Another mass shooting...this time a Florida school.

This is an Admin / Moderator NO GO ZONE. You're on your own.

Moderator: Team

TrOll
New Member
New Member
Posts: 26
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 12:28 pm

Re: Another mass shooting...this time a Florida school.

Post by TrOll » Tue Feb 20, 2018 9:53 pm

maniac.jpg
Never forget that "FAST" is relative!

Concern yourself only with being the best that YOU can be without regard to what others may think!

sanfordandson
Guru
Guru
Posts: 5543
Joined: Sat May 20, 2006 6:28 pm

Re: Another mass shooting...this time a Florida school.

Post by sanfordandson » Wed Feb 21, 2018 11:03 am

Right one cue, the tin foil hat club has arrived with claims of "crisis actors". Of course they were debunked immediately....

dirtracr5
Guru
Guru
Posts: 1452
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2012 1:29 pm

Re: Another mass shooting...this time a Florida school.

Post by dirtracr5 » Wed Feb 21, 2018 11:47 am

sanfordandson wrote:
Wed Feb 21, 2018 11:03 am
Right one cue, the tin foil hat club has arrived with claims of "crisis actors". Of course they were debunked immediately....
Just saw that. Absolutely sickening to smear the victims. Our country has reached a new low yet again.

exhaustgases
Guru
Guru
Posts: 3349
Joined: Sun Oct 06, 2013 9:03 pm

Re: Another mass shooting...this time a Florida school.

Post by exhaustgases » Wed Feb 21, 2018 2:51 pm

dirtracr5 wrote:
Wed Feb 21, 2018 11:47 am
sanfordandson wrote:
Wed Feb 21, 2018 11:03 am
Right one cue, the tin foil hat club has arrived with claims of "crisis actors". Of course they were debunked immediately....
Just saw that. Absolutely sickening to smear the victims. Our country has reached a new low yet again.
You do have to wonder why they are in full support of the Marxist agenda though!

j-c-c
Guru
Guru
Posts: 2699
Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2016 9:03 pm

Re: Another mass shooting...this time a Florida school.

Post by j-c-c » Wed Feb 21, 2018 2:53 pm

David Redszus wrote:
Tue Feb 20, 2018 9:48 pm
The issue had nothing to do with time; it had to do with the number of guns compared to the number of fatalities. The data clearly shows a decline in fatalities as a function of number of guns.
Why has one party for decades, opposed successfully, allowing the CDC any studying of gun related violence, other then the results might oppose their narrative?
All data can usually be interpreted from different angles, but suppression of all data is somewhat suspicious.

David Redszus
Guru
Guru
Posts: 6475
Joined: Tue Nov 27, 2007 9:27 am
Location: Chicago
Contact:

Re: Another mass shooting...this time a Florida school.

Post by David Redszus » Wed Feb 21, 2018 3:10 pm

j-c-c wrote:
Wed Feb 21, 2018 2:53 pm
David Redszus wrote:
Tue Feb 20, 2018 9:48 pm
The issue had nothing to do with time; it had to do with the number of guns compared to the number of fatalities. The data clearly shows a decline in fatalities as a function of number of guns.
Why has one party for decades, opposed successfully, allowing the CDC any studying of gun related violence, other then the results might oppose their narrative?
All data can usually be interpreted from different angles, but suppression of all data is somewhat suspicious.
Why did teenage suicides increase by 60% during the Obama administration?

Compare the number of fatalities during school shootings by the mentally insane to the number of teenage suicides, or the number of black on black homicides. That should clearly indicate where the real problems are to be found. Inside the skull of the mentally ill.

Gun violence, homicides, suicides, gun ownership, gun control laws, etc, have been exhaustively studied. What has not been adequately studied are the mental health issues related to homicides. Please read the Lott report.

Leftist socialists should first find solutions to the homicide rates in black, Democrap Chicago and black Democrap Baltimore. Use those combat zones to test new social theory before imposing more legislative nonsense on the rest of the country.

Find something that really works and prove it before running off at both ends of your body.

dirtracr5
Guru
Guru
Posts: 1452
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2012 1:29 pm

Re: Another mass shooting...this time a Florida school.

Post by dirtracr5 » Wed Feb 21, 2018 3:25 pm

David Redszus wrote:
Wed Feb 21, 2018 3:10 pm

Why did teenage suicides increase by 60% during the Obama administration?
The rise of bullying on social media is a major factor.

