tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5806884.post3752827558654105291..comments2023-10-31T03:18:26.963-07:00Comments on Great Guys Weblog: More guns, more shootingsBrethttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15063508651955739056noreply@blogger.comBlogger77125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5806884.post-12479989590780515812017-11-14T11:01:19.478-08:002017-11-14T11:01:19.478-08:00[erp:] The trend toward de-institutionalization st...<i>[erp:] The trend toward de-institutionalization started in the 50's with new drugs to treat mental illness ...</i><br /><br />True. Just as the trend was motivated by people who were effectively incarcerated without due process, or recourse. There were plenty of people who weren't insane, but confined nonetheless.<br /><br />The problem is that, unlike physical disease, mental disease is devilishly difficult to objectively diagnose. Maybe one in 10,000 people with mental issues go on to do anything violent, and it is almost impossible, in advance, to tell who. (Granted, not totally impossible. Cracking a baby's skull would seem to be a danger sign.)<br /><br /><i>[Clovis:] We don't know why people become mass shooters, but we see that, if more guns are available (per capita), more mass shootings happen (per capita). </i><br /><br />This is why the focus on shootings, instead of killings, is nothing more than ooohhhh shiny thing!<br /><br />The Australians confiscated guns in 1996. <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_massacres_in_Australia" rel="nofollow">There have been 12 mass killings since.</a><br /><br />The worst mass killings in the US haven't involved guns. (I'm going with memory here, on account of there is no way of getting a useful search result given Vegas and Texas.)<br /><br />Finally, I'm left with this quandary: if all guns were to vanish tomorrow, these mass shooters would just shrug their shoulders and binge watch Disney musicals, instead?<br /><br />erp:<br /><br />I don't think there is any plausible mental health policy that can deal with a phenomena as rare as mass killers without ensnaring a whole bunch of people who, while certainly annoying, won't become violent.Hey Skipperhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10798930502187234974noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5806884.post-85920348199141722552017-11-14T08:57:12.272-08:002017-11-14T08:57:12.272-08:00Bret,
---
but I'll admit that when I read it,...Bret,<br /><br />---<br />but I'll admit that when I read it, I also assumed you meant the federal government, so a few extra keystrokes can be helpful.<br />---<br />As I understand your present health care system, there is money from the three branches involved for most cases where someone is being subsidized, so I did not feel the need to explain what you all surely know.Clovishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08921327103613284595noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5806884.post-51256364365377764902017-11-14T08:55:45.423-08:002017-11-14T08:55:45.423-08:00This comment has been removed by the author.Clovishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08921327103613284595noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5806884.post-8996511890368456172017-11-14T08:53:12.445-08:002017-11-14T08:53:12.445-08:00Erp,
---
you're right, there will be no movem...Erp,<br /><br />---<br />you're right, there will be no movement to take these people off the streets and into places where they can be removed from society and citizens can feel safe in their communities. <br />---<br /><br />Thanks, Erp, I get mightly happy when you agree I am right :-)Clovishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08921327103613284595noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5806884.post-56001739912210972082017-11-13T21:15:11.787-08:002017-11-13T21:15:11.787-08:00Clovis wrote: "What do you call the executive...Clovis wrote: "<i>What do you call the executive branches at state and municipal level?</i>"<br /><br />I usually use either the plural (governments) or usually I spell it out (state and local governments). Your use is also correct (I'm pretty sure), but I'll admit that when I read it, I also assumed you meant the federal government, so a few extra keystrokes can be helpful.Brethttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15063508651955739056noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5806884.post-17487719457827760402017-11-13T18:27:54.482-08:002017-11-13T18:27:54.482-08:00I'm talking semantics here. When we speak of ...I'm talking semantics here. When we speak of government, it's usually the feds. All you mention are also government. You do understand that there were institutions for the mentally ill and others for the criminally insane as well as places where retarded people were cared for. All these were CLOSED because the compassionates noticed they weren't like Club Med. Unless we return to sanity, you're right, there will be no movement to take these people off the streets and into places where they can be removed from society and citizens can feel safe in their communities.erphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09826044412670324694noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5806884.post-22106011058776412702017-11-13T17:51:13.884-08:002017-11-13T17:51:13.884-08:00What do you call the executive branches at state a...What do you call the executive branches at state and municipal level?<br /><br />None of them will step up mental health care anyway, so what's the next proposal of your list?Clovishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08921327103613284595noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5806884.post-21873829960381053522017-11-13T16:31:22.017-08:002017-11-13T16:31:22.017-08:00The word, government, usually refers to the feds. ...The word, government, usually refers to the feds. erphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09826044412670324694noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5806884.post-52390517529167737312017-11-13T16:17:16.251-08:002017-11-13T16:17:16.251-08:00Erp,
