Conquer Club

Metsfanmax wrote:These aren't reasons to reject the study, they're just reasons to not be confident in the specific result unless you live in Philadelphia.

Metsfanmax wrote:The 4.5 times more likely result was given after already having taken into account general characteristics that made a person at higher risk to be involved in gun violence. It does not seem to have taken into account the difference between legal and illegally owned guns, but I would argue that this is subsumed in the general "high-risk" category they describe in the paper.

Metsfanmax wrote:

HapSmo19 wrote:What's the the deal with you?
What business is it of yours and why do you care whether or not a person has advanced combat training while defending themselves in their own home?

...I would like fewer people to die in gun-related violence.

saxitoxin wrote:

Metsfanmax wrote:These aren't reasons to reject the study, they're just reasons to not be confident in the specific result unless you live in Philadelphia.

1. It's reason to reject the conclusion of the study, which states "the probability of success may be low" without the necessary qualification "in the singularly most crime-ridden city in the United States."

Metsfanmax wrote:The 4.5 times more likely result was given after already having taken into account general characteristics that made a person at higher risk to be involved in gun violence. It does not seem to have taken into account the difference between legal and illegally owned guns, but I would argue that this is subsumed in the general "high-risk" category they describe in the paper.

2. I can't comment on this as I don't have access to the full paper and "taken into account general characteristics that made a person at higher risk to be involved in gun violence" isn't explained - or as far as I can tell, even contained - in the abstract.

Metsfanmax wrote:

saxitoxin wrote:

Metsfanmax wrote:These aren't reasons to reject the study, they're just reasons to not be confident in the specific result unless you live in Philadelphia.

1. It's reason to reject the conclusion of the study, which states "the probability of success may be low" without the necessary qualification "in the singularly most crime-ridden city in the United States."

That fact doesn't substantially affect the result. The question being asked was not "how likely are you to get shot when possessing a gun," but rather "how much more likely are you to get shot when possessing a gun." Only the former depends on the absolute crime rate.

Metsfanmax wrote:

Metsfanmax wrote:The 4.5 times more likely result was given after already having taken into account general characteristics that made a person at higher risk to be involved in gun violence. It does not seem to have taken into account the difference between legal and illegally owned guns, but I would argue that this is subsumed in the general "high-risk" category they describe in the paper.

2. I can't comment on this as I don't have access to the full paper and "taken into account general characteristics that made a person at higher risk to be involved in gun violence" isn't explained - or as far as I can tell, even contained - in the abstract.

http://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/pd ... 008.143099

However, compared with control participants, shooting case participants were significantly more often Hispanic, more frequently working in high-risk occupations, less educated, and had a greater frequency of prior arrest. At the time of shooting, case participants were also significantly more often involved with alcohol and drugs, outdoors, and closer to areas where more Blacks, Hispanics, and unemployed individuals resided.

saxitoxin wrote:As I stated, it doesn't affect the data result, it affects the conclusion. The conclusion being "the probability of success may be low" with the implication of the discussion being this conclusion is valid outside the city limits of Philadelphia. Unless Philadelphia represents the demographic mean of all U.S. urban, suburban and rural areas - which it does not in at least one category (absolute crime rate), and most likely in many others as well - the study is of marginal value. This point is aside, however, from the more important fact that ...

This confirms the suspicion I originally stated -

However, compared with control participants, shooting case participants were significantly more often Hispanic, more frequently working in high-risk occupations, less educated, and had a greater frequency of prior arrest. At the time of shooting, case participants were also significantly more often involved with alcohol and drugs, outdoors, and closer to areas where more Blacks, Hispanics, and unemployed individuals resided.

next study

U Penn study wrote:Finally, as this was a case–control study, we had the advantage of being able to statistically adjust for numerous confounders of the relationship between gun possession and gun assault. These confounders included important individual-level factors that did not change with time such as having a high-risk occupation, limited education, or an arrest record. Other confounders that we included were situational factors that could have influenced the relationship under study: substance abuse, being outside, having others present, and being in neighborhood surroundings that were impoverished or busy with illicit drug trafficking. Although these situational confounders were potentially short-lived (e.g., a participant may have metabolized the drugs or alcohol they consumed, moved to another location, or left
the company of others) this was less important given the incidence–density sampling and the fact that case and control participants were essentially matched on time.

