As you've been busy trying poor taste, you've failed to put any thought into it. The point is about differences in characteristics according to type of gun owned.
Do you think your pet studies on guns, especially your latest foray with binge drinking and guns, can have any real and useful information to keep an ordinary person well informed and safe? This latest "guilt by association" study on binge drinking would lead someone to think that the more binge drinking activity, the more likely one would be shot by a semi-automatic firearm. Wouldn't college frat houses be one of the most high risk enviornments for being shot? Would you be statistically safer being around a community of druken Hillbillies on their farms, or a group of urban junkies in their crack houses?
I have actuanny not been trying anything just trying to focus on other things while i am working. Hence the no thought. I do however understand your article you quoted (honestly wasnt thinking and thought I could just have a conversation with someone but i will not do that again) So just under a third of gun owners are alcoholics, Which I am assuming were rifles and shotguns, As you said the gun becomeing more of a semi automatic there were more people drinking. My questions for you is this. Lets say 10 people binge drink, own shotguns 15 own semi auto pistols and 8 of those people own shotguns (so they were in the first part) 20 people own Semi auto rifles but out of these 20, 8 own shotungs and pistols and 6 more own pistols and semi auto rifles. so out of these surveys such as is could you make an accurate estimation on how many people binge drink and own certain weapons while they go up to people who own one or more type of firearm. I was reading an article somewhere about 300,000 guns sold in the hands of 100,000 people (doubt this is the real numbers) if each individual owns 3 guns (per these numbers) is there not a possibility that out of the 100,000 people the 1000 you choose to select might have more then 3 guns and make the numbers seem low or high based on what side of the issue people are on? My question for you on this is how many guns were owned in that year? Also how many of these individuals were police officers, ranchers, military, ect. http://www.businessinsider.com/most...-likely-to-die-from-alcoholism-than-average-1 1) Bartenders are 2.33 times more likely to die from alcoholism than average I know a few bartenders out this way who own shotguns for defense incase of a situation in a bar. Can you trully say this study with 800 people only is a good study? If there are 10 people on a bus 3 are women, 7 are men and blow it up large scare will you say 30 percent of the population is female while 70 percent is male?
Good of you to be honest about the quality of your posts. Given the use of statistical methods, its more than adequate. Teach yourself the t distribution just to get a clue!
You must think your just the biggest smartest person in the galaxy. You've hit a new low my friend, you should problably just quit, your little arguments that you use are so overfilled with the feces you determen to be usefull information to a serious debate that it is flowing all around you and creating such a stench of useless information that nobody takes your propaganda serious.
I refer to the stats that are right in front of me my good sir, and they contradict all your little cool stories and phrases you so love to quote.
Your dumb study has absolutely no bearing on reality. I highly doubt that you have even taken any stats classes and are just some wanna be internet pseudo intellectual sitting there thinkning your smarter than everyone else cause you can use google.
The problem with your arguments, Reiver, is that you are ignoring "definitions". If a mathematician defines that the factorial of 0 is 1 or that division by 0 is undefined, there is no amount of "research" that will override the definition. Thus, the second amendment is a definition in the USA. It must collapse, by definition, before the second amendment can be revoked.
I haven't ignored anything. I've merely referred to a study that tests gun owner characteristics. The results are of course 'unfortunate' for the rabid gun position. I've noted the reaction to the evidence, realising the rabid position is rather common on this forum. Its a shame that folk cannot think more objectively
... huh. Your posts about binge drinking got me curious what percentage of the population actually binge drinking. Thank you for piquing my interest in something. Aparently, 50% of the male population binge drinks and 39% of the female population drinks. Gun owners being a more responsible portion of the population perhaps? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binge_drink#Epidemiology Forgive the crappy source, but I am going to leave work now. Been working 12 hours of straight overtime so I can pay my bills and reduce my debt load. Gotta enjoy the off time and drink a responsible amount of beer in my off time
Why would you find that interesting, given the topic? The point is not that binge drinking and gun ownership will coincide. We'd of course expect that (and you can't compare percentages across surveys without using statistical methods). The point is that, in a survey of gun owners, there are key differences in alcohol-consumption across different types of gun ownership. That's a disturbing finding, given the risk factors involved.
There are lies, damned lies, and statistics. What other factors did the study gather? Did the specifically select for people from a high risk group for drinking and then fatuously tie in the firearm angle? What percentage of the same exact demographic minus guns are binge drinkers? What percentage of the people in the study were part of a control group?
That only works if we have, for example, a problem of endogeneity (with raw stats then leading to spurious conclusion. We don't have that here. However, happy to consider any problem that you can think of. Why would these type of gun owners have greater alcohol problems, other than a preference structure that impacts on both? Nope. Adopts standard data methods. Its a statistically significant difference. The different types of gun owners provides a control group
Because some people are intimidated by people who have guns. They are probably also intimidated by people who don't have guns, just not as much so.
That seems a little awkward when 'fear' is used as a main driver of personal preferences behind gun ownership
See, that's what's called bootstrap logic. Fear is only used as a reason for gun ownership by people to wish to denigrate firearms owners and marginalize their concerns. It is a fiction. People don't own firearms out of fear, they own them as useful tools for many purposes. As a police officer I carried a sidearm, not because I was afraid. I am no longer a police officer, so I do not carry one. I have one in my vehicle, but not in my office, although I know many people who do have them in their offices. I do not have it in my vehicle because I am afraid, but because I may need it (possibly for you).
I bought mine for various reasons. 1. Self Defense (I dont need one, and I can take an beating 1 on 1 no weapons) I carry a knife but sometimes a knife might not cut it (Lol) 2. Recreational, I am going with my wife this friday/saturday to go shooting, I have 300 rounds of Lead I received from a good friend who reloads as a wedding gift and plan to shoot them to make sure my pistol works great and so I can spend one on one time with the misses. 3. Hunting, Granted its only a .45 1911 but I can go bird hunting and if I see a bear/pig charge at me or relative (Again) I dont have to run and shoot it with bird shot o.0 Granted this is not the only way to have recreational time with my wife, But we cant always sit outside on nice days working on the motorcycle and we dont always like laying around the house watching movies. We walk the dog and play tug of war with her too. So fear has nothing to do with people owning guns (well maybe against the pig) But its not a main reason to be purchased.
The evidence, for example, suggests a link between gun ownership and watching cop shows. Subjective risks are an important element of preferences, with that subjectivity easily increased through fear effects
What evidence? I dont watch cop shows and still have always wanted to own a gun. o.0 I used to watch scooby doo and power rangers (The original mind you) and I liked the Green Ranger because of his Dragon Zord and knife. But I had to agree a gun might of been a great problem solver if they had it.
