Go Back   Maryland Shooters > Gun Rights and Legislation > National 2A Issues

Notices


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old October 7th, 2009, 10:33 AM #1
K-Romulus's Avatar
K-Romulus K-Romulus is offline
Suburban Commando
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: NE MoCO
Posts: 2,277
Images: 1
K-Romulus K-Romulus is offline
Suburban Commando
K-Romulus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: NE MoCO
Posts: 2,277
Images: 1
"Study" shows carrying a gun = "4.5 times more likely to get shot"

A bit of counter-intel that I hadn't seen here at MD Shooters.

I first saw the news on this "study" last week. Here is a link to the media spin:
http://www.philly.com/philly/hp/news.../63225267.html

Quote:
Posted on Fri, Oct. 2, 2009

Think a gun protects you in a fight? Think again
(...)
If you have a gun during a fight, think twice about the protection it might offer.

Epidemiologists at the University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine yesterday announced the findings of a study about whether guns are protective or perilous during an assault.

It found that those possessing a gun in an assault situation were 4 1/2 times more likely to be shot than those not possessing one, according to the study's author, Charles C. Branas, associate professor of epidemiology.

It was released online this month in the American Journal of Public Health and will be printed in the November issue. (...)
and

http://www.philly.com/philly/news/local/63656382.html
Quote:
Posted on Wed, Oct. 7, 2009

Monica Yant Kinney: A downside to carrying a gun?
(...)
"I carry when I go into cities for work or out to dinner with my family," Misus told me, "anyplace where I'm concerned for my safety."

I thought of my phone friend a few days later when University of Pennsylvania researchers released the results of a study seeking evidence that having a gun protects the holder from peril.

To the contrary, the epidemiologists found in the first-of-its-kind investigation: People with a gun on them were actually 4.5 times more likely to be shot than those who were unarmed.(...)
The media spin is just getting started, so expect to see references in the future, esp. at any shall-issue bill hearings.

I found a free link to the study here (saves you paying $30 to AJPH): http://works.bepress.com/dennis_culhane/88/

Quote:
Abstract

Objectives. We investigated the possible relationship between being shot in an assault and possession of a gun at the time.

Methods. We enrolled 677 case participants that had been shot in an assault and 684 population-based control participants within Philadelphia from 2003 to 2006. We adjusted odds ratios for confounding variables.

Results. After adjustment, individuals in possession of a gun were 4.46 (P<.05) times more likely to be shot in an assault than those not in possession. Among gun assaults where the victim had at least some chance to resist, this adjusted odds ratio increased to 5.45 (P<.05).

Conclusions. On average, guns did not protect those who possessed them from being shot in an assault. Although successful defensive gun uses occur each year, the probability of success may be low for civilian gun users in urban areas. Such users should reconsider their possession of guns or, at least, understand that regular possession necessitates careful safety countermeasures.
******

Basically, the "conclusions" are total spin. Here are the facts as laid out in the study:

1) FACT: the study's data shows that out of the 677 people in the case group who were shot, 94% of them DID NOT HAVE A GUN.

2) FACT: the "control group" for the study was randomly telephoned Philadelphians who were asked "Were you shot on or around [the exact same time that a case group shooting happened in Philadelphia]? Yes or no?"

3) FACT: the study then matched up the "control" to the "gun possession" subset of the case group to get the "4.5x" number.

There are some other details in the study like they matched the case/control by age, race, etc., but that makes no difference in helping support the "conclusion."

"Knowing is half the battle."

More complicated analysis of the study is found here:
http://volokh.com/2009/10/05/guns-di...in-an-assault/

More analysis here:
http://www.skatingonstilts.com/skati...it-sounds.html
K-Romulus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 7th, 2009, 10:56 AM #2
Half-cocked's Avatar
Half-cocked Half-cocked is offline
Senior Meatbag
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 22,893
Half-cocked Half-cocked is offline
Senior Meatbag
Half-cocked's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 22,893
Did the study sample a population of law-abiding permit holders, or does it operate "backwards" by sampling a population of people who were shot, AFTER they were shot?

If the latter, the study is totally meaningless, because it's obvious that criminals with a propensity for violence who carry guns, and who frequently put themselves in high-risk situations where violent encounters are likely, get shot at a far higher rate than law-abiding citizens who carry a gun only for self-defense.
Half-cocked is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 7th, 2009, 10:59 AM #3
herr.baer's Avatar
herr.baer herr.baer is offline
Midnight Rider
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 3,526
Images: 22
herr.baer herr.baer is offline
Midnight Rider
herr.baer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 3,526
Images: 22
Studies can show anything you want if you manipulate the data to show your point.
__________________
When the Lamb opened the fourth seal, I heard the voice of the fourth living creature say, "Come and see." I looked and there before me was a pale horse! Its rider was named Death, and Hell was following close behind him. They were given power over a fourth of the earth to kill by sword, famine and plague, and by the wild beasts of the earth. — Revelation 6:7-8


NRA Mid-Range F-Class Master
IDPA CDP Marksman
herr.baer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 7th, 2009, 11:08 AM #4
MikeTF's Avatar
MikeTF MikeTF is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: MD 40yrs - Smith Mountain Lake, VA since '13
Posts: 11,758
MikeTF MikeTF is offline
Senior Member
MikeTF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: MD 40yrs - Smith Mountain Lake, VA since '13
Posts: 11,758
Figures never lie, but liars sure do figure! Key problems I see with the study: 1) Urban, specifically Philly, 2) No reference to crime rates in the study area, 3) very small sample size - probably not statistically representative, 4) a college/academic study outside of the field of criminology, 5) etc etc etc.
MikeTF is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 7th, 2009, 11:18 AM #5
sigrug17's Avatar
sigrug17 sigrug17 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Gaithersburg
Posts: 479
sigrug17 sigrug17 is offline
Member
sigrug17's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Gaithersburg
Posts: 479
Thumbs down Agreed!

