PDA

View Full Version : Media Hype Questionable Gun Control Study



Chris
12-26-2018, 11:15 AM
Back a couple years ago, When trying to determine why the US has so many mass shootings, only one statistic matters (https://www.pri.org/stories/2017-11-17/when-trying-determine-why-us-has-so-many-mass-shootings-only-one-statistic)


Adam Lankford, a criminology professor at the University of Alabama, saw an opportunity to use data to provide an unambiguous answer. His paper, "Public Mass Shooters and Firearms: A Cross-National Study of 171 Countries," has been widely quoted as proof of a link between the frequency of mass shootings and handgun ownership.

The US leads in both categories.

..."We had 31 percent of these offenders, despite the fact that we only have about 5 percent of the world's population. So, we have well more than our share. And of course, that's very concerning for a variety of reasons."

Much of the media, even Obama cited it.

Turns out it was BS.

https://i.snag.gy/nIhSPg.jpg

From...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lXGgI2E5JUw

(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lXGgI2E5JUw)

Captain Obvious
12-26-2018, 11:21 AM
Funny how gun grabbers are the same crowd who would willingly surrender their rights and liberties to teh gubmint.

Captain Obvious
12-26-2018, 11:46 AM
I read the article also and I wished it just included the research data because I have no idea what he's getting at. Looks kind of smoke and mirrors cryptic

Just show me the data

Chris
12-26-2018, 11:49 AM
I read the article also and I wished it just included the research data because I have no idea what he's getting at. Looks kind of smoke and mirrors cryptic

Just show me the data


Apparently, that's the problem with Lankford's study. He refuses to share data or even methodology of collection.

Captain Obvious
12-26-2018, 11:51 AM
Apparently, that's the problem with Lankford's study. He refuses to share data or even methodology of collection.

Yeah, that kind of kills it for me

Chris
12-26-2018, 12:10 PM
A summary of Lott's New CPRC Research: How a Botched Study Fooled the World About the U.S. Share of Mass Public Shootings: U.S. Rate is Lower than Global Average (https://crimeresearch.org/2018/08/new-cprc-research-how-a-botched-study-fooled-the-world-about-the-u-s-share-of-mass-public-shootings-u-s-rate-is-lower-than-global-average/), with links to full paper along with appendices of complete data.

donttread
12-26-2018, 12:22 PM
Funny how gun grabbers are the same crowd who would willingly surrender their rights and liberties to teh gubmint.


Aren't most mass shootings committed with long guns? So this was bullshit from the start.

Standing Wolf
12-26-2018, 01:23 PM
Aren't most mass shootings committed with long guns? So this was bull$#@! from the start.

Not defending the study, but it all depends on how one defines "mass shooting", as no one definition is universally accepted. Some authorities define a mass shooting as one that involves the killing of at least four people, excluding the shooter...but others define a mass shooting as one in which at least five people are injured, even if no one is killed.

That's how you get those folks who talk about the "hundreds of mass shootings" every year. Like this:

https://www.gunviolencearchive.org/reports/mass-shooting

They're not just referring to those highly publicized incidents involving someone shooting up a school, a nightclub or a church; they're also including incidents that involve somebody firing into a crowd on a street corner in Chicago or L.A. and wounding at least five people - something that isn't even going to be reported on by the national media. And yes, the great majority of those types of incidents do involve handguns rather than any type of rifle.

Chris
12-26-2018, 02:06 PM
Not defending the study, but it all depends on how one defines "mass shooting", as no one definition is universally accepted. Some authorities define a mass shooting as one that involves the killing of at least four people, excluding the shooter...but others define a mass shooting as one in which at least five people are injured, even if no one is killed.

That's how you get those folks who talk about the "hundreds of mass shootings" every year. Like this:

https://www.gunviolencearchive.org/reports/mass-shooting

They're not just referring to those highly publicized incidents involving someone shooting up a school, a nightclub or a church; they're also including incidents that involve somebody firing into a crowd on a street corner in Chicago or L.A. and wounding at least five people - something that isn't even going to be reported on by the national media. And yes, the great majority of those types of incidents do involve handguns rather than any type of rifle.


Relevant to the topic at hand, that was defined by Lankford as:


In order to make apples-to-apples comparisons between countries, Lankford came up with criteria that narrowly define a mass shooter.

"These were individuals who attacked, in public, using firearms, killing not only someone they had a grudge against, but also random strangers or bystanders," he says. "And I was looking specifically at individuals who killed four or more victims, as kind of a baseline threshold."

He looked at school shootings, workplace shootings, theater shootings, church shootings, mosque shootings and the like. To qualify, killings couldn't be acts of organized terrorism or genocide.

Lott used the same definition.

Other definitions might be interesting but the media and Obama accepted Lankford's as well as his conclusions unquestioningly.

Tahuyaman
12-26-2018, 03:00 PM
Not defending the study, but it all depends on how one defines "mass shooting", as no one definition is universally accepted. Some authorities define a mass shooting as one that involves the killing of at least four people, excluding the shooter...but others define a mass shooting as one in which at least five people are injured, even if no one is killed...

I'm sure that in a shooting incident, mass or othwise not everyone shot is killed. In order to be a shooting, all that is required is for one to be shot. Right?

However, no matter how a mass shooting is defined, I believe handguns have been the most widely used. That said, semi auto so called "assault weapons" receive the most publicity. That's because of a political motive.