This is a discussion on Boycott Arizona ????????????? within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; Just idiotic...
Actually, unless someone chooses to make a weird scaling, the range of the correlation coefficient is between 0 and 1. The value 0.0 being no correlation and 1.0 complete correlation. Values around .7 are considered correlated but ONLY if the assumptions are met.The results were minutely positive (0.0223098064983772000) -- i.e., no significant correlation, albeit there was a very slightly higher ranking of crime in the where States The Bradies like the gun laws.
Had the gun laws they liked had significant effect there would have been a negative correlation approaching -1.0.
Whether the issues are correlated is not determined by your study.I then ran a Pearson's product moment correlation on the latest Brady Bunch rating of the States (1 = the States they like best) and the FBI's actual rates of violent crime . (Yes, I know I'm mixing paramedics and non-paramedics.)
Again, the results were minutely positive (0.0280386921633278).
So, the States where the Bradies like the laws have just a very little more crime than the States that they don't like.
It is possible to use other stastitical measures to determine the degree of correlation. Pearson's isn't one of them.
I do agree, however, that is there is probably no correlation between gun control laws and reduced crime. Similarly, I doubt there is a correlation between gun ownership and reduced crime.
Crime is undoubtedly highly correlated with economics, opportunities and drug use. While it might make people feel good to think guns or gun control deter crime, it is unlikely there is any significant correlation.
My reference says of Pearson correlation:
I'd be concerned were I to assert a strong correlation (say +/- 0.7) from non-paramedics. However, I was pointing out not even a hint of a significant one.The correlation coefficient is defined in terms of moments and does not require the data to be either marginally or jointly normally distributed . Some distributions such as the Cauchy distribution have undefined variance and hence ρ is not defined if X or Y follows such a distribution. In some practical applications, such as those involving data suspected to follow a heavy-tailed distribution, this is an important consideration. However, the existence of the correlation coefficient is usually not a concern; for instance, if the range of the distribution is bounded, ρ is always defined.
I'm just one root in a grassroots organization. No one should assume that I speak for the VCDL.
I am neither an attorney-at-law nor I do play one on television or on the internet. No one should assumes my opinion is legal advice.
Veni, Vidi, Velcro
A local talk radio guy in Phoenix tonight wondered aloud if Frommer would recommend visiting Chicago, as it had 509 homicides in 2008... what's more dangerous?
I don't think the result is necessarily wrong, in fact I agree with the conclusion, I just don't think it is mathematically justified using Pearson.
Perhaps all Mr. Frommer needs is a glass belly button so he can see where he is going and what is actualy happening around him.
"Those who hammer their guns into plows will plow for those who do not." - Thomas Jefferson
I hate that Mr. Frommer has chosen to show his lack of understanding of gun laws across the country by becoming so "shocked" at what happened in Arizona. You would think someone who has traveled the world would be more aware of how the gun laws of so many states allow their citizens to "carry weapons onto the sidewalks" and travel about armed.
It will be interesting to see how the current owners of the "Frommer's Travel Guides" react to their founders uneducated diatribe against the fine state of Arizona. According to several articles I've read, Mr. Frommer sold his ownership of the Travel Guides but remains as a consultant. Arthur Frommer - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
If I owned the company, I think I might want to sit down and have a little talk with Mr. Frommer and see if that relationship needs to be reevaluated. Hopefully his consulting days may soon be coming to an end.
Just last year I vacationed in Arizona and used a "Frommer's Travel Guide" to help me get around the state. And I was very pleased with the information it contained. And this year I used one for Montana and found it to be just as good. Maybe now I will look and see what else is on the market and give them a try the next time I go out of state for a vacation. If ol' Arthur had just kept his big mouth shut, I would have probably bought more guides but until I see how this turns out, I will keep my money or spend it on one of the other guides that I have not tried before.
Raising children is like being pecked to death by a chicken every day.
The comments on his blog are quite entertaining. The suggestion to mail him shredded copies of his guide is by far my favorite.
Kinda strange that he didn't choose to boycott any other state that allows concealed and/or open carry.
"I believe that the right of the citizen to keep and bear arms must not be infringed if liberty in America is to survive." - Ronald Reagan
Good for him. I will never purchase a Frommer guide again. Problem solved for both Mr. Frommer and I.
I urge Frommer to stay in "safe" places with strict gun control laws like NY, LA, or Chicago.
"The flock sleep peaceably in their pasture at night because Sheepdogs stand ready to do violence on their behalf."
Looks to me like his travel plans have been reduced to just a few states, and I could couldn't care less.
Maybe if voters wake up, he'll have to move to Europe.
The last Blood Moon Tetrad for this millennium starts in April 2014 and ends in September 2015...according to NASA.
Certified Glock Armorer
NRA Life Member
I went and read the article and then went to the blog to read what he had written. I was going to post a comment but I decided that I did not want to register for his site. Had I done so this is the comment I would have left:
Mr. Frommer, your comment on your blog that you will not travel in a state where they allow people to carry weapons to political events shows that you do not understand what you are talking about. You state that your problem is that you are afraid that someone will take out their gun and shoot into the crowd thereby injuring or killing an innocent bystander.
Mr. Frommer, the police carry weapons! They tend to shoot innocent bystanders occasionally. Heck, they tend to shoot themselves occasionally. A badge does not confer safety with firearms. Safety is up to the individual.
As for the general public being armed at political events; do you really think that Arizona, being an open carry state for quite awhile now, doesn't have political events other than presidential visits? Yet, so far NOTHING has happened at any of those events. Even when political issues are hotly debated and contested people still don't "shoot up the place." So, your fears are both unfounded and illogical.
Mr. Frommer, your prejudices are apparent. As apparent as your lack of both sensitivity and intelligence when it comes to firearms and the general public.
Uh, sounds like you should be glad he won't be visiting your state. He's an idiot.
Isn't there already a thread running in another forum about this?
I would venture that as a collective we would declare the writer of the travel guides is an idiot and a certified hoplophobe.