2A - Anti 2A Study on how if you own a Gun, you are more prone to commit Homicide!

This is a discussion on 2A - Anti 2A Study on how if you own a Gun, you are more prone to commit Homicide! within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; (Boston) -- A new study from the American Journal of Public Heath shows that U.S. states with higher estimated rates of gun ownership experience a ...

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 39
Like Tree27Likes

Thread: 2A - Anti 2A Study on how if you own a Gun, you are more prone to commit Homicide!

  1. #1
    VIP Member
    Array ANGLICO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    I'm the guy next door that is polite, but does not tell you crap.
    Posts
    3,462

    2A - Anti 2A Study on how if you own a Gun, you are more prone to commit Homicide!

    (Boston) -- A new study from the American Journal of Public Heath shows that U.S. states with higher estimated rates of gun ownership experience a higher number of firearms-related homicides.

    My Comments: Yeah right. Wonder who paid for this study of suspect data from the CDC? You be the judge. Expect more of this pho-research to come as the keepers of the Grants direct how studies are oriented. If you do not read or understand science peer reviewed journals or the current corruption in the peer review process, that might be lost on you.

    ....Regression analysis was used to examine the relationship between state levels of gun ownership and firearm homicide rates, while controlling for a range of potential state-level confounding variables, including: age, gender, race/ethnicity, urbanization, poverty, unemployment, income, education, divorce rate, alcohol use, violent crime rate, nonviolent crime rate, number of hunting licenses, age-adjusted non-firearm homicide rate, incarceration rate, and suicide rate.

    ....Siegel noted that the study did not determine causation, allowing that it is theoretically possible that people are more likely to purchase guns if they live in states with higher levels of firearm homicide. But he said the issue warrants further study. (My Comment: Yeah, the big disclaimer! But he still got his approved Grant Money to publish to the political intent of what the people that gave him money for wanted!)

    Read this crap of an excuse for a study, when every other study out there points to the exact opposite: New research shows link between rates of gun ownership and homicides
    sealteam20001 likes this.
    Socialism Kills! Time proven, with a very large body count! We are a Constitutional Republic....... not a Democracy, get it correct!

    Don't be mistaken for a Gecko45: http://lonelymachines.org/mall-ninjas/

    Watch: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=14qTdp-Dd30

    ANGLICO Images

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #2
    Senior Member Array CIBMike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    839
    When you can't prove it skew it.
    ANGLICO likes this.
    The easy way is always mined.

  4. #3
    Member Array mb1900's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    The Midwest
    Posts
    144
    I don't know why you guys are so quick to jump to conclusions. Public safety depends on many factors. Some places, like Afghanistan, have a lot of guns, but they're dangerous places. Other countries have higher gun ownership per capita than the US, and they are safer. More guns doesn't always mean better public order.

    Also, take a look at this crucial paragraph:

    Siegel noted that the study did not determine causation, allowing that it is theoretically possible that people are more likely to purchase guns if they live in states with higher levels of firearm homicide. But he said the issue warrants further study.
    In other words, you live in a more dangerous state. Consequently you buy a gun to protect yourself. Seems perfectly logical to me.

    I personally suspect gun ownership by law-abiding citizens doesn't impact the crime rate a whole lot -- there just aren't enough of us carrying, and the criminals are good at finding unarmed sheep to fleece. Greater firearm ownership by criminals does lead to more crime. I do think that gun ownership correlates with a higher suicide rate. It's a reliable way of killing yourself. I'm not sure whether the study makes these distinctions.

  5. #4
    VIP Member
    Array msgt/ret's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    7,089
    I have a friend whose profession was writing applications for grants, if you did not get the results the grant provider was looking for no further grants would be provided.
    CIBMike likes this.
    When you have to shoot, shoot. Don't talk.
    "Don't forget, incoming fire has the right of way."

