33:59 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

            •  *roll eyes* (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Glen The Plumber

              Millions? Seriously?

              I'm surprised we're not inundated with orders of magnitudes more DGU stories compared to accidental and unjustified shootings then.

              Go on, start your diary series listing the daily DGUs. Should be a piece of cake to get thousands a day.

              External validation.

              Learn it.

              •  Studies show a wide variation from 108k (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Kasoru, FrankRose, ER Doc

                (from a study that wasn't even LOOKING for DGUs) to 2.5 million (which, from the sounds of it, was bogus).

                The 'usual' number accepted is 1.5 million.

                So "millions" might've been inaccurate but we're talking about an order of magnitude when comparing defensive gun uses to injuries/deaths related to firearms.

                •  Those studies have been debunked (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Glen The Plumber

                  by multiple external validation calculations, which puts the numbers in a range from 10-60k per year.

                  You are free to critique the external validation methodology if you like, but don't even pretend that the 'acceptance' of those self-reported survey numbers is valid in any statistical sense.

                  FFS, 1.5 million DGU per year doesn't even pass the smell test as we would be inundated by an order of magnitude more 'stories' about DGU compared to the GunFAIL diaries.

                  •  Link to those refutations? nt (3+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Kasoru, ER Doc, FrankRose
                    •  I've posted them before: (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      Glen The Plumber

                      1st one:

                      # of annual justifiable homicides: 200
                      mortality of gunshot wounds ~20% -> 200/20% = 1000 justifiable woundings
                      percentage of DGUs where attacker is wounded ~8% (Kleck) -> 1000 / 8% ~ 12k justifiable DGUs per year

                      Possible critiques:

                      mortality of gunshot wounds is calculated from wounds only serious enough for hospitalization (would lower mortality and increase DGU result)

                      mortality for attackers would be higher since less likely to visit hospital for serious wounds (would lower DGU result)

                      Kleck's percentage of woundings per DGU is too high (would increase DGU result)

                      Kleck's percentage of woundings per DGU is too low (would lower DGU result)

                      The number from Kleck is the most uncertain, though it seems likely that an objective ratio (percentage time that attacker was wounded) vs. a subjective absolute (did you engage in a DGU) would yield more accurate results.

                      Furthermore, comparison of 'wounding ratio' to 'shot at attacker ratio' indicates a multi-shot hit percentage of ~50%, which is comparable to real world stats lending additional confidence to the figure.

                      2nd external validation:

                      Violent crime rate is about 390 per 100k people annually.
                      There are roughly 6M CCW permits.
                      Assuming they carry 100% (overestimate obviously) that would mean ~23k crimes against gun carriers per year.

                      Since ~2/3rds of DGUs were outside the home (Kleck), that would increase DGUs to 40k if you include the 1/3rd at home.

                      Critiques:

                      Obviously, 100% of CCW permit holders are not carrying 24/7 (would reduce DGU results by what, 50%?)

                      Crime/DGU is under-reported. True, both by about 30%, which would boost DGUs up to about 60k if the violent crime rate did not already take under-reporting into consideration.

                      This only counts DGU that would have prevented a crime.

                      So, again we get a range of results from 10-60k depending on what assumptions you make, but in each of these cases we are relying on actual measured values for the most part, instead of completely relying on whether or not someone thinks that flashing a gun at a tresspasser was a legitimate DGU.

                      Furthermore the numbers and uncertainties in the two validation calculations are different. Therefore, the fact that they both provide numbers within the same ballpark lends additional confidence that the numbers that were more uncertain (the percentages from Kleck) weren't too far off.

                      How does this square with Klecks predictions of 2.5M DGUs (or all the other self-reported surveys)? Simple. The vast majority of those DGUs were 'unjustified', and not used to prevent a crime. In other words, the majority of them were likely criminal OGUs that the self-reporting gun owner misreported as a DGU. False positives for small numbers that completely skewed the results.

                      And, given the observed mentality of gun owners regarding various stories here at DKos (shootout in Michigan ring a bell?), this seems not only likely, but bloody obvious.

                      3rd external validation: (somewhat related to 1st, more of a consistency check)

                      There are ~60k recorded firearm injuries per year

                      8% wounding rate (Kleck) * 2.5M = DGU 200k firearm injuries

                      8% wounding rate * 1.5M = DGU 120k firearm injuries

                      8% wounding rate * 30k (mean from above) = 2.4k

                      So, from the survey results, we have DGU firearm injuries either 300% of the recorded rate, or 200% of the recorded rate.

                      Or, using a mean from the previous validation calculations, we have about 4% of total firearm injuries from DGUs.