David Redszus
Guru
Guru
Posts: 6475
Joined: Tue Nov 27, 2007 9:27 am
Location: Chicago
Contact:

Re: Another mass shooting...this time a Florida school.

Post by David Redszus » Wed Feb 21, 2018 5:41 pm

dirtracr5 wrote:
Wed Feb 21, 2018 3:25 pm
David Redszus wrote:
Wed Feb 21, 2018 3:10 pm

Why did teenage suicides increase by 60% during the Obama administration?
The rise of bullying on social media is a major factor.
But only the weak minded take social media seriously.
How about the mental effects of video games?

Has school bullying ever been seriously studied? Or are we dealing with a bunch of bullyingshiit?

Firedome8
Guru
Guru
Posts: 3305
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2016 6:16 pm

Re: Another mass shooting...this time a Florida school.

Post by Firedome8 » Wed Feb 21, 2018 5:50 pm


elle
New Member
New Member
Posts: 39
Joined: Wed Jun 30, 2010 11:51 am

Re: Another mass shooting...this time a Florida school.

Post by elle » Wed Feb 21, 2018 6:24 pm

David Redszus wrote:
Tue Feb 20, 2018 9:48 pm
The issue had nothing to do with time; it had to do with the number of guns compared to the number of fatalities. The data clearly shows a decline in fatalities as a function of number of guns.
Please calculate the number of guns and the number of deaths that would be required to reach a ratio of zero at current rates / slopes.
Now we are playing silly math games which you use instead of a cogent argument. To reach a ratio of zero the number of fatalities would have to become zero or the number of guns would have to become infinite. Neither case is plausible.
It is commen sense to make predictions of future numbers with historical ones.
Now that is really, really silly. Ask any economist, investor, stock trader, if such a model makes any sense.
I asked you to apply the most simple model possible, assume that both rates will be as they were in near past. What numbers will that produce for your goal of a zero ratio -> zero fatalities per million guns which would prove your argument to be true, that more guns would mean more safety! And will these number, no. of guns and no. of fatalities, be acceptable to you?
You did not ask any such thing and if you had, I would have simply laughed at your ignorance. Zero fatalities per million guns is your goal, not mine. A simple slope indicates a trend but does not predict an end point. But you miss the point entirely with your juvenile antics.

The issue is not whether more guns cause more fatalities or not. The question should be whether more gun owners should be examined instead of number of guns. Further, we should ask about the nature of those gun owners; who are they? Are they hunters, ex-military or ghetto thugs? A gun collector who doubles his gun collection does not become twice as dangerous to society as does a single mentally perplexed individual who buys a gun on the black market or steals a single gun.

These gun issues and many more have been previously studied by folks without a socialistic axe to grind.


More Guns, Less Crime

is a book by John Lott that says violent crime rates go down when states pass "shall issue" concealed carry laws. He presents the results of his statistical analysis of crime data for every county in the United States during 29 years from 1977 to 2005. Each edition of the book was refereed by the University of Chicago Press. The book examines city, county and state level data from the entire United States and measures the impact of 13 different types of gun control laws on crime rates. The book expands on an earlier study published in 1997 by Lott and his co-author David Mustard in The Journal of Legal Studies[1] and by Lott and his co-author John Whitley in The Journal of Law and Economics, October 2001.[2]

Below are summaries of the main topics discussed in More Guns, Less Crime.
Shall issue laws
Lott examines the effects of shall issue laws on violent crime across the United States.
His conclusion is that shall issue laws, which allow citizens to carry concealed weapons, steadily decrease violent crime. He explains that this result makes sense because criminals are deterred by the risk of attacking an armed victim. As more citizens arm themselves, the danger to criminals increases.

Training requirements
Lott examines the effects of training requirements on crime rate and accident rate. He finds that training requirements have very little effect on both crime rates and accident rates.

Waiting periods
Lott examines the effects of waiting periods. These include limiting the time before purchasing a gun, and limiting the time before obtaining a concealed carry permit.

Brady Law
Lott examines the effects of the Brady law.

"Stand Your Ground" and "Castle Doctrine" Laws
The third edition of the book is the first study to examine Stand Your Ground and Castle Doctrinelaws.

Other countries
The focus of the book is overwhelmingly on the US, but Lott does mention briefly gun ownership and crime rates in other countries, such as Great Britain, Ireland, and Jamaica, noting that murder rates rose after guns were banned. He also notes that many countries, such as Switzerland, Finland, New Zealand, and Israel, have high gun ownership rates and low crime rates, while many other countries have both low gun ownership rates and either high or low crime rates.

