|
overlord
Jul 11, 2006, 5:43 AM
Post #201 of 211
(3329 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 25, 2002
Posts: 14120
|
In reply to: The skeptic in me thinks that the statistics I want to see (compare 1981 to 1982) are never cited because they don't support the pro-gun lobby.
actually, for a "valid" causal relationship (on a totally inadequate sample) you would need statistics for about 5 years prior and 5 years after the ne legalislation. crime rate varies too much in smaller communities.
anyway, to really know, a real experiment would be needed (like get the results, change the legalislation, get the results, plus a control group, bot groups random...). and that would cost a LOT of money and would take quite some time. and im not sure everybody would be happy with the results.
oh, and you would need to do it in such a way that the ppl would be unaware of the experiment (or they might act to disrupt it; e.g. for example do or no do crimes according to what they think about the subject).
|
|
|
|
|
tisar
Jul 11, 2006, 8:10 AM
Post #202 of 211
(3329 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 1, 2004
Posts: 2577
|
In reply to: Thanks for the links. Honestly I'm not even going to bother reading any articles without good citations and statistics....this is just too touchy a subject. (take the first one, for example, "no homicides in 2001"....well what about 2000 and 2002?). uh. All those stories compare Kennesaw in 1981 with Kennesaw in 1999....17 years after the law went into effect. Crime rate nationally dropped in those years, and crime in Atlanta very well may have dropped then, too (can't find any good statistics). The skeptic in me thinks that the statistics I want to see (compare 1981 to 1982) are never cited because they don't support the pro-gun lobby.
I found some interesting thoughts about the topic here. The bias is obvious, though I dont think they made up the numbers. This would mean that the supporters of the 'more guns, less crime' lobby picked the 1981 number on purpose:
In reply to: Kennesaw Burglaries 1976-1986 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 48 85 86 41 21 22 35 35 54 35 35 29 32 70
It's obviously a ten years peak...
- Daniel
|
|
|
|
|
rhaig
Jul 11, 2006, 2:39 PM
Post #203 of 211
(3329 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 27, 2006
Posts: 2179
|
In reply to: I found some interesting thoughts about the topic here. The bias is obvious, though I dont think they made up the numbers. This would mean that the supporters of the 'more guns, less crime' lobby picked the 1981 number on purpose: In reply to: Kennesaw Burglaries 1976-1986 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 48 85 86 41 21 22 35 35 54 35 35 29 32 70 It's obviously a ten years peak... - Daniel
like I've been telling you people.
there are lies, damn lies, and statistics. people selectively quote stats to support the position they want supported.
those are interesting burglary numbers, I'd love to compare violent crime numbers as well.
(not accusing anyone here of selectively quoting articles. just making my point that those who write the articles aren't going to always quote all the stats.)
|
|
|
|
|
kubi
Jul 11, 2006, 2:41 PM
Post #204 of 211
(3329 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 15, 2004
Posts: 815
|
In reply to: I don't know where the '81 and '82 stats are. All I know is crime there is low. very low. lower than it used to be (-89% in the 6 months following the passage of the ordinance in one of the articles you didn't read).
Was that one of the articles you posted? I read all of them. The -89% stat was from "Kennesaw Update"; The New American, 6/10/96. I couldn't find any link to this article (though I found lot's of citations of it). Anyway, The New American is hardly an original source....or even an unbiased source.
In reply to: anyway... I stated my opinion, that's all it is. Kennesaw is an interesting topic, but by no means conclusive evidence. Even if all the stats published about it are true.
Kennesaw is very interesting, it's just discouraging that there aren't any good statistics compiled from this great experiment.
In reply to: find me some pro-guncontrol stats from kennesaw. I looked for them, couldn't find any. I like to compare both sets of liars. The truth is usually somewhere in the middle.
I couldn't find any good articles about Kennesaw, pro or anti gun control.
According to Wikipedia there was no 89% decrease in crime but a slight (insignifigant) increase in burglary after the law went into effect.
|
|
|
|
|
rhaig
Jul 11, 2006, 5:11 PM
Post #206 of 211
(3329 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 27, 2006
Posts: 2179
|
In reply to: In reply to: I don't know where the '81 and '82 stats are. All I know is crime there is low. very low. lower than it used to be (-89% in the 6 months following the passage of the ordinance in one of the articles you didn't read). Was that one of the articles you posted? I read all of them. The -89% stat was from "Kennesaw Update"; The New American, 6/10/96. I couldn't find any link to this article (though I found lot's of citations of it). Anyway, The New American is hardly an original source....or even an unbiased source.