                      Browsing the various GunFAIL diaries, which do you think is more likely? That there are 2-3 times the number of injuries out there from DGUs that just aren't being reported? Even though Kleck says only 1/3 of the DGUs aren't reported?

                      Finally, while you can quibble on the exact values of some of the uncertainties from Kleck, one thing you can't argue with is that Kleck absolutely fails a self-consistency check. If his numbers are orders of magnitude uncertain (which is what you need to support the 1.5-2.5M DGUs), then that uncertainty will remain in the final result, giving you a survey result of 1.5 DGUs +/- 15 DGU, for example. Therefore, they didn't measure any specific absolute value with any accurate significance.

                      Furthermore, the nature of this uncertainty has to derive from the type of study itself. That being the self-reporting of whether a particular gun use was really a non-criminal DGU.

                      •  Given that only about 10% of DGUs (6+ / 0-)

                        Involve any shots being fired, there's one order of magnitude right there.

                        Applying this to your numbers gives a range of 600 - 800 thousand a year... which is right about in the middle of the range of estimates I've seen, so it's probably not too far off.

                        --Shannon

                        "It is better to die on your feet than to live on your knees." -- Emiliano Zapata Salazar
                        "Dissent is patriotic. Blind obedience is treason." --me

                        by Leftie Gunner on Fri Feb 21, 2014 at 02:40:53 PM PST

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  16% (0+ / 0-)

                          And that's included in the external validation #1 (through the wounding rate/DGU), and is irrelevant for external validation #2, which just relies on crime stats.

                          16% of DGUs involve the defender shooting at the attacker and an 8% wounding rate per DGU (according to Kleck).

                          This is how you get from 1000 justified woundings to ~12k DGUs per year, that's your order of magnitude.

                          Why would people uprate something that is mathematically incorrect? I mean, I can understand if you don't agree with the external validation analysis, but your post is fundamentally and factually mathematically wrong.

                          And yet it gets 3 uprates? Weird. Any upraters care to explain your thought process here, I find it incomprehensible.

                          •  Ozy, my reply is below. (3+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Tom Seaview, gerrilea, Kasoru

                            "Two nights ago..." a true story.

                            I live in a "gun-friendly state".
                            With un-gun-friendly police.

                            Community Policing Officer, October 2011:

                            Crime being committed?
                            Take a still photo of the person committing the crime.
                            Try to get a real good facial image.

                            Do not videotape, as that requires consent of all parties, particularly if there is audio.
                            If you present video, we may be back to arrest you.
                            No option, we enforce the law equally.

                            Be CERTAIN the person "committing the crime" has NO business being there/doing so.

                            Display or use a firearm, or other weapon, we will make an arrest.  You can plead Castle or SYG in court.  
                            That is after your incarceration without bond, after we confiscate your weapon(s) and ransack your house.

                            Your job, your only job.  Be a good victim, get a useable photograph, and turn the evidence over to us.
                            WE are the cops.  NOT you.  

                            IF you plead Castle or SYG, and we can get the right Judge to vacate that and direct a conviction?
                            The law our Boss's Boss* HATES is DEAD.  Goal #1.
                            ALL guns out of civilian hands?  Goal #2.

                            One day you'll thank us.

                            Unsaid:
                            Us cops doing what we want, without fear, without judicial interference?  New Goal #1.

                            He found himself arrested not too many months later.
                            Seems he didn't wait long-enough for new goal #1 to become law.

                            *The Boss of the Chief of Police, would be the city politicians.

                          •  Reply to what? (0+ / 0-)

                            I'm not clear as to what point you're trying to make regarding the previous analysis.

                            You can't take video recordings without consent? I find that highly unlikely. If your police are this misinformed, you've got a big problem, completely unrelated to guns.

                            Considering how this, and your dog anecdote seem to be pretty large deviations from the topic of DGU external validation, perhaps you would be better served to start a discussion branch of your own.

                          •  Dog or gun, if there isn't a body (3+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            gerrilea, Kasoru, andalusi

                            in a morgue or in a hospital?
                            IT DIDN'T HAPPEN.  

                            Statistically speaking.  
                            Everything else is either an 'anecdote' or a complete fabrication.
                            a/k/a right wing meme/bald face lie/NRA talking-point

                            Of course, more bodies is directly pertinent to the GunFail diaries, and cause for a complete and total civilian gun ban.

                          •  What didn't happen? (0+ / 0-)

                            You're not making any sense.

                            Are you seriously trying to equate 32 deaths per year from dog bites, mostly from pit bulls, and 30,000 deaths per year from guns, mostly hand guns?