NRC Report
Partially in response to Lott's book, a sixteen-member panel of the United States National Research Council was convened to address the issue of whether right-to-carry laws influenced crime rate. They also looked at many other gun control measures, including the soon-to-expire 1994 Assault Weapon Ban, gun buy-backs, and bans on handgun possession or carry. In 2004 they issued the report "Firearms and Violence: A Critical Review" which examined Lott's statistical methods in detail, including computation of the statistical uncertainties involved, and wrote:

The committee found that answers to some of the most pressing questions cannot be addressed with existing data and research methods, however well designed. Indeed, the committee was unable to find any of the laws that it examined had any effect on crime or suicide rates.

The issue of right-to-carry laws was the only law that drew a dissent from the committee's otherwise universal findings that it could not reach a conclusion. In a very unusual dissent for National Research Council reports, criminologist James Q. Wilson wrote that:

The direct evidence that such shooting sprees occur is nonexistent. The indirect evidence, as found in papers by Black and Nagin and Ayres and Donohue is controversial. Indeed, the Ayres and Donohue paper shows that there was a “statistically significant downward shift in the trend” of the murder rate. This suggests to me that for people interested in RTC laws, the best evidence we have is that they impose no costs but may confer benefits. . . . In sum, I find that the evidence presented by Lott and his supporters suggests that RTC laws do in fact help drive down the murder rate, though their effect on other crimes is ambiguous.

Support
A conference organized by the Center for Law, Economics, and Public Policy at Yale Law School and held at American Enterprise Institute was published in a special issue of The Journal of Law and Economics. Academics of all interests in the debate were invited to participate and provide refereed empirical research. As follows are some papers from that conference supported Lott's conclusions.
• Bruce L. Benson, Florida State University, and Brent D. Mast, American Enterprise Institute, "Privately Produced General Deterrence", The Journal of Law and Economics, October 2001.[8]
• John R. Lott, Jr, "The Concealed-Handgun Debate," Journal of Legal Studies, January 1998.[9]
• Florenz Plassmann, State University of New York at Binghamton, and T. Nicolaus Tideman, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, "Does the right to carry concealed handguns deter countable crimes? Only a count analysis can say", The Journal of Law and Economics, October 2001.[10]
• Carlisle E. Moody, College of William and Mary, "Testing for the effects of concealed weapons laws: Specification errors and robustness," The Journal of Law and Economics, October 2001.[11]
• David E. Olson, Loyola University Chicago, and Michael D. Maltz, University of Illinois at Chicago, "Right-to-carry concealed weapons laws and homicide in large U.S. counties: the effect on weapon types, victim characteristics, and victim-offender relationships," The Journal of Law and Economics, October 2001.[12] They found "a decrease in total homicides."
• David B. Mustard, University of Georgia, "The Impact of Gun Laws on Police Deaths," The Journal of Law and Economics, October 2001.[13]
• John R. Lott, Jr and John Whitley, "Safe-Storage Gun Laws: Accidental Deaths, Suicides, and Crime," The Journal of Law and Economics, October 2001.[2]
• T. B. Marvell, Justec Research, "The Impact of Banning Juvenile Gun Possession," The Journal of Law and Economics, October 2001.[14] Marvell found evidence that right-to-carry laws reduced rape rates.
Other refereed empirical academic studies besides the original paper with David Mustard that have supported Lott's conclusions include the following.
• William Alan Bartley and Mark A. Cohen, Vanderbilt University, "The Effect of Concealed Weapons Laws: An Extreme Bound Analysis", Economic Inquiry, 1998.[15]
• Stephen G. Bronars, University of Texas, and John R. Lott, Jr., "Criminal Deterrence, Geographic Spillovers, and Right-to-Carry Concealed Handguns", American Economic Review, May 1998.[16]
• John R. Lott, Jr and John Whitley, University of Adelaide, "Abortion and Crime: Unwanted Children and Out-of-Wedlock Births," Economic Inquiry, April 2007.[17]
• John R. Lott, Jr and John Whitley, University of Adelaide, "A Note on the Use of County-Level UCR Data," Journal of Quantitative Criminology, October 2001.[18]
• Florenz Plassmann, State University of New York at Binghamton, and John Whitley, University of Adelaide, 'Confirming "More Guns, Less Crime"', Stanford Law Review, 2003.[19]
• Eric Helland, Claremont-McKenna College and Alexander Tabarrok, George Mason University, 'Using Placebo Laws to Test "More Guns, Less Crime",' The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, 2008.[20]
• Carlisle E. Moody, College of William and Mary, and Thomas B. Marvell, Justec Research, "The Debate on Shall-Issue Laws", Econ Journal Watch, 2008.[21]
• Carlisle E. Moody and Thomas B. Marvell, “The Debate on Shall-Issue Laws," Econ Journal Watch, September 2008 [22]
• Carlisle E. Moody and Thomas B. Marvell, “ On the Choice of Control Variables in the Crime Equation," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, October 2010[23]
• Carlisle E. Moody, Thomas B. Marvell, Paul R Zimmerman, and Fasil Alemante, “The Debate on Shall-Issue Laws," Review of Economics & Finance, 2014[24]
• Donald J. Lacombe and Amanda Ross, "Revisiting the Question 'More Guns, Less Crime?' New Estimates Using Spatial Econometric Techniques," Social Science Research Network, 2014.[25]
• Mark Gius, "An examination of the effects of concealed weapons laws and assault weapons bans on state-level murder rates," Applied Economics Letters, 2014.[26]


