War Room Lounge V26: Neoliberal Clicks

[Higus]

Anyway on a lighter note Some of you guys may have heard about the concealed carry study that just came out. @Greoric Please read and analyze it cost me 40 bucks. It is a medical paper so I want to make sure I am getting this. @Cubo de Sangre and everyone else please enjoy

Before people jump to conclusions, they should understand that saying something like "gun laws have a statistically insignificant effect on crime" is not the same as saying "gun laws have no effect on crime".

 

[Quipling]

My face is still sore from sparring yesterday. Like, the point of my chin I can feel where I got popped a couple times still.

Are you supposed to get hit in the face?

 

[Gregolian]

Are you supposed to get hit in the face?

Well no, but I suck at getting my face out of the way and most of the hits came during my last session.

 

[Fawlty]

No, "can" defense

 

[Islam Imamate]

Before people jump to conclusions, they should understand that saying something like gun laws have a "statistically insignificant effect on crime" is not the same as saying "gun laws have no effect on crime".

Its science speak for "there was no difference".

 

[Higus]

Its science speak for "there was no difference".

lol, not quite. Its more accurate to say that it can't prove there is a difference with high confidence.

 

[Islam Imamate]

lol, not quite. Its more accurate to say that it can't prove there is a difference with high confidence.

Yes I know that's what it technically means but in practice it means the study found no difference. You don't get to hide behind science speak when its convenient. If we are going into the weeds like that the burden to prove there is a difference falls on you and in the absence of that there is no reason to believe gun laws make a difference.

Besides seems like you misread the study anyhow. It didn't look at gun control but gun liberalization so the study is saying that relaxing laws around concealed carry made no difference in violent crime rates.

 

[Sketch]

 

[Higus]

Yes I know that's what it technically means but in practice it means the study found no difference. You don't get to hide behind science speak when its convenient. If we are going into the weeds like that the burden to prove there is a difference falls on you and in the absence of that there is no reason to believe gun laws make a difference.

Besides seems like you misread the study anyhow. It didn't look at gun control but gun liberalization so the study is saying that relaxing laws around concealed carry made no difference in violent crime rates.

I’m not hiding behind science speak. I work in quality control and there are many times when there is a known difference between 2 groups, but they show as statistically insignificant. That doesn’t mean that a difference does not exist. It usually means you need more data or your metrics aren’t suitable for detecting the difference.

My biggest gripe with the methodology for the study was that they were using states as data points. I do not believe that looking at the state level will provide you with a complete picture of the effects or the laws. Many guns used in crimes in states or cities with strict laws were purchased in states with more lax laws. The states aren’t isolated from one another. Then it’s also worth considering that some states with “may issue” laws will in practice issue very differently between counties.

 

[Islam Imamate]

I’m not hiding behind science speak. I work in quality control and there are many times when there is a known difference between 2 groups, but they show as statistically insignificant. That doesn’t mean that a difference does not exist. It usually means you need more data or your metrics aren’t suitable for detecting the difference.

Sure but I'm not going to assume there is a difference in the absence of evidence for it.

My biggest gripe with the methodology for the study was that they were using states as data points. I do not believe that looking at the state level will provide you with a complete picture of the effects or the laws. Many guns used in crimes in states or cities with strict laws were purchased in states with more lax laws. The states aren’t isolated from one another. Then it’s also worth considering that some states with “may issue” laws will in practice issue very differently between counties.

They're isolating their variables, that's science 101. These laws were passed at the state level so it makes sense to use the states as data points. The states aren't isolated but the period study covers before and after the passage of these laws so whatever effect the neighboring states were having would presumably persist across that period with the primary difference being studied being the effect of the laws.

No study is perfect but that strikes me as a negligible complaint.

 

[Cubo de Sangre]

Anyway on a lighter note Some of you guys may have heard about the concealed carry study that just came out. @Greoric Please read and analyze it cost me 40 bucks. It is a medical paper so I want to make sure I am getting this. @Cubo de Sangre and everyone else please enjoy

Holy shit I'm way past stats class. Huge if true? No shit people who apply for carry permits aren't the ones out committing crime?

 

[Ruprecht]

Before people jump to conclusions, they should understand that saying something like "gun laws have a statistically insignificant effect on crime" is not the same as saying "gun laws have no effect on crime".

It's a limited study because it's only looking for a direct correlation between the laws (no issue, may issue, shall issue and unrestricted carry) and violent crime rates. They only allowed for poverty and unemployment as other contributing variables (no mention of demographics such as the percentage of the population under 25).
I wouldn't expect a direct correlation though, the variable you'd check for correlation would be the number of permits, or better yet the number actually carrying. I'd also want to look at the correlation (both with the liberalisation of the laws and violent crime) with overall levels of proliferation, which is hard to assess (they typically use a proxy like the proportion of suicides committed using a firearm).
It'd be unusual for there to be no effect, certainly a contradiction of both typical explanatory political narratives. The idea that more regular citizens carrying firearms will deter violent crime or the countering hypothesis that it will escalate the levels of violent crime due to an "arms race".

 

[JDragon]

Man, I am really, really starting to love Ben Askren. He's just making Convington like an amateur regarding his shit talking and social media skills. And his Marty from Nebraska line regarding Usman just killed me.

Really makes you wonder what Dana was thinking not wanting to pay the man before.

 

[Captain Davis]

Legit lol

 

[Quipling]

Man, I am really, really starting to love Ben Askren. He's just making Convington like an amateur regarding his shit talking and social media skills. And his Marty from Nebraska line regarding Usman just killed me.

Really makes you wonder what Dana was thinking not wanting to pay the man before.

It's working, too. Some casual fans I know have ben askren me if he was any good.

 

[Limbo Pete]

It's working, too. Some casual fans I know have ben askren me if he was any good.

 

[Trotsky]

It's working, too. Some casual fans I know have ben askren me if he was any good.

 

[WhiteMousse]

The alpha-beta thing is one of those things that isn't accurate, but can still be useful.

Like God

 

[Devout Pessimist]

It's working, too. Some casual fans I know have ben askren me if he was any good.

Askren: He called me up and said, "How about we trade you" and I was like, "You can do that? That's a thing?"

<Lmaoo><Lmaoo><Lmaoo>

 

[Andy Capp]

It's working, too. Some casual fans I know have ben askren me if he was any good.