Quote:
Originally Posted by herr.baer View Post
Studies can show anything you want if you manipulate the data to show your point.



Totally agree. These studies are completely a FRAUD. Not scientific (meaningless control factors), and completely manipulated to show a certain result.
__________________
"Vengeance is mine declares the Lord, but I just want to be about the Lord's business!" --- R. Mullins ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
sigrug17 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 7th, 2009, 11:24 AM #6
zombiehunter zombiehunter is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 6,464
zombiehunter zombiehunter is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 6,464
amazon.com
How to Lie with Statistics

Book. Go.
zombiehunter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 7th, 2009, 11:29 AM #7
kohburn's Avatar
kohburn kohburn is offline
Resident MacGyver
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: SOMD / Newbern NC
Posts: 6,305
kohburn kohburn is offline
Resident MacGyver
kohburn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: SOMD / Newbern NC
Posts: 6,305
Quote:
study seeking evidence that having a gun protects the holder from peril.

To the contrary, the epidemiologists found in the first-of-its-kind investigation: People with a gun on them were actually 4.5 times more likely to be shot than those who were unarmed
I think that is the part that bothers me the most - its presented as if they set out to prove one thing and "found" the other... when the reality is they carefuly manipulated the data to present something that I STILL can't figure out how they got.

Quote:
677 people in the case group who were shot, 94% were unarmed
this says to me that if you are unarmed you are 16X MORE likely to get shot.
__________________
Quote:
cogito ergo sum ​​amant libertatem
kohburn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 7th, 2009, 11:55 AM #8
alucard0822's Avatar
alucard0822 alucard0822 is online now
For great Justice
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: PA
Posts: 13,224
Images: 11
alucard0822 alucard0822 is online now
For great Justice
alucard0822's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: PA
Posts: 13,224
Images: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by kohburn View Post
I think that is the part that bothers me the most - its presented as if they set out to prove one thing and "found" the other... when the reality is they carefuly manipulated the data to present something that I STILL can't figure out how they got.



this says to me that if you are unarmed you are 16X MORE likely to get shot.
yea, I took it the same way, you only have a few people that were shot during an assault, no telling if they were in the middle of a drug deal gone bad, gang fight, or even a law abiding citizen that stopped the crime, shot the assailant, and then got shot themselves. Like most brady funded BS "studies" it is easily debunked and countered, and serves the purpose of making them look like idiots to anyone that has any concept of scientific principals.
__________________
"Unfortunately, freedom allows sh*theads to get away with stuff. You always know the mark of a coward. A coward hides behind freedom. A brave person stands in front of freedom and defends it for others."
-Henry Rollins
alucard0822 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old October 7th, 2009, 11:59 AM #9
-Mil-Surp-Phreak-'s Avatar
-Mil-Surp-Phreak- -Mil-Surp-Phreak- is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Gaithersburg
Posts: 1,741
-Mil-Surp-Phreak- -Mil-Surp-Phreak- is offline
Senior Member
-Mil-Surp-Phreak-'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Gaithersburg
Posts: 1,741
Quote:
There are 3 kinds of lies. Lies, damned lies, and statistics.
One of my favorite quotes.
__________________
"America is at that awkward stage. It's too late to work within the system, and too early to shoot the bastards." ~ Claire Wolfe, 101 Things To Do Until The Revolution
-Mil-Surp-Phreak- is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 7th, 2009, 12:11 PM #10
fightinbluhen51's Avatar
fightinbluhen51 fightinbluhen51 is offline
"Quack Pot Call Honker"
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 8,192
fightinbluhen51 fightinbluhen51 is offline
"Quack Pot Call Honker"
fightinbluhen51's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 8,192
Quote:
Originally Posted by zombiehunter View Post
amazon.com
How to Lie with Statistics

Book. Go.
More Guns, Less Crime, The Bias Against Guns, GO!

Seriously, this is ridiculous, which can be evidence by just simply doing a study on PA permit holders by themselves. Seems that they probably didn't ask "are you a criminal or have you been convicted of a crime, charged with a crime, arrested, ect" to provide for the fact that criminals have a higher chance of actually being shot. And shot by perhaps, legal gun owners? Yes.
__________________

“It does not take a majority to prevail ... but rather an irate, tireless minority, who keep on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men”-SAMUEL ADAMS, 1776
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
fightinbluhen51 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

  Home Page > Forum List > Gun Rights and Legislation > National 2A Issues


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:14 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
© 2017, Congregate Media, LP Privacy Policy Terms of Service