  6. #5
    Distinguished Member Array sealteam20001's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    wasilla alaska
    Posts
    1,351
    Just had a very long talk with all my FIREARMS, about suicide and homicide and after many hours, we came to a conclusion.. Suicide = NO WAY, Homicide = YES highly possible in a defense mode. And that concludes that study groups findings!!

  7. #6
    VIP Member Array maxwell97's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    2,889
    Quote Originally Posted by mb1900 View Post
    I don't know why you guys are so quick to jump to conclusions. Public safety depends on many factors. Some places, like Afghanistan, have a lot of guns, but they're dangerous places. Other countries have higher gun ownership per capita than the US, and they are safer. More guns doesn't always mean better public order.

    Also, take a look at this crucial paragraph:



    If other words, you live in a more dangerous state. Consequently you buy a gun to protect yourself. Seems perfectly logical to me.

    I personally suspect gun ownership by law-abiding citizens doesn't impact the crime rate a whole lot -- there just aren't enough of us carrying, and the criminals are good at finding unarmed sheep to fleece. Greater firearm ownership by criminals does lead to more crime. I do think that gun ownership correlates with a higher suicide rate. It's a reliable way of killing yourself. I'm not sure whether the study makes these distinctions.
    But you have to take into account the motivations of the people who fund these studies. The whole point is to justify legislation. This is one of those things the politician's aides can file away, so the politician can say "studies have shown" and then proceed to make an argument against our freedoms.

    Otherwise, what exactly was the motivation here? Why not find out whether states with more gun ownership have higher OVERALL murder rates, as opposed to murders with guns? Because that might show something the politicians don't want seen. It's a pretty safe bet that, given more guns, more people will be murdered with guns instead of pipes, baseball bats and butcher knives.

    Anytime you hear terms like "gun crime," "firearm homicide," or "gun violence," the person speaking it has an anti-gun agenda.
    "Yet this government never of itself furthered any enterprise, but by the alacrity with which it got out of the way... The character inherent in the American people has done all that has been accomplished; and it would have done somewhat more, if the government had not sometimes got in its way."

  8. #7
    Member Array mb1900's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    The Midwest
    Posts
    144
    Quote Originally Posted by maxwell97 View Post
    But you have to take into account the motivations of the people who fund these studies.
    Do you know this guy Siegel? Do you know that he falsified the data? All we can do is check to see whether the numbers are correct. The study makes sense to me. If I live in a state with a higher crime rate, I'd want to get a gun, too. If I live in a state with really good public order, I'm less likely to spend $10,000 on firearms and training. The study may reflect the truth. Don't be afraid of the truth.

    If you dismiss studies based on what you suspect of their motivations, then others can dismiss your dismissal with equal ease. There has to be respect for the truth.

    But I think it's valuable to do other sorts of correlations, as you suggest.

    Take a look at the following. Researchers do have some degree of independence.

    CDC Gun Violence Study's Findings Not What Obama Wanted
    http://news.investors.com/ibd-editor...-narrative.htm

    What Researchers Learned About Gun Violence Before Congress Killed Funding
    http://www.propublica.org/article/wh...killed-funding
    brocktice likes this.

  9. #8
    VIP Member
    Array ANGLICO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    I'm the guy next door that is polite, but does not tell you crap.
    Posts
    3,462
    Quote Originally Posted by mb1900 View Post
    Do you know this guy Siegel? Do you know that he falsified the data? All we can do is check to see whether the numbers are correct. The study makes sense to me. If I live in a state with a higher crime rate, I'd want to get a gun, too. If I live in a state with really good public order, I'm less likely to spend $10,000 on firearms and training. The study may reflect the truth. Don't be afraid of the truth.

    If you dismiss studies based on what you suspect of their motivations, then others can dismiss your dismissal with equal ease. There has to be respect for the truth.



    But I think it's valuable to do other sorts of correlations, as you suggest.

    Take a look at the following. Researchers do have some degree of independence.