In reply to: In reply to: anyway... I stated my opinion, that's all it is. Kennesaw is an interesting topic, but by no means conclusive evidence. Even if all the stats published about it are true. Kennesaw is very interesting, it's just discouraging that there aren't any good statistics compiled from this great experiment. In reply to: find me some pro-guncontrol stats from kennesaw. I looked for them, couldn't find any. I like to compare both sets of liars. The truth is usually somewhere in the middle. I couldn't find any good articles about Kennesaw, pro or anti gun control. According to Wikipedia there was no 89% decrease in crime but a slight (insignifigant) increase in burglary after the law went into effect.
again, I wish there were general violent crime stats listed. I guess we'll have to be content with "it's an interesting topic without good stats" also, it's certainly not a scientificly sound sample, so we can stop beating that horse.
Almost makes me wish SanFran had been able to enact it's gun ban. It would have given us a larger sample and more data points.
|
|
|
|
|
kubi
Jul 11, 2006, 8:07 PM
Post #207 of 211
(3329 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 15, 2004
Posts: 815
|
In reply to: Almost makes me wish SanFran had been able to enact it's gun ban. It would have given us a larger sample and more data points.
True.
|
|
|
|
|
the_iceman
Jul 11, 2006, 8:37 PM
Post #208 of 211
(3329 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 16, 2006
Posts: 347
|
In reply to: oh, and you would need to do it in such a way that the ppl would be unaware of the experiment (or they might act to disrupt it; e.g. for example do or no do crimes according to what they think about the subject).
In which case, those who didn't like the results would claim that the test samples were selected post-test because they supported the testers' agenda. You can't win. The fact is, the anti-gun lobby will never win. At least not in America. There are too many people who understand their rights, and refuse to give them up, just because Janet Reno et al, want it that way.
|
|
|
|
|
reno
Jul 13, 2006, 6:41 PM
Post #209 of 211
(3329 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 30, 2001
Posts: 18283
|
Interesting articles HERE and HERE
FWIW, gun control laws in DC are much tougher than those in FLA.
|
|
|
|
|
kubi
Jul 13, 2006, 7:28 PM
Post #210 of 211
(3329 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 15, 2004
Posts: 815
|
In reply to: Interesting articles HERE and HERE FWIW, gun control laws in DC are much tougher than those in FLA.
Those articles don't mean anything. Even if they did have some sort of significance I doubt it would be pro-liberal gun policy like you'd like it to be. If you actually read the report issued about crime in Florida aggravated assault with a firearm INCREASED by over 11%...hardly an improvement. If you look at the numbers, there were about 2000 more firearm assults then the previous year and 34 less murders.
but like I said originally, those articles don't mean anything.
|
|
|
|
|
rhaig
Jul 13, 2006, 8:03 PM
Post #211 of 211
(3329 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 27, 2006
Posts: 2179
|
In reply to: In reply to: Interesting articles HERE and HERE FWIW, gun control laws in DC are much tougher than those in FLA. Those articles don't mean anything. Even if they did have some sort of significance I doubt it would be pro-liberal gun policy like you'd like it to be. If you actually read the report issued about crime in Florida aggravated assault with a firearm INCREASED by over 11%...hardly an improvement. If you look at the numbers, there were about 2000 more firearm assults then the previous year and 34 less murders. but like I said originally, those articles don't mean anything.
crime rate as a whole went down 1.5%, domestic crime went up 0.5%. Aggrivated assult and robbery are the only major categories that went up. There's been an absolute decrease in crime in FL every year for the past 3 years reports. (I say absolute meaning not adjusted for increase in population)
I agree, these articles mean very little. (other than there is an apparent downward trend in crime rate in FL, and DC is not a very safe place to live.)
They can both be used quite pursuasively to argue in this dead-horse thread though.
aside from the summary I got ripped for a few pages ago, all I know is if you make it illegal to own a handgun, all the criminals in the US are going to hurry down to the local police department to turn in their guns. (there's that tongue again)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