Intellectually, if you can't run with the big dogs, stay on the porch. :lol:

Well, David at least we have some sort of objective discussion now. :shock: [-o<

Of course the numbers presented by me (the ones you were to lazy to look up) are time series. Countable identities as a function of time. For a very rough introduction: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_series. If you are still stating that
The issue had nothing to do with time
you should have a date with some sort of mental doctor. Having good [Blank Post] might be a cure as well...

Number of fatalities as a function of time being the first time series I presented to you, and the number of guns inside the US as a function of time as the second one.

You did -- at least some sort of -- comparison of both time series. By simply dividing the function value of one by the other. Not by accident you chose the number of guns to be the denominator. Your claim was: decreasing ratio of fatalities per million guns -> is equal to : more guns equals more safety. Your ratio seems to be arbitrary, to be honest.

Lets do the inverse: compute for each sampling point: million guns divided by the number of fatalities. The resulting numbers should raise with time. Right?This could mean:
1) targets tend to move faster with time increasing, more shots per unit time do not hit the target
2) gun users need more guns to assault a single target
3) gun users increase their incompetence of using guns properly with time

Are you thinking, that I would ever use some of the above points as an argument aginst gun ownership in the US? Sorry! No, I wouldn't! For the same reasons I do no accept your ratio as a valid argument of your position, that more guns equals more safety for everyone.

By the way: you should go to Florida and propose your arguments to some of the victim's parents, brothers or sisters. Eye to eye and face to face!

Your statement :
To reach a ratio of zero the number of fatalities would have to become zero or the number of guns would have to become infinite. Neither case is plausible.
Does not answer my question, but proves that you should take a class in advanced calculus.

Since both rates are positive and the number of guns per unit time is increasing faster than the number of fatalities per unit time, both numbers are going to infinity when approaching a ratio of zero. But the number of guns are doing this faster.

Are you thinking that this is acceptable? How does this fit into your world of an increasing number of guns? Are you willing to accept an infinite amount of victims?

Do you still hold your statement that as the ratio of fatalities per million guns decreases we are all safer? Really?

To be honest, the numbers tell a different story. At the current state of gun ownership regulation the number of fatalities do increase with the number of guns inside the United States of America per unit time.

Your statement:
Now that is really, really silly. Ask any economist, investor, stock trader, if such a model makes any sense.
Is nothing, BUT VERY VERY HOT AIR! Stock traders that are capable of applying the mathematics of time series and probablistic differential equations to their business are among the very best payed people in any working economy.

Does Lott apply the same logic as you?

As for your last comment: Quod licet jovi, non licet bovi.

j-c-c
Guru
Guru
Posts: 2699
Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2016 9:03 pm

Re: Another mass shooting...this time a Florida school.

Post by j-c-c » Wed Feb 21, 2018 7:09 pm

David Redszus wrote:
Wed Feb 21, 2018 3:10 pm
j-c-c wrote:
Wed Feb 21, 2018 2:53 pm
David Redszus wrote:
Tue Feb 20, 2018 9:48 pm
The issue had nothing to do with time; it had to do with the number of guns compared to the number of fatalities. The data clearly shows a decline in fatalities as a function of number of guns.
Why has one party for decades, opposed successfully, allowing the CDC any studying of gun related violence, other then the results might oppose their narrative?
All data can usually be interpreted from different angles, but suppression of all data is somewhat suspicious.
Why did teenage suicides increase by 60% during the Obama administration?

