33 and counting Dead in knife attack...

[Geaux4it]

And to add, you are 12x more likely to die by homicide outside the borders of the US. Think I will take my chances here, even though we own half the worlds guns

-Geaux

But you're 4x-5x more likely to be murdered in the US compared to other developed Western nations, almost all of which have stricter gun control.

And for that acceptable risk to live here, I hope to mitigate that risk with my Kimber

-Geaux

 

[JoeB131]

[

And to add, you are 12x more likely to die by homicide outside the borders of the US. Think I will take my chances here, even though we own half the worlds guns

-Geaux

We are only 3% of the world's population. That we have as many homicides as we do is sort of an embarassment [sic].

Aren't you the asshole who posted over and over about smashing business managers in the head with baseball bats, you fucking hypocrite? You're a mouthy, hypocritical pussy.

Hey, dude, really, that's the only thing that's going to get through to them.

The reason little Molly doesn't get sucked through a thresher today is because someone threatened the rich with violence if they didn't fix things.

Except now it's little Pradip getting sucked through a thresher.

 

[JoeB131]

And to add, you are 12x more likely to die by homicide outside the borders of the US. Think I will take my chances here, even though we own half the worlds guns

-Geaux

But you're 4x-5x more likely to be murdered in the US compared to other developed Western nations, almost all of which have stricter gun control.

And for that acceptable risk to live here, I hope to mitigate that risk with my Kimber

-Geaux

Again, that Kimber is 43 times more likely to kill someone in your household than a bad guy.

 

[TemplarKormac]

News from The Associated Press

Cleary a ban on knives is in order.



peace...

Guns do what now? Simple mechanics tell you that a person can kill many more people with a knife than a gun.

 

[TemplarKormac]

But you're 4x-5x more likely to be murdered in the US compared to other developed Western nations, almost all of which have stricter gun control.

And for that acceptable risk to live here, I hope to mitigate that risk with my Kimber

-Geaux

Again, that Kimber is 43 times more likely to kill someone in your household than a bad guy.

Remember what happened the last time you tried to cite the Kellerman study? Need I remind everyone here what happened in kaz's thread when you did?

 

[JoeB131]

And for that acceptable risk to live here, I hope to mitigate that risk with my Kimber

-Geaux

Again, that Kimber is 43 times more likely to kill someone in your household than a bad guy.

Remember what happened the last time you tried to cite the Kellerman study? Need I remind everyone here what happened in kaz's thread when you did?

You all stomped your little feet and said, "I don't want Kellerman to be true!!!!"

And then you posted links to Gun Nut Sites that didn't want Kellerman to be true, either.

Because nothing you posted was really all that compelling or changed the basic facts.

You know what would change the facts? Actually letting the CDC study gun deaths, and then seeing if they get different results than what Kellerman got.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Author Henry E. Schaefer M.D. published a rebuttal paper to Kellerman’s 1993 report that same year, in which Schaefer notes several flaws, starting with Kellerman's use of the case control method (CCM) of analysis. It was later rebutted by the likes of J. Neil Schuman, Criminologists Gary Kleck, Don Kates and others. Also, the Kellermann et al paper was never peer reviewed. When asked to prove the raw numbers that supposedly backed up his claim, he refused, and still to this day has refused to.

Florida State University Criminologist Gary Kleck found that no method of gun control had any impact on the number of suicides. Controlling guns did somewhat temper suicide through use of a gun, but not the overall suicide rate. The Kellerman study was still flawed, even after Kellerman backed away from his 43 times figure and concluded that a person who owned a gun was now "2.7 times more likely to be the victim of a homicide than one who did not."

The Kellerman, et al (1993) study in the NEJM attempts to use the case-control method (CCM) to show that gun ownership increases homicide in the home. The limitations of the CCM, and serious flaws in the study methodology, result in invalidation of the study's conclusions.

The CCM has a number of limitations in what it can accomplish, and has a number of conditions (assumptions) which must be satisfied for it to be able to satisfactorily accomplish even the limited goals for which it is suitable. The biggest limitation is that the CCM can't demonstrate causation. The CCM finds 'associations' between studied factors and the 'outcome' which defines the 'cases'. These 'associations' may suggest that there is a causal relationship, and may then be used to justify a study of causal relationships, but it is incorrect to jump from the discovery of an association to a conclusion of causation. Other weak points in the CCM have to do with susceptibility to biases in the selection of the cases, and with confounding factors which can affect the choice of the controls. These can easily lead to spurious associations when there actually are none, or to associations which are reversed in direction from what actually exists.