                            Are you suggesting that since some jurisdictions ban pit bulls that, since guns are a thousand times more deadly, that perhaps we should consider banning hand guns as well?

                            Seems like you're a bit ahead of the curve as far as gun bans go, but if you want to take up that goal, then have at it.

                            If you have some other point, I'm afraid I'm not able to discern it from your writings.

                          •  Ozy, there's a game called gun statistics (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Kasoru, andalusi

                            I used my real-time dog incident as an "anecdote" in your words.

                            As far as the effectiveness of owning a dog goes?
                            She didn't bite anyone, so...
                            there wasn't a "dog incident" per State statistics.
                            No incident recorded?  
                            It never happened - statistically.

                            So, let's examine the DGU statistics.

                            1) someone needs to be shot, for it to be a statistic.

                            2) if someone isn't shot, yet a gun is discharged, it's reckless endangerment.  
                            A crime against the whole community.
                            Endangering the welfare of your children.
                            The very essence of GunFail diaries.

                            3) if a gun is displayed, and not fired, it's criminal threatening with a firearm.  "Menacing" is how it's codified in some States.

                            There's a common meme expressed:
                            "Non-discharge firearm displays are really the criminal threatening of innocent people mistakenly in a given location, with or without permission."

                            Exactly the reasoning given by my local PD, when my spouse interrupted someone removing her property from her car last year.

                            "HOW do you KNOW they weren't just mistaken?  Your car looks like 100 others in town."
                            Her reply:
                            Oh, I don't know.  Burglar tools used instead of a key?  Instead of knocking on the door at 4:00 AM:  
                            "Hey, I'm here for that iPod, iGo charger, and $8 in toll change you advertised as free-to-a-good-home on Craigslist."

                            She was told not to be a smart-ass.  Don't call if you don't have a photo of them in-commission, and a license plate of their car.  We have important police work to do, and dealing with petty-ante crap isn't it.

                            To your use of statistics:

                            Are you seriously trying to equate 32 deaths per year from dog bites, mostly from pit bulls, and 30,000 deaths per year from guns, mostly hand guns?
                            Your "30,000 deaths" includes a majority which are suicides.
                            As we're a gun-loving country, that would put us at the top of international suicide rates per-capita.
                            Statistically-extrapolated.
                            More guns = more suicides.

                            WHO statistics:
                            US ranked 33, though to be honest, that's before the uptick in middle-aged/wiped-out-of-my-investments, and veteran suicides.  I'd slide us up to 21, even with Finland.  
                            5.5 million Finns, own 1.6 million guns.
                            Average of 2 persons, per household.
                            5.5 million divided by 2, is 2.75 million.
                            That 2.75 million applied against 1.6 million firearms is 58%.

                            Of course, Finland doesn't limit you to 1 gun per household, so the 58% figure is off by an undetermined percentage.

                            US, per Gallup:
                            47% report gun ownership.

                            I'd say that's comparable, and why I'd anchor US suicide statistics to Finland's.  
                            Neither of which breaks the top 20, nor the top 10, nor #1 in suicide rate per 100,000 persons.
                            But... but... the GUNZ.

                            Here's a recent article from the
                            NY Times, never one to shy away from blaming guns.
                            The NY Times fails to mention the huge uptick in US firearm ownership ratios.  
                            Fails to mention the Republican/RW/NRA spew about needing MORE GUNZ as causative.  
                            Fails to say, or infer that the real issue is the guns, only the guns, and quite frankly?
                            THE GUNS.

                            NO GUNS = NO SUICIDES.

                            You'd think that would be a concise, easy to set type-for, conclusion.

                            As to me being ahead of the curve on gun bans?
                            No.  I failed to bookmark the one Kossack who had the nerve to say:
                            Eventually they're all gone.  One by one, Assault Weapons today, handguns tomorrow.
                            Rifles, then shotguns, until civilian gun ownership is relegated to a thing of the past.

                            While I disagreed with the intent, I tipped for honesty.

                          •  Math, ehe??? Since I've uprated that post... (0+ / 0-)

                            here's my position.

                            When we dissolve this conversation into pure math, we become less than human.  Math says the answer is: 42

                            Since we already know the final answer is at least 108.000 DGU's each year...that number outweighs the 11,000 murders, by a factor of what??? 10x.

                            That's the bottom line, when you do the math.

                            Does it really matter if there are 2.5 million or 10 million DGU's each year?

                            What if just 1 life was saved?

                            What if that 1 life was yours?

                            Would the numbers matter then???

                            Surely not.