Where did I state it was federal responsibi...Erp,<br /><br /><br />Where did I state it was federal responsibility? I wrote 'govt', meaning all the branches.Clovishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08921327103613284595noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5806884.post-41107175885729541962017-11-13T15:01:27.508-08:002017-11-13T15:01:27.508-08:00Clovis, Health care isn't a federal responsib...Clovis, Health care isn't a federal responsibility. Each state and community makes their own arrangements. You are falling into the socialist mind-set. Try to resist.erphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05687563737750942586noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5806884.post-31468985816199011882017-11-13T12:00:22.525-08:002017-11-13T12:00:22.525-08:00Erp,
Any suggestion in order to make that happen?...Erp,<br /><br />Any suggestion in order to make that happen? I guess there is no chance for the govt to foot that bill for better mental health care and facilities in the USA.<br /><br />Clovishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08921327103613284595noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5806884.post-29353550430784263262017-11-13T08:00:16.770-08:002017-11-13T08:00:16.770-08:00Yes, and those steps are to remove those who'v...Yes, and those steps are to remove those who've proven to be violent and out-of-control like this last guy who had previously harmed his wife and child and <b>crushed a baby's skull</b> and had escaped from a mental facility and yet was was not restrained. There used to be places for the criminally insane and there were far fewer mass shooting for no apparent gain to the shooter.<br /><br />Check out those statistics.<br /><br />The trend toward de-institutionalization started in the 50's with new drugs to treat mental illness, but went into full court press mode in the late 60's and 70's with Geraldo Rivera's TV extravaganza and the election of Jimmah.erphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05687563737750942586noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5806884.post-64700443231763195232017-11-13T07:32:13.887-08:002017-11-13T07:32:13.887-08:00Peter,
This is not so much about causes, but how ...Peter,<br /><br />This is not so much about causes, but how they many causes manifest themselves. We don't know why people become mass shooters, but we see that, if more guns are available (per capita), more mass shootings happen (per capita). Anything beyond that is just speculation.<br /><br />Now, I may say this is not important from a numerical point of view, but I would not say mass-killings are not important at all. They are very important to the ones affected, after all.<br /><br />As policies implications go, to me, if the correlation of that article is right, it means mass-shootings will keep happening anyway in the USA, and since this is a near certainty, steps to ensure they are less harmful could be taken.Clovishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08921327103613284595noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5806884.post-35606212545270596952017-11-12T10:41:12.259-08:002017-11-12T10:41:12.259-08:00Clovis, when you brilliant boffins get going on a ...Clovis, when you brilliant boffins get going on a thread like this, I never know whether there is a political/policy subtext or whether you are just having a good time having a professional intramural squabble. If the latter, then you are right. But what I don't get is why so many people think there is <i>one</i> cause of this statistically rare phenomenon. Also, if you agree that mass-killings, although horrific, are statistically rare and unrelated to general gun homicides and violence, why is this even important? After all, that NYT article wasn't in the science section, was it?Peterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15836910211382887430noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5806884.post-1986345347022781062017-11-12T08:29:42.380-08:002017-11-12T08:29:42.380-08:00[Clovis:] It is beyond me the reason Skipper and P...<i>[Clovis:] It is beyond me the reason Skipper and Peter would expect random mass shootings to be correlated with other kinds of gun deaths. </i><br /><br />Because shootings (or, as I prefer, killings) exist along a spectrum of violence, whereas a correlation between shootings and white collar crime, for instance, might be a real reach. <br /><br />What I don't get is how you can put them into separate categories. After all, to kill many, it is first required to kill one.