The Kellerman, et al (1993) study has been widely quoted as demonstrating that there is a causal relationship between handguns in the home and homicides. The paper itself doesn't go that far, but it uses suggestive language, which suggests that there is more than merely an 'association'. The flaws in the paper are such as to make the the reader suspicious of the association found. Showing flaws in the methods does not prove that the paper is wrong, but it causes a loss of confidence in the results. Conclusions which are not properly supported must be considered invalid until proper support becomes available, if ever. It is the responsibility of the authors to support their conclusions. It isn't the responsibility of the readers to go out to collect data to prove that the flaws in the paper lead to incorrect conclusions.

The detailed treatment of these flaws, with supporting data, examples and methods is necessarily quite long, but it does illustrate that the Kellerman, et al paper is based on unsupported assumptions and that the conclusions must be viewed with suspicion or rejected as being unsupported.

-- Henry E. Schaffer, Ph. D.



Serious Flaws in Kellerman

.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Lol. And off he goes again. His gun control argument in tatters.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Need I remind you all how flawed the Kellerman study was:

The flaws in Kellerman's study can be summarized as:

- No peer review

- No release of raw data has ever been made

- Sampling and bias errors

1. 65% of subjects were black

2. Does not consider positive aspects of gun ownership by asking if a weapon was used to frighten off an intruder, or if the homicides were justified (i.e. justifiable homicides by homeowner or police.) Kellerman merely asked: "In this household where a homicide was committed, was there a gun, any gun in the house?" Kellerman intentionally limited his study group to cases where people were murdered in their own homes.​

- Error introduced due to failure of subjects to respond honestly was not treated in Kellerman's study.

- Improperly grouped subgroups into populations using the chi-square Mantel-Haenszel analysis for matched pairs without giving an analysis, which leads to errors due to the stratification of the data.

- Only three counties were used in his study thereby making the application of even causal associations within the data to the entire population of the U.S. a farce.

- 52.7% of Kellerman's subjects had a family member with an arrest record

- 31.3% had a history of drug abuse

- 31.8% had a household member hurt in a family fight

- Given the above is this representative of a "typical" American household?

 

[JoeB131]

And more foot stomping that doesn't change the basic facts.

"We don't want you to count the suicides.. no fair!!!"

Frankly, I am sitting no more than 50 feet from where my neighbor killed himself with that gun he bought for "protection".

 

[JoeB131]

Need I remind you all how flawed the Kellerman study was:

The flaws in Kellerman's study can be summarized as:

- No peer review

- No release of raw data has ever been made

- Sampling and bias errors

1. 65% of subjects were black

2. Does not consider positive aspects of gun ownership by asking if a weapon was used to frighten off an intruder, or if the homicides were justified (i.e. justifiable homicides by homeowner or police.) Kellerman merely asked: "In this household where a homicide was committed, was there a gun, any gun in the house?" Kellerman intentionally limited his study group to cases where people were murdered in their own homes.​

- Error introduced due to failure of subjects to respond honestly was not treated in Kellerman's study.

- Improperly grouped subgroups into populations using the chi-square Mantel-Haenszel analysis for matched pairs without giving an analysis, which leads to errors due to the stratification of the data.

- Only three counties were used in his study thereby making the application of even causal associations within the data to the entire population of the U.S. a farce.

- 52.7% of Kellerman's subjects had a family member with an arrest record

- 31.3% had a history of drug abuse

- 31.8% had a household member hurt in a family fight

- Given the above is this representative of a "typical" American household?

What does that have to do with anything?

So they were black and had "criminal records", so it's okay that they died?

Is this what you are seriously saying, guy?

 

[JoeB131]

Hey, how many people in Kellerman's study were overweight losers without jobs?

We should take them out ofthe study, too.

 

[Wry Catcher]

BEIJING (AP) -- More than 10 knife-wielding attackers slashed people at a train station in a southwestern city in what authorities called a terrorist attack by ethnic separatists in western China, and police fatally shot four of the assailants, leaving 33 people dead and 130 others wounded, state media said.

One suspect was arrested, Xinhua said.

Authorities said five suspects were shot dead but that their identities had not yet been confirmed, and police were hunting for the remaining attackers, Xinhua reported.

Too bad police were not there sooner to stop the bloodshed. It appears that one suspect is in police custody. No doubt they are trying to get him tell where the others are hiding. For sure he will get the death penalty.

This attack just goes to show that even with gun control in place, hardened criminals or terrorists will find a way to commit their heinous crimes, even without guns if they are not available. If guns are available, and with strict gun control in place, criminals will have even more of an advantage since they know the only resistance they will encounter is by police.

Given a choice, I'll choose an asshole coming at me with a knife 10 out of 10 times; I can't stop a bullet but I can defend myself against a knife attack.