                            When I was 13 yrs old, a gang tried to break into our home.  I was trained to arms, both physically and mechanically.  My older sister and I were home alone, our Father and his 3rd wife were out grocery shopping.  They came for him.  When I realized they were going to break the front door down, I quickly loaded his 357 and my sister got the 12 gauge.  When they finally broke through the front door, their leader took one step over the threshold and I raised the loaded weapon directly to his head, giving him two choices, leave or take another step and be killed.  The 15-20 other gang members on our porch and front yard stopped.  

                            Their leader started to move towards me and I was pulling on the trigger....at that same moment... my sister cocked the 12 gauge behind me (they hadn't seen here standing on the steps behind me) and they then realized we weren't playing games, they fled.

                            Not one shot was fired and 4 lives were saved that day.

                            Upon reflection of those events during my meditations I did daily as part of my karate training, I realized one thing.  I would have killed as many of them as I could, without thought, without remorse and without regret.

                            "It's easy to pull the trigger, but can you live with the results?"  

                            That reality was one of the many things our father taught us.  I realized that I could have, would have become a killer in an instant, at the age of 13 yrs.

                            I've never owned a firearm because of that day and that moment.........I shall never become a killer.

                            Each of us makes the choices we do, their ours to make...and ours to take responsibility for.

                            Freedom isn't for the weak.

                            Your math is truly meaningless in this world.  

                            Reality is: in this nation there are over 108,000 similar instances where someone's firearm saved a life.

                            Even more tragic is the truth that over 11,000 times,  a firearm killed another.  In one brief moment pulling that trigger was the easiest thing to do.

                            WHY?  What have we done wrong?  Why have we made life so cheap?  

                            Why don't our children KNOW the value of a human life???????????

                            The gun didn't do this.....WE DID!

                            What answer does your math give us?  

                            Do you naively believe if all guns were magically removed from this nation tomorrow, we'd instantaneously know that life is precious and it surely doesn't grant "do-overs"???

                            I know better...

                             

                            -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

                            by gerrilea on Fri Feb 21, 2014 at 08:26:31 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Wow (0+ / 0-)

                            That was an utter word salad.

                            If you think the 'math' is unimportant, then why did you even bother to comment since this was a mathematical exercise to demonstrate that the self-reported surveys fail external validation.

                            We don't know that the 'final' answer is 108k DGUs because that also was an extrapolated self-reported survey that also fails external validation (though by far less than the 2.5M estimate), and it also doesn't include a confidence interval or error bars.

                            And why would you even compare DGUs solely against murders since not every DGU is a life saved? Heck, according to the Kleck survey, roughly half the DGUs occurred when there was no threat offered. If you want to use a proper comparison, compare real DGUs (positive gun use) to gun injuries and threats (negative gun use).

                            As far as your anecdotal evidence, I'll just direct you to the GunFAIL diary. Feel free to look up the families of the victims and comfort them with your story.

                            However, the fact that you conflate each DGU as a 'life saved' means you haven't even bothered to understand what those flawed surveys were even measuring.

                            http://www.guncite.com/...

                            No threat or attack: 46.8%

                            Defenders perception whether someone would have died without DGU:
                            Almost certainly would have: 15.7%

                            Why is life so cheap you ask? Perhaps because of aspects of our culture, a culture that worships the ability to end life so easily with a gun to such an extent that even sane regulations are met with massive hostility and political blow-back.

                            If all guns were 'magically' removed from our country tomorrow, I do know one thing for sure. That day's GunFAIL diary would be a hell of a lot shorter. Can you say anything else with such certainty?

                            However, getting back to the surveys, can you (or anyone else) provide an example of a justified DGU when no threat or attack is offered? For the life of me, I can't seem to envision such a case where the gun use would be 'defensive', since there is no threat or attack being 'defended' against.

                            Does this not appear that there are at least 50% false positives built right into and documented by the survey?

                          •  You degrade us all...have a great life...n/t (0+ / 0-)

                            -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

                            by gerrilea on Sat Feb 22, 2014 at 02:21:26 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  One wonders (0+ / 0-)

                            why you even bothered to weigh in with so little to contribute to the discussion.

                            Next time, do your homework and stay on topic.

                            Let's see:

                            Thinks 108k DGUs is the 'final answer': wrong
                            Thinks each DGU is a life saved: wrong
                            Thinks homicide rate isn't related to gun availability: wrong

                            Can't answer what a DGU is when no threat or attack is present, can't justify or even comment regarding a potential 50% false positive rate for self-reported surveys.

                            When confronted with data, even data from a Kleck DGU study, you fall back on a meaningless hit-and-run insult.

                            Have a great life, indeed. Just know that if you, or any of your RKBA buddies keep peddling this survey bullshit as 'factual', I'll slap you down each time I see it.