    CDC Gun Violence Study's Findings Not What Obama Wanted
    CDC Gun Violence Study Didn't Give Obama White House Outcome It Wanted - Investors.com

    What Researchers Learned About Gun Violence Before Congress Killed Funding
    What Researchers Learned About Gun Violence Before Congress Killed Funding - ProPublica
    There are many studies in life...........................................
    Socialism Kills! Time proven, with a very large body count! We are a Constitutional Republic....... not a Democracy, get it correct!

    Don't be mistaken for a Gecko45: http://lonelymachines.org/mall-ninjas/

    Watch: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=14qTdp-Dd30

    ANGLICO Images

  10. #9
    Member Array bigbadsmiles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    220
    Quote Originally Posted by mb1900 View Post
    If you dismiss studies based on what you suspect of their motivations, then others can dismiss your dismissal with equal ease. There has to be respect for the truth.[/url]
    Well actually you're suppose to look at these peer reviewed journals critically, and sadly, yes, you do need to understand the motivations behind them. I work in the field, it's either publish or parish, not to mention dealing with scum willing to pay ungodly amounts of money to have someone contort and falsify information. And for the love of God, never turn to the news for facts.
    ἐν τούτῳ νίκα - In hoc signo vinces

    Confidence- thrives on honesty, on honor, on the sacredness of obligations, on faithful protection and on unselfish performance. Without them it cannot live.-FDR

  11. #10
    Member Array mb1900's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    The Midwest
    Posts
    144
    Quote Originally Posted by bigbadsmiles View Post
    Well actually you're suppose to look at these peer reviewed journals critically, and sadly, yes, you do need to understand the motivations behind them.
    Dismissing an entire study based on what you surmise of the funder's motivation is intellectual laziness. If that's all your field does, I urge you to leave it, because it's a stupid field where truth means nothing. You have your personal integrity to think about.

    But I don't think you mean something so extreme. However, what you said might mislead some people here. I suspect what you mean is something like: the right way to go about it is to examine the studies sponsored by the same funder closely, and establish a pattern of error or intentional fraud.
    brocktice and wdbailey like this.

  12. #11
    VIP Member Array Ghost1958's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    5,458
    The right way to go about it is this. Somebody is making themselves a job stating what common sense would tell the average person 40 years ago but not now.
    If im in a gun friendly state, I likely own a gun. If I want to kill you ill use that gun because its the easiest way to off you.


    If I dont live in a gun friendly state and dont have a gun and I want to kill you I will still kill you I will just use a axe knife ball bat car whatever.

    Of course there are more gun homicides where there are more guns, either defensive or criminal. That does not equate to more total homicides per state however counting all methods of killing.

    Smoke and mirrors folks.
    Poorly likes this.
    " It is sad governments are chief'ed by the double tongues." quote Ten Bears Movie Outlaw Josie Wales

  13. #12
    VIP Member Array ccw9mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    25,796
    Quote Originally Posted by ANGLICO View Post
    (Boston) -- A new study from the American Journal of Public Heath shows that U.S. states with higher estimated rates of gun ownership experience a higher number of firearms-related homicides.
    Yes, the more of a given tool in existence then the more that tool will be used.

    But they're making it sound like the likelihood of gun-owning leading to homicidal outbursts is what that means, when nothing could be further from the truth. If this deceit is true, then all the state-based states that occur related to CHL carriers versus the general population are bunk.


    ....Regression analysis was used to examine the relationship between state levels of gun ownership and firearm homicide rates, while controlling for a range of potential state-level confounding variables, including: age, gender, race/ethnicity, urbanization, poverty, unemployment, income, education, divorce rate, alcohol use, violent crime rate, nonviolent crime rate, number of hunting licenses, age-adjusted non-firearm homicide rate, incarceration rate, and suicide rate.
    I wonder if they controlled for the confounding sidestepping of the Constitution involved in many states where there are higher rates ... stiff anti-citizen, anti-gunner type restrictions that, in spite of higher ownership rates, result in fewer people capable of defending using those owned weapons. And, it seems to me, many crimes result in felons being caught with guns they themselves don't own. They're the ones committing the murders and violent crimes, largely, and all those pretty guns sitting in safes don't do anyone any good. Witness DC, NYC, Los Angeles proper, Chicago.