Metsfanmax wrote:

saxitoxin wrote:As I stated, it doesn't affect the data result, it affects the conclusion. The conclusion being "the probability of success may be low" with the implication of the discussion being this conclusion is valid outside the city limits of Philadelphia. Unless Philadelphia represents the demographic mean of all U.S. urban, suburban and rural areas - which it does not in at least one category (absolute crime rate), and most likely in many others as well - the study is of marginal value. This point is aside, however, from the more important fact that ...

I agree with this general conclusion about the limited potential applications of the study (and so do the authors). It's still a strong argument to inform government policy in urban areas.

This confirms the suspicion I originally stated -

However, compared with control participants, shooting case participants were significantly more often Hispanic, more frequently working in high-risk occupations, less educated, and had a greater frequency of prior arrest. At the time of shooting, case participants were also significantly more often involved with alcohol and drugs, outdoors, and closer to areas where more Blacks, Hispanics, and unemployed individuals resided.

next study

As I stated, the overrepresentation of these groups was accounted for and weighted appropriately when generating the results. They were fairly vague on the statistical method used to weight these factors, however.

U Penn study wrote:Finally, as this was a case–control study, we had the advantage of being able to statistically adjust for numerous confounders of the relationship between gun possession and gun assault. These confounders included important individual-level factors that did not change with time such as having a high-risk occupation, limited education, or an arrest record. Other confounders that we included were situational factors that could have influenced the relationship under study: substance abuse, being outside, having others present, and being in neighborhood surroundings that were impoverished or busy with illicit drug trafficking. Although these situational confounders were potentially short-lived (e.g., a participant may have metabolized the drugs or alcohol they consumed, moved to another location, or left
the company of others) this was less important given the incidence–density sampling and the fact that case and control participants were essentially matched on time.

saxitoxin wrote:In any case, MfM - you said you do not want to ban firearms. What level of regulation would you want?

For instance, in Canada you need to take an 8-hour safety class to get a rifle or a shotgun, and an extra 4-hour safety class to get a handgun (Canada has a low violent crime rate). In the UK almost all firearms other than bolt-action long guns are prohibited, and even those are heavily regulated (UK has a high violent crime rate). Which of those two regulatory regimes would you find acceptable? Or neither?

In retaliation against the New York newspaper — the Journal News — that published the addresses of those pistol permit holders in two of the state’s counties, a blogger has created a map pinpointing the addresses of the newspaper’s employees.

Mimicking the title of the Journal News’ original article, Robert Cox with “Talk of the Sound” headlined his post: Map: Where are the Journal News employees in your neighborhood?
Robert Cox With Talk of the Sound Creates Map of Journal News Employees in Retaliation to Gun Permit Map

He wrote:

The map indicates the addresses of all Journal News Employees in the New York Tri-State area. Each dot represents an individual Journal News employee — a reporter, editor or staffer. The data does not include freelancers — reporters or photographers — which can be hired without being an employee. Being included in this map does not mean the individual at a specific location is a responsible reporter or editor, just that they are a reporter or editor.

[...]

To create the map, Talk of the Sound submitted Google searches for the names and addresses of all Journal News employees in the New York Tri-State area. By state law, the information is public record.

Cox went onto explain that putting together the map has been a crowd-sourced effort between other bloggers and readers. He wrote the map will be updated as more information continues to become available.

He also noted that since the publication has downsized in recent years, some of the names of employees might not be current. So far, dozens of names and addresses have been collected and published.

See the full-size map here.

Another blogger has been curating the names and addresses of News Journal employees as well (via Beta Beat). Christopher Fountain, a Greenwich, Conn., real estate agent on his blog For What It’s Worth, generally composes posts about real estate and home improvement, has been voicing his thoughts on the News Journal’s publishing of gun owner addresses and also recently linked Cox’s interactive map of employee addresses.

Night Strike wrote:

In retaliation against the New York newspaper — the Journal News — that published the addresses of those pistol permit holders in two of the state’s counties, a blogger has created a map pinpointing the addresses of the newspaper’s employees.

Mimicking the title of the Journal News’ original article, Robert Cox with “Talk of the Sound” headlined his post: Map: Where are the Journal News employees in your neighborhood?
Robert Cox With Talk of the Sound Creates Map of Journal News Employees in Retaliation to Gun Permit Map

He wrote:

The map indicates the addresses of all Journal News Employees in the New York Tri-State area. Each dot represents an individual Journal News employee — a reporter, editor or staffer. The data does not include freelancers — reporters or photographers — which can be hired without being an employee. Being included in this map does not mean the individual at a specific location is a responsible reporter or editor, just that they are a reporter or editor.

[...]

