Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
|
|
And are you just not seeing that "homicides" and "murders" are not the same thing, nor are they defined the same ways?
Yes, hillrat, I get that they think it's "excessive." But before it's even possible to address that, we need to be using the same terms with the same definitions.
It's like students in an applied ethics class debating on, for example, whether or not abortion is "wrong." All of their opinions are pre-theoretical, filled with loaded language, and the participants are not even using the same WORDS. I mean, the words SOUND the same, they are pronounced the same, and all participants think they are saying the same words, but they are not. The pro-life camp says, "Life begins at conception," and the pro-choice camp says, "No it doesn't." Both use the word "life," yet it is NOT the same word, because it means vastly different things to the two sides of the debate.
And people don't think through the theoretical implications of their opinions. Instead, they just "know" certain things, and to them, such things are "obvious" (to the point that they are deeply suspicious of the honesty, intelligence, or even sanity of those that can't see the "obvious").
So, I'm trying to be sure that I really DO understand what the Joe's et al really are saying, and what their words really mean. That's not being "obtuse;" it's being careful and systematic. I agree that they probably have an overarching "It's obviously too much" sort of intuition here. But what the "it" is, and WHY "it" feels like "too much" is what needs to be pinned down.
EDIT: Sorry, hillrat, cross-posts. I was responding to Joe in my opening sentence. Oh, and I realize that YOU are not suggesting that I'm being obtuse. LOL
|
|
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
|
|
FBI Uniform Crime Reports (UCR), in 2011 there were 12,664 murders and 653 justifiable homicides (of which 393 were performed by law enforcement.
Uh huh. I know that's what they report. And I addressed HOW they report that up-thread. This is RAW data, issued with the significant disclaimer that this data reflects the "investigation" on the incidents, PRE-review by a host of fact-finding agencies and entities, such as courts and juries.
The point is that this data calls things "murders" that (as just ONE sort of entity) a jury often later finds was NOT murder. The FBI does not then go back and "clean up" this data, which is WHY they issue the disclaimer they do.
The FBI data is RAW and PRE-review. And they even SAY that it is not "accurate" in the very sense that you and many others are claiming that it is accurate.
By contrast, the CDC data is "cooked," POST-review, and reflects the final findings on these cases. Hence, the CDC distinguishes among various types of "homicide" that the FBI lumps all together as "murder."
|
|
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
|
|
The more pressing point, however, is the one that Wes indicated just earlier, I believe. He is now emphasizing that 67% of all homicides (murders, accidents, suicides) are gun-caused!
And I do believe that THAT statistic is the one the has the most potential for us to find common ground upon.
So, if we can focus on that one, I think we might move forward in an assessment of that one in productive fashion. That is certainly the one that, more than any I've heard yet, SCREAMS: "Houston, we have a problem!"
|
|
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
|
|
Got it. The stats I'm looking at don't make that distinction, though, so I don't either. You'd have to point to a source delineating the difference statistically - I suppose the FBI murder stats showing around 8800 murders as opposed to 12000 are doing just that.
Right. That's why I looked up how the FBI defines their terms, because only when finding their disclaimers and definitions can you get clear about what they are really saying. That's what I posted up-thread.
I don't buy even 8800 murders, however, because that doesn't even come close to a correlation with the cooked CDC data, which would put the figure at closer to 4000.
But, as I just said, this is nickel and diming the issue. I think we're getting clearer about what's driving the "too much" intuition, and that's that a LOT of people are dying (67% of all homicides, in fact) from guns.
So, let's focus on that statistic, if that sounds good to you. That's one that seems clear to us all, I think, and it's one I'm not inclined to debate the "factuality" of.
What to MAKE of it is the next step, imo.
|
|
hillrat
Trad climber
reno, nv
|
|
Plea bargaining, botched investigation and so forth probably have a small impact on the number, as would the distinction between murder vs homicide vs justifiable. Statistically I would expect the margin of error to be fairly small. The overall question would be in how you try to fix result, in any case. Now I understand, hedge, that your advocating for the repeal of the 2nd would, if the guns were removed from society, effectively eliminate death by gun. Unfortunately, here, in the foreseeable future, it's not a practical solution.
So I think the rest of us are stuck debating what to change, and how effective any change would be, given the current trend in public policy. Granted, IF you could eliminate ALL the guns in our society, well then there wouldn't be any deaths by gun (yeah, some people have lathes and stuff. It'd be a statistical anomaly).
|
|
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
|
|
So why wouldn't that work both ways?
In theory it could. However, the very nature of LEO investigations is such that "homicides" are investigates as prima facie "murders." Once a homicide is "known" to be, say, a suicide, the "investigation" is over.
So, the "homicide" filter is about as course-grained as you can get, and it reflects that an "investigation" went on the books. But an "investigation" is a very, very low bar. All that means in many cases is that a cause of death hasn't yet been gotten back from a coroner's office.
The point is that "homicide investigation" gets a LOT of things "on the books" with the FBI, the majority of which (according to the CDC) are later deemed to not be "murder" but instead are, in something like 2/3 of the cases, deemed to be results of accidents or suicides. Suicides rank HUGE among "homicides" in this country, and there's no doubt (at least at present in my mind) that the easy access to guns makes it much easier for people to "just pull the trigger" than other methods that are not nearly as reliable causes of death.
|
|
hillrat
Trad climber
reno, nv
|
|
Seems there may be a lack of reliable data in some cases. Stuck with what we've got.
meh. I've not got enough sleep
|
|
Chaz
Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
|
|
Are justifiable homicides counted as homicides in the homicide stats? Like when a cop shoots someone who needs to be killed?
