Comments on: Playing the Odds http://www.pagunblog.com/2009/11/05/playing-the-odds/ The right of the citizens to bear arms in defense of themselves and the State ... Fri, 10 Feb 2012 04:34:26 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: mikeb302000 http://www.pagunblog.com/2009/11/05/playing-the-odds/#comment-52801 mikeb302000 Wed, 11 Nov 2009 10:37:42 +0000 http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/?p=14069#comment-52801 Yes indeed. Xrlq proves that gun folks can have a sense of humor. Yes indeed. Xrlq proves that gun folks can have a sense of humor.

]]> By: Sebastian http://www.pagunblog.com/2009/11/05/playing-the-odds/#comment-52757 Sebastian Tue, 10 Nov 2009 03:38:22 +0000 http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/?p=14069#comment-52757 That's pretty funny right there. That’s pretty funny right there.

]]> By: Xrlq http://www.pagunblog.com/2009/11/05/playing-the-odds/#comment-52755 Xrlq Tue, 10 Nov 2009 03:25:13 +0000 http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/?p=14069#comment-52755 If 2% of us wore helmets to protect ourselves from meteorites, but we found a way to disguise those helmets so that the meteorites had no way of knowing which of us were wearing helmets and which of us were not, how many meteors would be deterred from entering the atmosphere in the first place? If 2% of us wore helmets to protect ourselves from meteorites, but we found a way to disguise those helmets so that the meteorites had no way of knowing which of us were wearing helmets and which of us were not, how many meteors would be deterred from entering the atmosphere in the first place?

]]> By: Let’s talk about drug related crime - 3 Boxes of BS http://www.pagunblog.com/2009/11/05/playing-the-odds/#comment-52643 Let’s talk about drug related crime - 3 Boxes of BS Fri, 06 Nov 2009 18:07:04 +0000 http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/?p=14069#comment-52643 [...] about drug related crime Nov.06, 2009 in CCW, Soapbox, crime, culture, myths, statistics, troll Over at Snowflakes in Hell, TrollB MikeB302000 left the following comment Aren’t you pro-gun guys the ones who continually [...] [...] about drug related crime Nov.06, 2009 in CCW, Soapbox, crime, culture, myths, statistics, troll Over at Snowflakes in Hell, TrollB MikeB302000 left the following comment Aren’t you pro-gun guys the ones who continually [...]

]]> By: Weer'd Beard http://www.pagunblog.com/2009/11/05/playing-the-odds/#comment-52642 Weer'd Beard Fri, 06 Nov 2009 18:05:04 +0000 http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/?p=14069#comment-52642 And willfully break the law to get them! That's a big risk for just "Paranoia", huh? And willfully break the law to get them!

That’s a big risk for just “Paranoia”, huh?

]]> By: Bob S. http://www.pagunblog.com/2009/11/05/playing-the-odds/#comment-52621 Bob S. Fri, 06 Nov 2009 13:40:02 +0000 http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/?p=14069#comment-52621 MikeB302000, If as you say <i>"s it fair to compare the probability of needing a gun to save your life to the chance of being struck by a meteorite? </i> Then why did you illegally own firearms? By your own admission, you've owned firearms legally and illegally over a 15 year period. If the odds are so slight, why did you have the firearms then? MikeB302000,

If as you say “s it fair to compare the probability of needing a gun to save your life to the chance of being struck by a meteorite?

Then why did you illegally own firearms? By your own admission, you’ve owned firearms legally and illegally over a 15 year period.

If the odds are so slight, why did you have the firearms then?

]]> By: Sebastian http://www.pagunblog.com/2009/11/05/playing-the-odds/#comment-52620 Sebastian Fri, 06 Nov 2009 13:25:13 +0000 http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/?p=14069#comment-52620 MikeB: As you could see if you kept reading, I tried doing a somewhat crude control for stranger-on-stranger violent crime, and still came out with a number that's in the league of deaths people consider it normal to take precautions to prevent. MikeB:

As you could see if you kept reading, I tried doing a somewhat crude control for stranger-on-stranger violent crime, and still came out with a number that’s in the league of deaths people consider it normal to take precautions to prevent.