                          •  I've done my homework..."Buddy"! (0+ / 0-)

                            It's this "theoretical math problem" you're attempting to push off as legitimate conversation that has me disgusted.

                            I think that when you boil things down to numbers, we humans become mere statistics...no thanks, I'm not a number on your computer screen.

                            I don't care what YOUR numbers are.  MY "homework" was living to argue with you about the 2nd Amendment 40+ yrs later!

                            A gun saved FOUR lives that day.  I could give a flying rats ass if they never saved a life before or after. At the moment I needed superior force, it was within arms reach and saved my life.

                            And you haven't slapped anything down here buster!  YOU have proven beyond a doubt that life is just a numbers game to you to be argued anonymously on the "intertubes"...

                            Have fun with that...I'm not here to play games.

                            108.000 live per year have been saved, AT A MINIMUM, through the exercise of the "Right To Keep And Bear Arms".

                            As for this garbage:

                            Can't answer what a DGU is when no threat or attack is present,
                            Impossible to know without self-reporting/admission to criminal intent.

                            This leads us to this propaganda:

                            50% false positive rate for self-reported surveys.
                            So, wise master sir, does this mean those "survey's" our gov't uses...just like "The National Crime Victimization Survey" is invalid as well?

                            You can't have it both ways baby.  Your "math argument" fails yet again.

                            You need to find a better argument.

                            And you couldn't answer my simple questions and yet assail me for answering yours....

                            What if just 1 life was saved?

                            What if that 1 life was yours?

                            Would the numbers matter then???

                            OH, and wasn't your demand that we whom uprated the posting, give our reason(s)????

                            Shit, had I known you would refuse the answer because it didn't fit your agenda, then I wouldn't have wasted my time.

                            -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

                            by gerrilea on Sat Feb 22, 2014 at 06:13:35 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Theoretical math? (0+ / 0-)

                            Methinks you don't know what the word theoretical actually means.

                            The numbers in the external validation calculations are vetted against actual reported reality, not extrapolations from 56 people in a survey, and therefore much less uncertain than any of the self-reported surveys.

                            A gun saved FOUR lives that day.  I could give a flying rats ass if they never saved a life before or after. At the moment I needed superior force, it was within arms reach and saved my life.
                            And how many has a gun killed since then? Ah right, you 'could give a flying rats ass'. Also known as the: don't give a shit about anyone but myself defense.

                            Your four lives are important to you, everyone gets that. The thousands who have died from gun violence since then have been important to others, just as much. You may think I'm 'minimizing' your experience and the four saved lives, but you are doing the same to many tens of thousands more.

                            108.000 live per year have been saved, AT A MINIMUM, through the exercise of the "Right To Keep And Bear Arms".
                            BULLSHIT. 100% That is a self-reported survey that doesn't include the error bars, confidence intervals, or any statistical measures of accuracy. It also fails the 3 external validations, the statistical p value test linked further down, and the 'smell test' in the complete and utter dearth of 'DGU saved my life' stories that gun rights advocates would be publishing all over the web, to the tune of and expected 300 PER DAY. Where are they? chirping crickets

                            Your disregard of math and external validation does not give you the right to claim things that just aren't true.

                            With regard to a DGU when no threat is present, I'm not asking you to validate each one of those in the survey, I'm asking you to provide an example of a justifiable DGU when no threat is present. Give an example, that's all. Explain how one can 'defensively' use a gun when there is no threat to defend against.

                            So, wise master sir, does this mean those "survey's" our gov't uses...just like "The National Crime Victimization Survey" is invalid as well?
                            If they are self-reported surveys with a low incidence value, then absolutely they suffer the same problems with false positives, see here:

                            http://www.statisticsdonewrong.com/...

                            You can't have it both ways baby.  Your "math argument" fails yet again.

                            You need to find a better argument.

                            Laughable. You don't even appear to understand the math well enough to critique it. Just bury your head in the sand. Do you need me to explain the relevance of the statistical p-value link posted above? I hope not since it has the good fortune of including a DGU example as well as others.

                            Answer these?

                            What if just 1 life was saved?
                            What if that 1 life was yours?

                            Would the numbers matter then???

                            Seriously? You're falling back on emotional appeals to make your argument? I didn't answer before because transparently emotional appeals are a pretty fucking stupid way to debate policy, but sure, I'll answer. Of course it would matter to me, just like it matters to the few thousand lives saved each year from DGU. But there are many things that matter to me that shouldn't necessarily be implemented as policy.

                            But then, the argument is just as easy to turn on you, as all emotional appeals are: would it matter to you if you or your family were gunned down by someone who would have been denied a gun with a background check?