To create the map, Talk of the Sound submitted Google searches for the names and addresses of all Journal News employees in the New York Tri-State area. By state law, the information is public record.

Cox went onto explain that putting together the map has been a crowd-sourced effort between other bloggers and readers. He wrote the map will be updated as more information continues to become available.

He also noted that since the publication has downsized in recent years, some of the names of employees might not be current. So far, dozens of names and addresses have been collected and published.

See the full-size map here.

Another blogger has been curating the names and addresses of News Journal employees as well (via Beta Beat). Christopher Fountain, a Greenwich, Conn., real estate agent on his blog For What It’s Worth, generally composes posts about real estate and home improvement, has been voicing his thoughts on the News Journal’s publishing of gun owner addresses and also recently linked Cox’s interactive map of employee addresses.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/blogger-retaliates-against-paper-that-published-gun-owner-addresses-by-creating-interactive-map-of-its-employees/

MegaProphet wrote:

Phatscotty wrote:

CreepersWiener wrote:

This is great! We can go disarm all of these people now!

Why stop there, just go the next step and force all law abiding gun owning citizens to wear yellow stars on their coats.

see how ya are?

Will the stars say deputy sheriff?

Phatscotty wrote:

MegaProphet wrote:

Phatscotty wrote:

CreepersWiener wrote:

This is great! We can go disarm all of these people now!

Why stop there, just go the next step and force all law abiding gun owning citizens to wear yellow stars on their coats.

see how ya are?

Will the stars say deputy sheriff?

or maybe this...

Symmetry wrote:For f*ck's sake Scotty, I don't know what's more disgusting, your increasingly ignorant and shit-fueled attempts to portray the Holocaust as something that could have just been prevented by the 2nd Amendment, or your remarkably nasty trolling of a genocide, with pictures, underlined by your partying sig.


I think this might be the point where I think you went beyond being a nasty troll, to simply being a shitty person.

saxitoxin wrote:

Phatscotty wrote:

MegaProphet wrote:

Phatscotty wrote:

CreepersWiener wrote:

This is great! We can go disarm all of these people now!

Why stop there, just go the next step and force all law abiding gun owning citizens to wear yellow stars on their coats.

see how ya are?

Will the stars say deputy sheriff?

or maybe this...

Who woulda thought that one day this would be as much a tale of tragedy and redemption as The Diary of Anne Frank?

Phatscotty wrote:

saxitoxin wrote:

Phatscotty wrote:

MegaProphet wrote:

Phatscotty wrote:

CreepersWiener wrote:

This is great! We can go disarm all of these people now!

Why stop there, just go the next step and force all law abiding gun owning citizens to wear yellow stars on their coats.

see how ya are?

Will the stars say deputy sheriff?

or maybe this...

Who woulda thought that one day this would be as much a tale of tragedy and redemption as The Diary of Anne Frank?

It's about targeting a certain kind of people, invading their privacy, discrimination, making sure everybody knows what kind of person they are and where they can be found...

Symmetry wrote:

Night Strike wrote:

In retaliation against the New York newspaper — the Journal News — that published the addresses of those pistol permit holders in two of the state’s counties, a blogger has created a map pinpointing the addresses of the newspaper’s employees.

Mimicking the title of the Journal News’ original article, Robert Cox with “Talk of the Sound” headlined his post: Map: Where are the Journal News employees in your neighborhood?
Robert Cox With Talk of the Sound Creates Map of Journal News Employees in Retaliation to Gun Permit Map

He wrote:

The map indicates the addresses of all Journal News Employees in the New York Tri-State area. Each dot represents an individual Journal News employee — a reporter, editor or staffer. The data does not include freelancers — reporters or photographers — which can be hired without being an employee. Being included in this map does not mean the individual at a specific location is a responsible reporter or editor, just that they are a reporter or editor.

[...]

To create the map, Talk of the Sound submitted Google searches for the names and addresses of all Journal News employees in the New York Tri-State area. By state law, the information is public record.

Cox went onto explain that putting together the map has been a crowd-sourced effort between other bloggers and readers. He wrote the map will be updated as more information continues to become available.

He also noted that since the publication has downsized in recent years, some of the names of employees might not be current. So far, dozens of names and addresses have been collected and published.

See the full-size map here.