 

[jon_berzerk]

BEIJING (AP) -- More than 10 knife-wielding attackers slashed people at a train station in a southwestern city in what authorities called a terrorist attack by ethnic separatists in western China, and police fatally shot four of the assailants, leaving 33 people dead and 130 others wounded, state media said.

Authorities said five suspects were shot dead but that their identities had not yet been confirmed, and police were hunting for the remaining attackers, Xinhua reported.

Too bad police were not there sooner to stop the bloodshed. It appears that one suspect is in police custody. No doubt they are trying to get him tell where the others are hiding. For sure he will get the death penalty.

This attack just goes to show that even with gun control in place, hardened criminals or terrorists will find a way to commit their heinous crimes, even without guns if they are not available. If guns are available, and with strict gun control in place, criminals will have even more of an advantage since they know the only resistance they will encounter is by police.

Given a choice, I'll choose an asshole coming at me with a knife 10 out of 10 times; I can't stop a bullet but I can defend myself against a knife attack.

given the choice i would rather neither came at me

unfortunately we do not live in a rose colored glasses sort of utopia

 

[TemplarKormac]

Since when did you get your degree in criminology? Yes, the number of suicides is correct, but not all of them were committed with a firearm. Not all murders are committed with firearms, and yeah, gun accidents which counted as how much of a percent of the population as a whole? You're being blatantly dishonest, and so was Kellermann.

In 1994 (after the publication of his paper), Kellerman was taped giving a presentation at a seminar. At this time he states on the tape that a person is 18 times more likely to be murdered if they keep a firearm in the home! Guess who was at the seminar, Joe? None other than Janet Reno. She loved quoting him when speaking about gun control in her capacity as Attorney General during the Clinton Administration.

.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Need I remind you all how flawed the Kellerman study was:

The flaws in Kellerman's study can be summarized as:

- No peer review

- No release of raw data has ever been made

- Sampling and bias errors

1. 65% of subjects were black

2. Does not consider positive aspects of gun ownership by asking if a weapon was used to frighten off an intruder, or if the homicides were justified (i.e. justifiable homicides by homeowner or police.) Kellerman merely asked: "In this household where a homicide was committed, was there a gun, any gun in the house?" Kellerman intentionally limited his study group to cases where people were murdered in their own homes.​

- Error introduced due to failure of subjects to respond honestly was not treated in Kellerman's study.

- Improperly grouped subgroups into populations using the chi-square Mantel-Haenszel analysis for matched pairs without giving an analysis, which leads to errors due to the stratification of the data.

- Only three counties were used in his study thereby making the application of even causal associations within the data to the entire population of the U.S. a farce.

- 52.7% of Kellerman's subjects had a family member with an arrest record

- 31.3% had a history of drug abuse

- 31.8% had a household member hurt in a family fight

- Given the above is this representative of a "typical" American household?

What does that have to do with anything?

So they were black and had "criminal records", so it's okay that they died?

Is this what you are seriously saying, guy?

That's what Kellermann's study said, guy. The CDC got tired of his crap and defunded him three years later.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Hey, how many people in Kellerman's study were overweight losers without jobs?

We should take them out ofthe study, too.

Alas, an admission of defeat.

 

[JoeB131]

[

That's what Kellermann's study said, guy. The CDC got tired of his crap and defunded him three years later.

No, that's not how it happened, guy.

After Kellerman debunked "you need a gun in your house to protect yourself", the GOP Congress told the CDC that it couldn't study gun violence, ever again!!!

Gun violence research: NRA and Congress blocked gun-control studies at CDC.


In the 1990s, politicians backed by the NRA attacked researchers for publishing data on firearm research. For good measure, they also went after the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for funding the research. According to the NRA, such science is not “legitimate.” To make sure federal agencies got the message, Rep. Jay Dickey (R-Ark.) sponsored an amendment that stripped $2.6 million from the CDC’s budget, the exact amount it had spent on firearms research the previous year...

 

[JoeB131]

Hey, how many people in Kellerman's study were overweight losers without jobs?

We should take them out ofthe study, too.

Alas, an admission of defeat.

No, just pointing out that some lardass who admits he can't hold down a job due to "emotional issues" really has no business owning a gun.

 

[Unkotare]

We are only 3% of the world's population. That we have as many homicides as we do is sort of an embarassment [sic].

Aren't you the asshole who posted over and over about smashing business managers in the head with baseball bats, you fucking hypocrite? You're a mouthy, hypocritical pussy.

Hey, dude, really, that's the only thing that's going to get through to them. .

Hey pussy, you're a hypocritical little coward who wouldn't raise his hand to an old woman for fear of the ass-kicking you'd end up with. Don't bemoan violent crime in the US while playing at your empty little fantasies of violence, you big-mouthed fucking punk.