                            Do you think it matters to the friends and family of the thousands of people killed each year by gun violence?

                            When it comes to policy, do you really think we should fall back on emotional appeals, because that sure sounds like a piss-poor way to run a country to me.

                            Shit, had I known you would refuse the answer because it didn't fit your agenda, then I wouldn't have wasted my time.
                            Refuse to answer? There are 3 external validations still waiting your critiques. You can add to that the issues with false positives and p value for low incidence occurrences in the link above.

                            You've got a lot of work to do before you get the privilege of saying I've 'refused to answer' your questions. Especially when one of your responses was an pathetic attempt at a zero-content pithy one-liner insult.

                            Yes, I 'demanded', or rather asked that you justify yourself. But I asked specifically to justify your uprate of the 100% incorrect math of that response.

                            If math and statistics just isn't your thing, just say so and go find less numerical discussions.

                          •  Your argument fails in some logic... (0+ / 0-)
                            And how many has a gun killed since then? Ah right, you 'could give a flying rats ass'. Also known as the: don't give a shit about anyone but myself defense.
                            The question should be:

                            How many has THAT gun killed before or since?

                            Zero, would be the answer...by the way.

                            I truly care that all whom need (or want) a tool, have it, if they so desire.

                            It's that simple.  That tool, if used incorrectly can maim and kill.  It can also intentionally kill.  It's up to the person holding it that matters, NOT the item they're holding.

                            Huge difference.  I want as many people as possible to have a many tomorrows as life grants them.  I don't want or need to know "the numbers"...really.   I know too many people are dying from violence, including gun violence...Well...how do we become less violent?

                            Teach our children non-violent dispute resolution, teach them how to think critically and logically.

                            If you ban "X"...they'll start using "Y"...wash, rinse, repeat until anything and everything one can use to hurt another is banned...TEACH the person to be non-violent and poof...problem solved!

                            This is why your math is immaterial...it leads to false solutions that will do nothing to stop violence.

                            -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

                            by gerrilea on Sat Feb 22, 2014 at 08:08:09 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  A more polite reply (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            gerrilea

                            and possible solution to our disagreement.

                            That 108,000 DGU/year number is from 1994 statistics.

                            All of my external validations are using current ~2012-2013 values (justifiable homicides and violent crime rate).

                            According to the DoJ, current crime rates are 1/3 of what they were in 1994.

                            http://www.wanttoknow.info/...

                            It seems likely that DGUs should scale with violent crime rate, so 108,000 DGUs in 1994 would equate to 36,000 DGUs annually in present day.

                            This number is exactly in the ball park of my external validation calculations.

                            It seems we may have less to argue about then we thought.

                          •  Not sure if I follow the logical progression here (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Ozy

                            If DGU's were at 108,000 or 10x the murder rate...then it should mirror today...gun homicides have gone down by 49%...meaning the DGU's...if accurate should be closer to 54,000.

                            http://www.cnn.com/...

                            The new study found U.S. firearm homicides peaked in 1993 at 7.0 deaths per 100,000 people. But by 2010, the rate was 49% lower, and firearm-related violence -- assaults, robberies, sex crimes -- was 75% lower in 2011 than in 1993, the study found.
                            What's not included or weighted in this analysis is the massive increase in firearm ownership over this same period.

                            We went from 194 million to over 310 million.  From 40% ownership to 47%...that's a huge increase.

                            -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

                            by gerrilea on Sat Feb 22, 2014 at 08:17:43 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  DGUs are not just about homicides (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            gerrilea

                            they are primarily about preventing violent crimes and property crimes, such as burglaries, robberies, and assaults. At least according to the surveys.

                            As such, they should mirror the overall reduction in all violent crime, rather than specifically homicides.

                            And, since DGUs don't necessarily depend on the 'attacker' having a gun, we wouldn't necessarily expect it to drop by the full 75% decline in firearm-related violence, but again by the average overall violent crime rate reduction.

                            Here's a good document of the various crime prevalence rates, and their decline.

                            http://www.bjs.gov/...

                            In general, if you include both violent crime and also property crime rates (burglaries and other crimes that could also invoke a DGU), an average reduction in prevalence of ~2/3rds is about right.

                            That's a good point about the increase in gun ownership as well. That's about a 20% increase which could boost the DGU numbers proportionally. However, the number of households with guns has declined from 45.5% to 34.4%, about a 25% reduction, which would proportionally lower DGUs for things like burglaries and 'on-property' violent crime.

                            http://www.gunpolicy.org/...

                          •  These statistics are still only based on (0+ / 0-)

                            self-reporting.  How do we overcome this inherent flaw?