That's "homicide" too, isn't it?
|
|
Jennie
Trad climber
Elk Creek, Idaho
|
|
It seems low compared to the homicide and suicide numbers...this source says 606 deaths from "unintentional firearm injuries" in 2010.
http://smartgunlaws.org/gun-deaths-and-injuries-statistics/
I suppose most accidental firearm injuries are non-lethal. Homicides/suicides the projectile is aimed at vital areas of anatomy...accidental discharges would have a more random aspect and fewer fatal injuries. (?)
|
|
mechrist
Gym climber
South of Heaven
|
|
The CDC data includes in "homicides" accidents and suicides. The FBI data treats "homicides" as (pre-reviewed) cases of murder. After review, only a fraction of these "homicides" turn out to be "murder."
You don't understand statistics... or the word homicide, apparently. It is extremely unlikely that they include suicides in homicides for 2 reasons: 1) look up the definition of homicide, 2) 19,000 suicides involving firearms plus the number of actual homicides will be greater than 11,000... I promise.
If you want suicides, accidents, etc... http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/dvs/deaths_2010_release.pdf
You seem courteous and (maybe) actually curious. But you are a waste of my time. You deserve all the sh#t hedge gives to you, at least until you take some "personal responsibility" and put some effort into understanding what you are talking about.
So, you do NOT get to blithely claim "12,000 murders" as "fact" and then bash on others for not being accurate or careful with the facts.
First of all, I get to do whatever I want to do.
I absolutely get to claim 11,000+ HOMICIDES and point you directly to the CDC page. Hedge can lump in the ~600 accidental deaths that involve firearms and round up to 12,000 if he wants to. (He may have done something else when he got that 12,000, I wasn't paying attention because +/- 10% is likely not even statistically significant considering the issues involved with compiling the data). Fact is, whatever data set you look at, firearms are involved in the majority of homicides (67%) AND suicides (over half) and they are far too easy to acquire due to inadequate regulations.
Either of us can call anyone an idiot when they ignore the content provided, throw out some other numbers without backing them up, don't even understand the definition of the terms being discussed, and then pretend they are providing important contributions to the "discussion."
YOUR very simplistic claims are the ones I've been calling you on, and at every step you just move the target.
The only thing you have called out with any clarity is "I'm an idiot!"
And a huge thanks to hillrat for being reasonable gun owner and chiming in. These issues would be resolved much quicker and easier if more reasonable people like him would speak up.
|
|
Norton
Social climber
the Wastelands
|
|
I went a little overboard yesterday and I apologize to (most of) those I offended.
yesterday?
only yesterday?
try every day
now, having said that Joe, you did just man up and said the right thing, something that very few people do
its not that what you say is wrong, because it is not, it is how you say it
While you and I may disagree on the delivery, I understand and largely support your message
and from what other people say who know you personally, I think I would like you if we ever met
|
|
mechrist
Gym climber
South of Heaven
|
|
He is now emphasizing that 67% of all homicides (murders, accidents, suicides) are gun-caused!
NOPE. Suicides are not homicides. If you want to lump all homicides and accidents and suicides, it would be more like 21,000+ gun related deaths.
|
|
hillrat
Trad climber
reno, nv
|
|
Thanks for the public apology jghedge. I too apologize for the offensive things i,ve said to you. Thanks for curbing it a bit. Makes it much more likely to consider your point of view.
Doesnt mean we agree, as i continue to view hunting, self defense, and target shooting as legitimate reasons to own guns. That said, there may be some reasonable compromise to be made.
|
|
Toker Villain
Big Wall climber
Toquerville, Utah
|
|
But,.... I thought there was no sporting reason to own a compromise.
|
|
hillrat
Trad climber
reno, nv
|
|
Some would say there,s no sporting compromise you can reasonably reach.
So pretty much, any gun can kill. Once you start banning specific types, it,s probably just a matter of time until bb guns get the chop. It,s also likely that whatever,s left as legal will be the types that eventually end up in common usage both legal and criminal. It,s kind of a one-way road that eventually punishes the average owner, but doesn,t fix the overall crime problem.
I happen to think we can do better, without giving up tradition and practicality.
|
|
Norton
Social climber
the Wastelands
|
|
Once you start banning specific types, it,s probably just a matter of time until bb guns get the chop
do you really believe what you said, Hilltop?
think about it, we already "bann" many kinds of weapons from civilian ownership
and have for decades
and yet, bb guns have NOT been banned, have they?
anyway, ain't nothing gong to get banned, not even large round clips
in fact, it is looking very doubtful that even a bill putting tougher penalties on straw buyers and more expanded background check will ever become law, much less come up for a vote
|
|
mechrist
Gym climber
South of Heaven
|
|
Once you start banning specific types, it,s probably just a matter of time until bb guns get the chop.
AK47 were banned under Ronny Raygun, right? That was quite a while ago. I'm not aware of other specific types that have been banned since. I think you have heard of the slippery slope so many times you assume it may actually exist.
It,s kind of a one-way road that eventually punishes the average owner, but doesn,t fix the overall crime problem.
Both of those are assumptions. Bans on guns have been lifted (Washington DC, among others). So just because things get banned doesn't mean they will always be banned.
We have never had a coordinated federal effort to ensure the competence and responsibility of gun purchasers. We don't KNOW if it will reduce crime, but clearly when anyone who hasn't been convicted of a felony (yet) can walk into a gun store and buy 2 guns a week without raising any flags, something should be changed.
I happen to think we can do better, without giving up tradition and practicality.
That's because you are reasonable.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!