<br /><br />Meanwhile, it is beyond me how anyone can put into a box this thing called "shootings" while simultaneously ignoring all the other means to the same end.<br /><br />If the US is more violent across the spectrum than similarly situated countries, then means aren't the problem, something, or things, else is.<br /><br />Alternatively, if the US was just like Canada except for violence using guns, then that would be very powerful argument for getting rid of guns (ignoring the perennial problem for which confiscationists never have an answer: the only people disarmed are the law abiding). The confiscationist argument is, at its core, that guns make violent acts so easy that they are instrumental in causing violent crime. Confiscating guns would be correlated with a plummeting suicide rate, or murder rate, or mass killings; conversely, the wide availability of guns would be correlated with increases in each of these ills.<br /><br />Alternatively, since none of those relationships hold, then at the very least one should seriously entertain the possibility that guns aren't the problem.<br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />Hey Skipperhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10798930502187234974noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5806884.post-73067700039670206972017-11-12T04:24:23.646-08:002017-11-12T04:24:23.646-08:00It is beyond me the reason Skipper and Peter would...It is beyond me the reason Skipper and Peter would expect random mass shootings to be correlated with other kinds of gun deaths.<br /><br />Seems rather trivial that lunatics who try to kill dozens of random strangers in one spot are pretty different from the criminal who kills in a robbery. To wit, you rarely see mass shooters with a past of criminal enterprises.<br /><br />Bret,<br /><br />Both future trading and drug studies would easily give you far more data points to draw on. Now, if the bet was if the USA will keep having far more mass shooters per capita than most of the rest of the world, that's a future trading I'd easily bet on.Clovishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08921327103613284595noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5806884.post-2634018811871536312017-11-12T03:55:57.694-08:002017-11-12T03:55:57.694-08:00I agree, Skipper, that trying to correlate mass sh...I agree, Skipper, that trying to correlate mass shootings with a rise in gun availability while "ordinary" gun homicides are plummeting is a big problem for Clovis and the NYT. I was also very intrigued with your sharp insight that, given the out-of-sight American gun numbers, there should actually be <i>more</i> mass shootings in the States. I don't know if that kind of deep wisdom correlates with martinis, but I'm heading out to buy some gin to find out.Peterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15836910211382887430noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5806884.post-74314097307820046762017-11-12T02:38:46.612-08:002017-11-12T02:38:46.612-08:00There is another conceptual problem with this grap...There is another conceptual problem with this graph. It finds the availability of guns strongly correlated with mass shooters, yet the huge increase in guns since the mid-1990s is also correlated with a drop of something like 50% in non-mass gun murders.<br /><br />It would have been simple task to see where the US lies in other forms of violence. If, for instance, the US has a high rate of non-gun murders compared to other similar countries -- which, SFAIK, is the case -- then gun availability doesn't explain anything. <br /><br />Additionally, removing young African-American men from the stats causes violent crime rates to plummet. Since guns aren't racist, then, then the explanation must lie elsewhere. <br /><br />Even if sparkly unicorns were to suddenly rule the world and make all guns vanish, a very real and major problem -- the near-extinction of meaningful fathers in many black communities -- would remain, as would the consequent violence and crime.<br /><br />If confiscationists looked at <i>all</i> the evidence available, not just a few out of context cherries, I don't see how they could reach any conclusion other than that guns are at worst irrelevant. <br /><br />That is clearly the case for suicide rates, for instance.Hey Skipperhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10798930502187234974noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5806884.post-16248197389281929582017-11-11T23:32:36.345-08:002017-11-11T23:32:36.345-08:00Clovis wrote: "I am looking to that graph and...Clovis wrote: "<i>I am looking to that graph and doing first order estimatives by rule of thumb. </i>"<br /><br />OK. It looks to me (yes, guessing) that without the US, you can't reject the null hypothesis that the slope is not positive - the standard error of estimate will be too high. Why they didn't include a table with the numbers is beyond me - then we could stick it in a spreadsheet or matlab and futz away.<br /><br />I have a problem with data sets where removing one point changes things. Here are a couple of examples:<br /><br />1. In futures trading (with Howard), imagine the axes are money put at risk versus return based on some trading rule. We would never, ever trade that rule. The outlier is likely to be one random trade that will not repeat for a very long time if ever.