Thread: Guns and kids

Originally Posted by Reiver

No, 'fact: more than one factor impacts on suicide rates; fact: you're ignoring the multiple variables to make unsupportable claim"

Ahhhh,no,it seems YOU are......and you deny Japan has gun control?...and you deny their suicide rate is rising?

Originally Posted by LoneStrSt8

Ahhhh,no,it seems YOU are......and you deny Japan has gun control?...and you deny their suicide rate is rising?

I refer to the obvious: there are multiple variables impacting on suicide and, without controlling for those variables, there is nothing we can deduce over gun control effects. This is all obvious so I don't understand why you find it so difficult to comprehend

Originally Posted by Reiver

I refer to the obvious: there are multiple variables impacting on suicide and, without controlling for those variables, there is nothing we can deduce over gun control effects. This is all obvious so I don't understand why you find it so difficult to comprehend

I find it hard to understand why you can't admit being wrong.

We're NOT talking about 'multiple variables' impacting the suicide rate, we are specifically mentioning gun control and it's so-called reduction in suicide rates...I've shown it doesn't reduce suicide rates, and you keep spinning..

Originally Posted by LoneStrSt8

I find it hard to understand why you can't admit being wrong.

I'd love to be wrong. It would be much easier if guns didn't have these effects. The evidence shows otherwise.

We're NOT talking about 'multiple variables' impacting the suicide rate

I am as I'm talking with 'sense'. Its not possible to make any comment over the effects of gun control without controlling for these variables. You don't have ceteris paribus and therefore you have no means to test gun hypothesis. Catch up now! You've been told this numerous times and the logic cannot be questioned

Originally Posted by Reiver

I'd love to be wrong. It would be much easier if guns didn't have these effects. The evidence shows otherwise.


I am as I'm talking with 'sense'. Its not possible to make any comment over the effects of gun control without controlling for these variables. You don't have ceteris paribus and therefore you have no means to test gun hypothesis. Catch up now! You've been told this numerous times and the logic cannot be questioned

NO the 'evidence' does NOT show this...in fact it shows it has NO relation at all

Originally Posted by LoneStrSt8

NO the 'evidence' does NOT show this...in fact it shows it has NO relation at all

We've already shown that's not the case. You seem to think ignoring the evidence will work wonders. Each to their own I suppose. I personally find that quite appalling

Originally Posted by LoneStrSt8

Don't be asinine,it's all about intent not having a gun won't stop one intent on suicide

"asinine" Can be subjective, friend. The fact that you are now attempting to move the goalposts tells me you are aware that your original comment was perhaps "asinine" itself. You had called it "nonsense", the fact that guns do not have perfect substitutes. Your evidence for this was citing a "30 story building", saying "THAT is a perfect substitute". The fact that a 30 story building is NOT mobile or portable destroys your claim.

Pro Death for the unborn but anti gun. Do you think that fetuses are armed and dangerous when they emerge and that's why you gotta go in and gettem?

Originally Posted by Hoosier8

The real goal of gun control is gun registration or confiscation which registration leads to.

Apparently, your opinions as to gun control are seated more in irrational fears than in practical knowledge. Your observation not correct.

Originally Posted by Hoosier8

Here you go. Something for you to read with lots of references to previous studies.

Do Guns Cause Crime?

http://hnn.us/articles/871.html

The theory that more guns men more violence flies counter to the facts in the US where gun ownership has increased and most States have passed Carry laws and violent crime has decreased over the last decade until just recently which can be attributed to the economy since past increased gun ownership did not correspond to an increase in violence but in a drop in violence.

This article does not mention suicide even once. I fail to see how this could be considered any sort of contrary evidence to Reiver's.

Originally Posted by Hoosier8

Something else:
http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/...useronline.pdf

What struck me about this review was the authors insistence on using a flawed model to study suicide effects. They persistently and exclusively looked at national comparisons without controlling for cultural differences. There are better ways to look at this phenomena and Reiver has tried to enlighten you as to this. I suspect that your illusions as to what motivates those of us who would like to see stricter gun laws, has clouded your ability to be objective as to this.

Originally Posted by LoneStrSt8

Originally Posted by Danct

You might want to get a better understanding of spurious relationships.

You might want to get a better understanding of facts......fact: Japan has serious gun control...Fact:Japan's suicide rate is climbing,/fact: gun control has nothing to do with the suicide rate

Thank you for confirming my point for me. You have once again made a spurious relationship.