Another blogger has been curating the names and addresses of News Journal employees as well (via Beta Beat). Christopher Fountain, a Greenwich, Conn., real estate agent on his blog For What It’s Worth, generally composes posts about real estate and home improvement, has been voicing his thoughts on the News Journal’s publishing of gun owner addresses and also recently linked Cox’s interactive map of employee addresses.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/blogger-retaliates-against-paper-that-published-gun-owner-addresses-by-creating-interactive-map-of-its-employees/

Wow, a shitty thing to do in the first place, but talk about retaliation. More fear for all involved. Are these bloggers trying to show that publishing this kind of information is legal? Or that if you post this kind of information, there will be threatening repercussions?

Probably a good idea not to read TheBlaze, Glenn Beck is still a recipe for paranoia. I could cry.

spurgistan wrote:Unless I'm mistaken, one of these things involves publicly available information, and the other one doesn't. That, to me, is the difference. If reporters addresses are also in the public record somehow, then I'm fine with it.

spurgistan wrote:Unless I'm mistaken, one of these things involves publicly available information, and the other one doesn't. That, to me, is the difference. If reporters addresses are also in the public record somehow, then I'm fine with it.

After the Journal News published interactive maps detailing where gun owners live in a number of New York counties in late December, people all across the nation decried the move as an invasion of privacy and a danger to the families.

A number of ex-burglars told Fox News that the list would prove invaluable to criminals, telling them which houses to avoid or rob, depending on what they wanted.

It was revealed on Sunday that one of the homes identified by the paper was targeted by burglars over the weekend, though a connection to the Journal News has not been proven.

New York’s Westchester/Rockland Newsday has noteworthy details on the break-in (all subsequent emphasis added):

A White Plains residence pinpointed on a controversial handgun permit database was burglarized Saturday, and the burglars’ target was the homeowner’s gun safe.

At least two burglars broke into a home on Davis Avenue at 9:30 p.m. Saturday but were unsuccessful in an attempt to open the safe, which contained legally owned weapons, according to a law enforcement source. One suspect was taken into custody, the source said.

The gun owner was not home when the burglary occurred, the source said. The victim, who is in his 70s, told Newsday on Sunday that he did not want to comment while the police investigation continues.

[...]

Neighbor John Mascia said he thought the gun permit database should not have been published.

“I could [not] care less what they have in their home,” Mascia said.

Police are investigating what role, if any, the database played in the burglars’ decision to target the home, the law enforcement source said.

Republican State Senator Greg Ball of New York released a strongly-worded statement on the matter Sunday, adding that he plans to introduce legislation to better protect the identities of gun owners in the future:

“The Journal News has placed the lives of these folks at risk by creating a virtual shopping list for criminals and nut jobs. If the connection is proven, this is further proof that these maps are not only an invasion of privacy but that they present a clear and present danger to law-abiding, private citizens. Former convicts have already testified to the usefulness of the asinine Journal News ‘gun maps’ yet the reckless editors are evidently willing to roll the dice, gambling with the lives of innocent local homeowners,” Senator Greg Ball said.

[...]

“The same elitist eggheads who use their editorial page to coddle terrorists and criminals are now treating law abiding citizens like level three sexual predators. These bills are critical to keep folks safe and fundamentally protect their inherent right to privacy… This is not about the Second Amendment; these bills are simply about commonsense and personal privacy. Publishing this information on a website, as we have evidently just witnessed in the recent attempted gun burglary, provides criminals with a map of where they can steal firearms from lawful owners for later use in the commission of crimes. This legislation is critical,” said Senator Greg Ball.

Ball wasn’t the only one to call out the Journal News in the wake of the robbery. Senator Ball’s office adds:

In addition to Senator Ball’s legislation, the Vice President of the Affiliated Police Association of Westchester County, Robert Buckley, said in a letter [that] publishing these maps online is jeopardizing the safety of residents and is irresponsible.

“The Affiliated Police Association of Westchester County Inc. is putting The Journal News on notice that we will hold [them] accountable for any incident where any of our over 25,000 members are involved with an incident where a criminal or ex-con presents themselves at the residence of one of our members as a result of their name being made public by [their] newspaper,” said Buckley.

Night Strike wrote:http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/01/13/house-identified-on-ny-papers-gun-map-burglarized-and-the-robbers-went-straight-for-the-guns/

AndyDufresne wrote:

Night Strike wrote:http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/01/13/house-identified-on-ny-papers-gun-map-burglarized-and-the-robbers-went-straight-for-the-guns/

That's it. I think it's high time we start shutting down newspapers and controlling the media to stop these things from happening. No sense in just creating a counterweight, we've got to add more controls, like approved articles from a central authority. It must be done in order to protect our good.


--Andy