Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Lol. I have my Bachelors in Electrical Engineering and stats was the easiest math we did, by far.
Perhaps you can explain how 0.00006% is "statistically significant". I'll be waiting.
You really aren't using the right term. "Statistically significant" applies to a result where the null hypothesis has a sufficiently low probability of being correct. The null hypothesis here is that there are no people who are killed by mass shooters. The 0.00006% number, while low, does indicate essentially a zero probability that the null hypothesis is correct, and therefore that the result is statistically significant. We can, with 100% confidence, distinguish the actual rate of mass shooting homicides from the case where there are zero such killings.
Now, if you want to say that the proportion of mass killings is very low, or that the likelihood of any given individual being involved in a mass killing is low, then I have no argument (assuming that your data are correct, which I doubt since the denominator in your proportion was the number of guns in the country rather than the overall population of the country, which would seem to be the more appropriate basis for calculating a proportion).
Type 1 error / alpha can be a tricky concept to grasp, even for people with good math skills. It would be interesting to compare the rate of gun homicide in the US to that of our most similar peer nations - say Britian, Canada, France, Japan and Australia. I have a hunch we would be different and the p-value would be infinitesimal.
Nearly one-third of the world’s mass shootings have occurred in the United States, a new study finds. Adam Lankford, an associate professor of criminal justice at the University of Alabama, has released the first quantitative analysis of public mass shootings around the world between 1966 through 2012. Unsurprisingly, the United States came out on top—essentially in a league of its own.
On Wednesday, Nikolas Cruz, 19, arrived at the halls of his former school in Parkland, Florida. Armed with a rifle, he allegedly carried out a massacre that left 17 people dead.
In October 2017, 64-year-old gunman Stephen Paddock fired into crowds gathered at the Harvest Music Festival in Las Vegas. Fifty-eight people were killed and more than 500 people were injured. It was the deadliest mass shooting in modern US history.
In 2016, an attack at the Pulse nightclub in Orlando left 49 people dead. In 2012, Adam Lanza went on a shooting spree in Newtown, Connecticut, killing his mother before murdering 26 students and staff at Sandy Hook Elementary School; in 2007, 32 people were killed in the Virginia Tech massacre.
The White House argues that Obama's second sentence qualifies the first, and added that PunditFact rated Mostly True the claim that "Americans are 20 times as likely to die from gun violence as citizens of other civilized countries." However, that claim refers to gun violence generally, not mass killings specifically, the topic of Obama's comment.
We're #3 in the world, but if we removed Chicago, Detroit, D.C., and New Orleans from the total, the four cities with the most stringent gun control, we'd drop to fourth from the bottom in the world.
I blame gun control.
It's like blaming heroin or opioid medicine for drug addiction. Any fool can become a drug addict. Any fool can become a non-drug addict.
Nearly one-third of the world’s mass shootings have occurred in the United States, a new study finds. Adam Lankford, an associate professor of criminal justice at the University of Alabama, has released the first quantitative analysis of public mass shootings around the world between 1966 through 2012. Unsurprisingly, the United States came out on top—essentially in a league of its own.
On Wednesday, Nikolas Cruz, 19, arrived at the halls of his former school in Parkland, Florida. Armed with a rifle, he allegedly carried out a massacre that left 17 people dead.
In October 2017, 64-year-old gunman Stephen Paddock fired into crowds gathered at the Harvest Music Festival in Las Vegas. Fifty-eight people were killed and more than 500 people were injured. It was the deadliest mass shooting in modern US history.
In 2016, an attack at the Pulse nightclub in Orlando left 49 people dead. In 2012, Adam Lanza went on a shooting spree in Newtown, Connecticut, killing his mother before murdering 26 students and staff at Sandy Hook Elementary School; in 2007, 32 people were killed in the Virginia Tech massacre.
The White House argues that Obama's second sentence qualifies the first, and added that PunditFact rated Mostly True the claim that "Americans are 20 times as likely to die from gun violence as citizens of other civilized countries." However, that claim refers to gun violence generally, not mass killings specifically, the topic of Obama's comment.
It's the trappings of a rich society. Comes with the deal. I promise you if you had equal freedoms in ISIS land it would make us look like Iceland. They just elect to ignore the law and well, you can see how "reasonable" they are.....give equal freedoms to ALL countries and their homicide rates will shoot up. And it won't be necessarily all due to open gun ownership. It will have a LOT more to do with pent up rage and oppression....picture opening up the flavellas in Brazil to our freedoms? Those folks do more to evade the police than anything else.
Just the outcome of an enriched society. Look at Timothy McVeigh...they actually transported him....safely, after he killed 168 with a bomb. Picture him doing that in say, Iran/Iraq/Syria/Egypt/Brazil/Honduras/Mexico/Gutamala/Somalia (iffy here, probably depends on how much cash he has on hand)......they aren't safer.....just more restricted and they still chop each other up with incredible regularity.
Case in point....remember Rwanda? The Hutus killed mostly Tutsi's by the THOUSANDS....800,000 to be exact in 3 MONTHS.....and guess what they did it mostly with? Machetes......so I ask you, do you REAAAAALLLLY think we are as bad as say, Somalia circa 1994? Chad? Sudan?
Please, our mere 50,000 is a starting point and fully 1/3 of those probably deserved it?
It's the trappings of a rich society. Comes with the deal. I promise you if you had equal freedoms in ISIS land it would make us look like Iceland. They just elect to ignore the law and well, you can see how "reasonable" they are.....give equal freedoms to ALL countries and their homicide rates will shoot up. And it won't be necessarily all due to open gun ownership. It will have a LOT more to do with pent up rage and oppression....picture opening up the flavellas in Brazil to our freedoms? Those folks do more to evade the police than anything else.
Just the outcome of an enriched society. Look at Timothy McVeigh...they actually transported him....safely, after he killed 168 with a bomb. Picture him doing that in say, Iran/Iraq/Syria/Egypt/Brazil/Honduras/Mexico/Gutamala/Somalia (iffy here, probably depends on how much cash he has on hand)......they aren't safer.....just more restricted and they still chop each other up with incredible regularity.
Case in point....remember Rwanda? The Hutus killed mostly Tutsi's by the THOUSANDS....800,000 to be exact in 3 MONTHS.....and guess what they did it mostly with? Machetes......so I ask you, do you REAAAAALLLLY think we are as bad as say, Somalia circa 1994? Chad? Sudan?
Please, our mere 50,000 is a starting point and fully 1/3 of those probably deserved it?
Comparing US with countries during genocide or civil war? That makes lot of sense
Go ahead compare to WW2 Europe, I hear it was a lot worse then.
Lol. You should have googled "statistically significant" before using it.
So, you're resorting to arguing semantics? You know what we mean, even if we are using the term "statistically insignificant" imprecisely. Let me help. The number of people killed in mass shootings is so infinitesimally small that it defies logic that so much time is spent talking about it. It's even more appalling that some folks are seriously suggesting that our constitutional rights be infringed over it. Worse, it distracts our leaders from focusing on issues that affect a wide swath of the population and can actually be solved - or at least mitigated.
Pedantic discourse doesn't make you clever. Annoying would be a more appropriate term.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