Compare the number of fatalities during school shootings by the mentally insane to the number of teenage suicides, or the number of black on black homicides. That should clearly indicate where the real problems are to be found. Inside the skull of the mentally ill.

Gun violence, homicides, suicides, gun ownership, gun control laws, etc, have been exhaustively studied. What has not been adequately studied are the mental health issues related to homicides. Please read the Lott report.

Leftist socialists should first find solutions to the homicide rates in black, Democrap Chicago and black Democrap Baltimore. Use those combat zones to test new social theory before imposing more legislative nonsense on the rest of the country.

Find something that really works and prove it before running off at both ends of your body.
Quote me and my questions all you want, but not answering my question, with your own deflective question, is also suspicious.
My question was benign enough to not blatantly point fingers, yours its appears is rather closed minded and more like giving a lecture, then a conversation.

exhaustgases
Guru
Guru
Posts: 3349
Joined: Sun Oct 06, 2013 9:03 pm

Re: Another mass shooting...this time a Florida school.

Post by exhaustgases » Wed Feb 21, 2018 7:46 pm

sanfordandson wrote:
Tue Feb 20, 2018 12:27 pm
Ken0069 wrote:
Tue Feb 20, 2018 12:14 pm
lefty o wrote:
Tue Feb 20, 2018 10:31 am
you are stupid arent you. i never said check out the israelis gun laws, i said they arm their teachers. its not the laws, its the fact the israeli's dont have a problem killing those that wish to cause them harm. quit your trolling you little pos! you have absolutely got to be about the most sick disgusting little ftard that has ever walked the face of the earth. all you care about is causing problems!
lefty I'm going to offer you a solution to your problem with this (and the other) f...ing M0R0NS (trolls) here!

If you click on your username on the forum home page then go into the "User Control Panel" there is a tab in there called "Friends & Foes" where you can create a list of user names to add there and you won't see anything they post except when someone else quotes them in a post they make. For that problem I've even learned to look at WHO POSTS in any thread before reading to avoid most of the useless bullshit he and others on my list write here. That and I rarely post anything in any thread they may post either as ignoring them seems to be the best way to deal with them IMHO!

Check out the link below to see how many I have blocked here now. :wink: Then go start your own list!! =D>

The List Rev A =;
Image
This is an excellent idea for lefty. Blocking is what snowflakes do when it gets to deep for them. Seems to fit lefty perfectly! :lol: =D> :-({|=
I kinda have to agree with Sandy this time. If you can't read it all why even bother looking?

The only real solution to the wrong people having guns is to step up profiling, the cops know the gangs and who has the guns. It does no good to make laws. Laws will never stop the black market, just like in the booze prohibition days, booze was easy to find, the same will happen with guns.
If they order a complete stop of production of all gun factories, then tons of small "stills" of gun manufactures will take up the slack, just like in prohibition days. Never ever will a gun not be available, make all the laws up the zing zang, guns will thrive.

RevTheory
Guru
Guru
Posts: 4385
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2014 6:45 am

Re: Another mass shooting...this time a Florida school.

Post by RevTheory » Thu Feb 22, 2018 9:00 am

As for bullying, we don't raise kids to deal with conflict responsibly, we've raised a generation of "victims". Boys don't try to jump their plastic Batman 3-wheeler over the trash cans off a milk-crate/plywood ramp, they sit alone in a dimly-lit room playing 1st-person shooter games.

Hell, you can't even call them a "boy" until they self-identify as one. And you sure as hell can't yank him off his seat at the dinner table and spank his ass for saying "no" to his mother or cops will be there in a few minutes. How many dads are there anyways and how many actually sit down to eat as a family anymore?

Yeah, the REAL problem is an inanimate object that needs the government to ban it.

dirtracr5
Guru
Guru
Posts: 1452
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2012 1:29 pm

Re: Another mass shooting...this time a Florida school.

Post by dirtracr5 » Thu Feb 22, 2018 9:18 am

David Redszus wrote:
Wed Feb 21, 2018 5:41 pm
But only the weak minded take social media seriously.
A case could be made for your opinion on that. Either way it doesn't change what is happening.


Post Reply