Here we go again.
If possible, please try to lower the level of anger when posting.
It seems you have returned to the fray having learned nothing about what we expect in civil conversation. There is no reason to come out swinging...you may not enjoy the result.
If possible, please try to lower the level of anger when posting.
It seems you have returned to the fray having learned nothing about what we expect in civil conversation. There is no reason to come out swinging...you may not enjoy the result.
And look who now acts like they know it all?
The funders are the taxpayer, myp! Do you get that?
It's always the taxpayer funding any 'founders' theory that we need some kind of massive and expensive study to determine or conclude scientifically why we have gun violence in our society. Ignoring at our own peril the obvious staring us straight in the face cultural rot at it's core.
What are you talking about? You said a Federally funded study will be politically biased. I said stop looking at the funders (the Federal government) and show me what is wrong with the methodology. And this is a small expense compared to what happens when you have inoptimal policy that leads to the likes of Sandy Hook. It is an investment in our future. In better policy.
And look who now acts like they know it all?
That's not me being a know it all. Just saying you are misrepresenting scientific methodology.
I should note my post was not targeted at anyone in particular. I don't know about you, but I come here to learn and yes, possibly change my mind. Been hard of late, especially when it comes to certain members though...
Good post though, I agree for the most part.
I said it CAN be bias. And I won't stop looking at the funders, I'm one of them!!!!! And this is no esmall expense either, and gets even more expensive when we finally realize we're thrown money at a problem that isn't scientific....at all! We've thrown money at drug use, alcoholism, child abuse, we can help those that are the victims, the root causes go ignored....and are not scientific. Banning alcohol or making drus illegal doesn't affect demand, you ignore the actual problems myo in some hopeless dream the government has all of your answers.
It doesn't.
Very good post, of simply making a law against something was effective at correcting any problem there would be no jails, or need for them, or police.
Illegalizing types of guns seems to have nothing to do with safety, murder is already illegal, so is brandishing, and reckless handling of firearms and on and on. Most people who use guns in violent ways break dozens of laws
I think you have a problem with some people who aren't conducting proper science rather than those actually conducting science... There are strong studies on all of those issues you mentioned that can lead to better policy. Political hurdles is another story, but a political class and citizenry that does not understand the importance of the studies will hardly look to those studies to base policy off them- instead they will run around like chickens with their heads cut off yelling whatever seems intuitively right to them- as if that means anything.
By the standards of proper science- like much of what you see in fields like physics, chemistry, biology, medicine, pharmaceuticals, etc.
Yea... not really. You are the one that rejects science, not me. Picking and choosing what studies to believe based on ideology is not a scientific process
I don't have time to explain it to you again as I am sure it will once more be a fruitless endeavor. Go read about the scientific method, controls, causation v. correlation, statistical analysis, and peer review. Go look at how respected journals like the NEJM select studies. That is what I am talking about when I say proper science.
Exactly. The bulk of gun crimes and suicides with a handgun. No study is needed, and we have many Universities currently engaged in such studies.
The problem isn't scientific as much as an issue of national morality
And what was Sandy Hook done with? And even your point here might be greater regulation is needed for handguns, I don't know- the data available is still very incomplete hence why I think we need more studies.
Myp.....the fact that many observers are calling for 'scientific studies' is a political hurdle....that the citizenry must consider an obstacle if it is to get to the bottom of these issues. Almost everyone knows this magazine count nonsense wont change reality nor will politically driven studies, it's gonna take a look in the mirror. And this nation seems to be unable to do that.
Similar threads