<br /><br />2. Imagine it was drug efficacy versus dosage. I don't think it would be wise to take a massive dose. One guy benefited from the big dose - would anybody else?<br /><br />And so forth.<br /><br />Furthermore, I personally doubt that number of guns has any direct implications in this problem but is rather a side effect of other things, for example:<br /><br />1. Ease of acquiring weapons. Even if there were 0 guns in the US but someone could go get all the guns and ammo he wanted instantaneously, that's more directly related than the number of guns itself. The number of guns is a symptom of how easy it is to get guns.<br /><br />2. Gun culture. Americans like guns and are comfortable with them.<br /><br />And so forth.<br /><br />The bottom line is that I don't find the graph statistically compelling nor the logic compelling.Brethttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15063508651955739056noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5806884.post-8939217863467004692017-11-11T10:49:00.584-08:002017-11-11T10:49:00.584-08:00In shameful truth, I had completely lost track uni...In shameful truth, I had completely lost track units, and convinced myself -- proving once again that denial is more than just a river in Egypt -- that a correlation of 1 proved there wasn't any correlation at all.<br /><br />And that was before my first martini, as I was pondering this whilst sitting in the back from Helsinki to Düsseldorf. <br /><br />Anyway, thanks for setting me straight.Hey Skipperhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10798930502187234974noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5806884.post-91387658047008061132017-11-11T10:30:28.687-08:002017-11-11T10:30:28.687-08:00[Clovis:] And it as good thing you have a Martini ...<i>[Clovis:] And it as good thing you have a Martini to excuse yourself, because you just gave the most wrong explanation about correlations that I ever saw.<br /><br />A 45 degrees line (plus a zero disperson about it) is the dream of every graph looking for correlations, for it shows one thing is absolutely correlated with the other one, a one to one relationship. </i><br /><br />I am terrified of saying this, because there is a decent chance of turning the entire internet into a singularity, thereby destroying civilization as we know it.<br /><br />You are right, and I am completely wrong.<br /><br />(Hides under desk, whimpering and thumb sucking, as if that is going to do any good in the face of the onrushing singularity.)Hey Skipperhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10798930502187234974noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5806884.post-44497456165960136242017-11-10T17:29:52.894-08:002017-11-10T17:29:52.894-08:00Bret,
I guess, therefore I did not calculate - I ...Bret,<br /><br />I guess, therefore I did not calculate - I am looking to that graph and doing first order estimatives by rule of thumb. <br /><br />You take the US out, you still have Yemen and a non-homogeneous distribution of the points that gives you a small positive correlation (but a steeper one at that, than when you had the US).<br /><br />You take both the US and Yemen out, and the graph is useless.<br /><br />Erp,<br /><br />Yep, pretty much all the rest of the world did that too, even if a bit later or if a bit more slowly.<br /><br /><br /> <br /><br />Clovishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08921327103613284595noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5806884.post-48990790980553946042017-11-10T17:07:08.147-08:002017-11-10T17:07:08.147-08:00No Clovis, all the world didn't open up the do...No Clovis, all the world didn't open up the doors of their institutions for the criminally insane and let the crazies out. They make up much of the homeless population -- not only crazies, but unfortunate retarded people who were thrown out to fend for themselves. It was totally outrageous. I was on the mental health state board at the time and was called a nazi because I voted against it.erphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09826044412670324694noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5806884.post-32510925176058256872017-11-10T16:16:45.611-08:002017-11-10T16:16:45.611-08:00Clovis,
You "guess" or did you calculat...Clovis,<br /><br />You "guess" or did you calculate?<br /><br />From what I can see, they didn't actually provide a link to the data, did they?Brethttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15063508651955739056noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5806884.post-74525303222997381882017-11-10T16:06:28.566-08:002017-11-10T16:06:28.566-08:00Peter,
A did a dumb mistake upon answering you, w...Peter,<br /><br />A did a dumb mistake upon answering you, when I gave those final numbers.<br /><br />The right numbers for the US, with 125 million guns, would be more like 42 (plus 2, minus 6 of uncertainty in a rough guess) mass shootings. So less than half the 90 mass shootings between 1966-2012.<br /><br /><br />Bret,<br /><br />I guess the correlation gets steeper if you take out the US (so more guns lead to even more deaths), but its dispersion grows and you have less statistical significance.<br /><br /><br />Erp,<br /><br />Almost every place is the same as the US at that, nowadays: the crazies are all out there.Clovishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08921327103613284595noreply@blogger.com