]]> By: Guav http://www.pagunblog.com/2009/11/05/playing-the-odds/#comment-52619 Guav Fri, 06 Nov 2009 13:01:58 +0000 http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/?p=14069#comment-52619 Mikeb302000, you raise a valid point, one I have thought of before. You're right--the average person who is not involved in drugs or gangs has less of a chance of being the victim of a homicide then someone who is involved in those things. But violent crime is not just "homicide"--it also includes robberies, beatings, rapes and other street crime that is not concentrated in that particular demographic. Most rape victims are NOT drug dealers or gang bangers. There's more to defend against than drug-related homicides. Mikeb302000, you raise a valid point, one I have thought of before. You’re right–the average person who is not involved in drugs or gangs has less of a chance of being the victim of a homicide then someone who is involved in those things. But violent crime is not just “homicide”–it also includes robberies, beatings, rapes and other street crime that is not concentrated in that particular demographic. Most rape victims are NOT drug dealers or gang bangers. There’s more to defend against than drug-related homicides.

]]> By: elmo iscariot http://www.pagunblog.com/2009/11/05/playing-the-odds/#comment-52618 elmo iscariot Fri, 06 Nov 2009 12:48:06 +0000 http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/?p=14069#comment-52618 Y'know what? That's probably a waste of electrons up there. Maybe it'd be better to just recap this discussion so far: Sebastian: "Why you stuck-up, half-witted, scruffy-looking... Nerf-herder!" Mike: "Who's scruffy-lookin'?" Y’know what? That’s probably a waste of electrons up there. Maybe it’d be better to just recap this discussion so far:

Sebastian: “Why you stuck-up, half-witted, scruffy-looking… Nerf-herder!”

Mike: “Who’s scruffy-lookin’?”

]]> By: elmo iscariot http://www.pagunblog.com/2009/11/05/playing-the-odds/#comment-52617 elmo iscariot Fri, 06 Nov 2009 12:44:24 +0000 http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/?p=14069#comment-52617 "So, no you cannot presume the incidents of per-year gun violence are entirely random." Sebastian calculated odds of being a victim of violent crime based on a random distribution, <i>then divided it by five</i> to represent the fact that most violent crimes can be avoided with the right lifestyle choices. He ended up with a rough estimate of 1%, or 1 in 100. The odds of being hit by a meteorite are 1 in 700,000. that's <i>seven thousand times</i> more likely. For the risk of meteor impacts to be anywhere near the risk of violent crime, we'd have to accept the proposition that violent criminals exclusively target other violent criminals, and that innocent victims are a vanishingly rare anomaly. This proposition would completely undermine most gun control arguments. The numbers make it clear that you need to choose one: either violent crime against innocent victims is so rare that restricting lawful citizens' access to guns in hope of indirectly decreasing the rate is a terrible overreaction, or violent crime is a small but realistic risk that's worth preparing for, and your belief that such preparation is paranoid is incorrect. You simply can't have it both ways. That you've ignored the _overwhelming_ disparity of risks to nitpick a detail that makes little difference and is addressed later in the same post is just another indication that you really aren't taking this discussion seriously. “So, no you cannot presume the incidents of per-year gun violence are entirely random.”

Sebastian calculated odds of being a victim of violent crime based on a random distribution, then divided it by five to represent the fact that most violent crimes can be avoided with the right lifestyle choices.

He ended up with a rough estimate of 1%, or 1 in 100. The odds of being hit by a meteorite are 1 in 700,000. that’s seven thousand times more likely. For the risk of meteor impacts to be anywhere near the risk of violent crime, we’d have to accept the proposition that violent criminals exclusively target other violent criminals, and that innocent victims are a vanishingly rare anomaly. This proposition would completely undermine most gun control arguments. The numbers make it clear that you need to choose one: either violent crime against innocent victims is so rare that restricting lawful citizens’ access to guns in hope of indirectly decreasing the rate is a terrible overreaction, or violent crime is a small but realistic risk that’s worth preparing for, and your belief that such preparation is paranoid is incorrect. You simply can’t have it both ways.

That you’ve ignored the _overwhelming_ disparity of risks to nitpick a detail that makes little difference and is addressed later in the same post is just another indication that you really aren’t taking this discussion seriously.

]]>