    Siegel noted that the study did not determine causation, allowing that it is theoretically possible that people are more likely to purchase guns if they live in states with higher levels of firearm homicide. But he said the issue warrants further study.
    Nice to see they are recognizing this for what it is, and isn't.

    Tons of guns, penalized and criminalized for daring to think of them, let alone carrying them freely. And they're surprised that corresponds with felons feeling more free to commit their predation upon citizens. Hm.
    Your best weapon is your brain. Don't leave home without it.
    Thoughts: Justifiable self defense (A.O.J.).
    Explain: How does disarming victims reduce the number of victims?
    Reason over Force: The Gun is Civilization (Marko Kloos).
    NRA, GOA, OFF, ACLDN.

  14. #13
    Senior Member Array Tzadik's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Suffolk, Virginia
    Posts
    608
    Is everybody missing the distinction "firearm related homicide"?

    Of course people with firearms are more likely to kill with firearms than people with out them.
    It's kind of like saying people with cars are more likely to be guilty of speeding.

    Women are more likely to suffer from ovarian cancer.

    Who comes up with these studies?

  15. #14
    TVJ
    TVJ is offline
    Senior Member Array TVJ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Tejas
    Posts
    656
    "When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men in a society, over the course of time they create for themselves a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that glorifies it."
    - Frederic Bastiat

  16. #15
    VIP Member Array suntzu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    TX/NH
    Posts
    5,797
    Quote Originally Posted by ANGLICO View Post
    (Boston) -- A new study from the American Journal of Public Heath shows that U.S. states with higher estimated rates of gun ownership experience a higher number of firearms-related homicides.

    My Comments: Yeah right. Wonder who paid for this study of suspect data from the CDC? You be the judge. Expect more of this pho-research to come as the keepers of the Grants direct how studies are oriented. If you do not read or understand science peer reviewed journals or the current corruption in the peer review process, that might be lost on you.

    ....Regression analysis was used to examine the relationship between state levels of gun ownership and firearm homicide rates, while controlling for a range of potential state-level confounding variables, including: age, gender, race/ethnicity, urbanization, poverty, unemployment, income, education, divorce rate, alcohol use, violent crime rate, nonviolent crime rate, number of hunting licenses, age-adjusted non-firearm homicide rate, incarceration rate, and suicide rate.

    ....Siegel noted that the study did not determine causation, allowing that it is theoretically possible that people are more likely to purchase guns if they live in states with higher levels of firearm homicide. But he said the issue warrants further study. (My Comment: Yeah, the big disclaimer! But he still got his approved Grant Money to publish to the political intent of what the people that gave him money for wanted!)

    Read this crap of an excuse for a study, when every other study out there points to the exact opposite: New research shows link between rates of gun ownership and homicides
    What you call a disclaimer is their CONCLUSION. Did you even read the study? In fact, I wonder if the source you use even read the study. Almost everything that you cite is from the article is is mostly what is in the free abstact of the study. The author of the articl does not (that I know of) cite anything other than what is in the abstract.

    It would be intersting if folks actually read the study before commenting on it.

    Remember the "we must pass the bill before we know what is in it"? Guess we must ridicule and tear apart a study that most likely no one has read yet. But what ever floats your boat. I reserve judgment until I actually read it.

    My guess is folks won't bother reading it because it is way to easy to dismiss anything we disagree with it.

    EDIT: The author of the article did appear to have read the study......
    Then I heard the voice of the Lord saying, “Whom shall I send? And who will go for us?”
    And I said, “Here am I. Send me!”

    Isaiah 6:8

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Search tags for this page

people with guns more likely to be killed by guns

Click on a term to search for related topics.