                            Is someone going to admit on a phone survey that they have/own a gun illegally or have used a gun they didn't register to defend themselves?

                            Surely not and this problem will become even more nefarious with the revelations of the crimes of the NSA.  Nobody in their right mind will be admitting that over the phone, in fact, I'd wager, they'd outright lie about firearm ownership now.

                            As an example of these flaws in all these "models", in the 50 yrs or so that I've been alive, just this past week I was called for a "pew research survey".

                            Once in my entire life.

                            Then we have sample size, time of day called, location-rural or urban, age, sex, education of person getting call, etc.

                            It's like the numbers the DOL puts out for unemployment.  Why is it based on surveys?  How about we get the information directly from the Social Security Administration?  We'd know instantly how many people are working and how many aren't.  We'd know their age, their sex, the marital status, the State they reside in, hell we'd know if they were working fulltime or parttime even, we'd know their estimated yearly income, etc...etc...etc...

                            I know people love to quantify things, I do it all the time myself...but is that truly going to help anyone?  Nope, it's going to give our Politicians BS to spread that their doing something.

                            How many jobs did the now permanent Bush Tax Breaks create?

                            How many are they creating today?

                            I think we both know the answer to that, we don't need a survey to tell us.

                            What I find in consistent with the number of homes with firearms reported is the simple fact the FBI's NICS system has had record setting requests, year after year for almost a decade.  Its currently at a 45.7% increase.

                            I do not believe for a moment that firearm ownership has gone down like it's been claimed.  I have FEMALE co-workers whom are getting permits AND guns.  20 yrs ago, no one ever talked about self defense or even owning a firearm.  You didn't talk about guns, ever.  Not here in New York anyways.  

                            Here in Buffalo, there's been some very disturbing home invasions and violence on a scale rarely seen.

                            How many people are going to "opt out" of our legal permitting requirements and own a weapon anyways?

                            "Better to be tried by 12 than buried by 6", right?

                            Which leads me to even question the claims violence has gone down.  Adrian Schoolcraft's whistleblowing revealed that the police numbers are mostly fabrications, intentionally so, to get federal funding.

                            I know from firsthand experiences here in Buffalo, the police don't want to take a report when you call them.  My apartment was broken into and when I found the mess, I promptly called them.  The "police officer" asked me if I really wanted to file a report.  Are you freaking serious?  And I asked that!  They then asked me, "Why are you going to report it to your insurance company?"  I said I didn't have an insurance company. Their reply, "Well there's no point in filing the report then."

                            I was furious!  

                            But hey, this is the reality I see and exist in...the numbers lie.

                            -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

                            by gerrilea on Sun Feb 23, 2014 at 01:55:02 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Look at the charts (0+ / 0-)

                            http://www.washingtonpost.com/...

                            Personally, I believe the data from the General Social Survey a bit more than Gallop because it's been tracked longer, shows a smoother function, and also includes individual ownership rates.

                            The Gallop survey is far too 'noisy', indicating that it's error bars are likely much larger.

                            Are we really to believe that between 1994 and 1996 more than 25% of gun-owning households gave them up? Or that 30 million more households had guns 6 months later? Unlikely.

                            Furthermore, that 40% to 47% increase that you stated apparently uses data from the wrong year. 1994, the year from the survey, was at 54% household ownership according to Gallop.

                            But your critiques regarding self-reported surveys are related to what I've been insisting all along. You simply can't trust them to report accurate numbers when it comes to things like gun violence because false positives and false negatives will blow your statistical uncertainties out of the water.

                            That's why I insist that external validation be used to provide a consistency check for any of these surveys. This consistency check just happens to provide a range (~10-60k) that is compatible with the 108k number properly scaled to modern crime and gun ownership rates.

                            That doesn't mean the final scaled number, ~36k, is completely accurate, it could easily be off by 50% in either direction. But it provides a good ballpark number that reasonably compares to non-survey based estimations.

                            The reason that the household and individual ownership rates are declining as the NICS rates increases is pretty easy to explain. People who already owned guns bought more. Given the rhetoric around Obama's election, reelection, as well as the gun control talk surrounding the various mass shootings, this is an obvious result considering it was gun owners and NRA members that were panicking.

                            We already have surveys that directly measure firearm ownership rates, and those charts are linked above, and I have no reason to believe that people were more likely to lie about ownership in 2012 compared to 1994, nor that illegal ownership is more likely in 2012 compared to 1994. In fact, considering the overall reduction in crime and gun related violence, it's likely that illegal gun ownership has significantly declined since 1994, which would further reduce the scaled DGU number. But that's difficult to quantify.

                            Your personal experience may, or may not accurately reflect overall trends in Buffalo, NY. But just like climate change, local conditions aren't necessarily indicative of the global picture, especially when we already have measurements that contradict your anecdotal evidence.

                          •  Thanks for honest conversation. (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Ozy

                            How do we get "external validation" for self-reporting?

                            I do understand the difference between "global" and "local', but the leaks are finally surfacing when it comes to the books being cooked for crime stats, not just here in Buffalo but more importantly in our large metro areas, like NYC.

                            Retired Police: NY Crime Stats Manipulated, Fabricated

                            a survey of more than one hundred retired NYPD higher-ups showed that cops—who are under constant pressure to produce happy-looking stats—have routinely fabricated or manipulated their data, since the crime analysis system was put into place in 1995.
                            What's even more disturbing is that many Police Captains, etc from these larger areas are offered very lucrative jobs in other States...spreading their "business", so to speak, elsewhere.  Small municipalities having crime rates going up, will spend a small fortune to get someone "whom can bring results".  How much is truly intentional fabrication or "muscling"victims to remain silent, like I was or an actual drop in crime due to good "policing"?

                            I know it would counter the RKBA stance that violence is going down while gun ownership is going up...but I seriously have no faith that we're being told the truth.

                            Cutbacks force police to curtail calls for some crimes

                            Chicago Police No Longer Respond To Lesser Crimes

                            These developments must be brought into any analysis.  If we stop counting "lesser crimes" and are not reporting the ones that do happen, accurately...then where are we?

                            No further ahead in anything.  

                            -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

                            by gerrilea on Sun Feb 23, 2014 at 03:08:37 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                      •  Two nights ago, the dog went off on it's own. (2+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        Tom Seaview, gerrilea

                        Thank DOG no one died.

                        Just a little after 1:30am, our mid-sized, wannabe Rottweiler started barking.  
                        (I'ze teh same colors as a Rotty, so I'ze must be one)

                        I woke from the couch, "watching the Olympics", which is right by the door.
                        I observed a male of indeterminate age, trying to break into our car, by beating on the window.
                        I opened the door, and he ran-off, out of the parking lot.

                        From experience, I didn't bother to call the police.

                        a) no crime was committed in their eyes.
                        Criminal Trespass on Posted property?  Sure, but not enough to send a car.

                        b) no item of value was damaged or taken.  Only an attempt.
                        Not enough to send a car, or take a report.

                        c) No positive ID of the suspect was made.  Parka, knit hat, gloves. 100% match for everyone in the state.
                        Not enough to send a car... or take a report.

                        Was this a Defensive Dog Use?
                        Was anyone bitten?  IF not, it's an bullshit DDU.

                        Did the dog discharge, endangering the community?
                        Should my Right to Keep and Feed Dogs, be restricted due to my inability to produce a blood-soaked pant leg?
                        The Police would certainly take your dog if there WAS a blood-soaked pant leg.

                        Shouldn't civilian possession of dogs be restricted or banned outright?  
                        As I an incapable of saying that I'm 100% certain, by continual observation, that my spouse didn't in-concert, or by malice, obtain property with, or from that person.
                        Leaving that property in her car, isn't this person a likely victim, not a perpetrator?

                        Did my dog, by barking, cause undue psychological harm to my neighbors, or this person? (who may of course be innocent, while my spouse is guilty)

                        Isn't the presence of a dog in the house 88 times more likely to injure or kill one of your own family?

                        Shouldn't I surrender my dog to the authorities?

                        I should I contact a victim advocacy in town, and see if anyone reported being victimized by a dog and owner at 1:30am on Wednesday?

                        Isn't it time?  
                        Isn't it long past time we removed these dogs from the home?

                        Trained dogs and trained owners belong in the Police Department ONLY.

                        I'M calling Senator Feinstein.  Enough is enough.
                        We need an executive order... and a repeal of the Right to Keep and Feed Dogs.

                        Next:  Ferrets.

          •  Tell it to these folks (0+ / 0-)

            http://www.usashooting.org/...

            Obviously ALL of them are child killers. All of them are "bad guys with guns" because there are no good guys with guns., because there is no such thing.

            Man, a2nite is quite possibly the most brilliant bulbs in the antigun echo chamber. After all, there is no possibility in the known universe that a2nite could be, um, er, wrong about anything at all. Wow. Just wow.

        •  packs concealed (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Glen The Plumber

          Doesn't seem to be fond of open carry. He says it violates his privacy rights.

          KOS: "Mocking partisans focusing on elections? Even less reason to be on Daily Kos."

          by fcvaguy on Thu Feb 20, 2014 at 06:54:19 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site