Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="CanadianDream" data-source="post: 2391434" data-attributes="member: 571814">See this is the problem....people just don&#039;t want to hear the truth.&nbsp; There is no magic to the study... all they did is look at the HISTORY of what has happened.The data could have been +ve or -ve corrleated...this is not the testing of a null hypothesis.&nbsp; Multivariate covariance utilizes a totally different approach.&nbsp; In essence, all it does is look at number of gun related injuries and sees if that is more common in households with guns period.&nbsp; The answer could have been +ve correleated (guns at home = greater risk) or -ve correleated (guns at home = lesser risk).&nbsp; Just face the facts man, it makes it more risky to have a gun at home then not.&nbsp; Period.Man just look at your statistics...your risk of getting shot by someone you KNOW is so much greater then by some random stranger.&nbsp; Seriously people stop being friggin paranoid.&nbsp; Yes people get shot on the highways randomly.&nbsp; But common, you are 1000x more likely to get killed by someone you know...and having a gun in your home...makes it 43x more likely it will happen to you.This is the problem...saying it is &quot;common sense&quot; - is just ignoring the truth.&nbsp; You may believe that - but it is JUST NOT THE CASE.Guns in home means YOU, YOUR FAMILY, YOUR FRIENDS, YOUR LOVED ONES, YOUR WIVES, G/F are all at a very significantly higher risk of getting injured.&nbsp; That is just the history of what has happened in this country.&nbsp; No magic, no special statistics, just the raw numbers.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="CanadianDream, post: 2391434, member: 571814"] See this is the problem....people just don't want to hear the truth. There is no magic to the study... all they did is look at the HISTORY of what has happened. The data could have been +ve or -ve corrleated...this is not the testing of a null hypothesis. Multivariate covariance utilizes a totally different approach. In essence, all it does is look at number of gun related injuries and sees if that is more common in households with guns period. The answer could have been +ve correleated (guns at home = greater risk) or -ve correleated (guns at home = lesser risk). Just face the facts man, it makes it more risky to have a gun at home then not. Period. Man just look at your statistics...your risk of getting shot by someone you KNOW is so much greater then by some random stranger. Seriously people stop being friggin paranoid. Yes people get shot on the highways randomly. But common, you are 1000x more likely to get killed by someone you know...and having a gun in your home...makes it 43x more likely it will happen to you. This is the problem...saying it is "common sense" - is just ignoring the truth. You may believe that - but it is JUST NOT THE CASE. Guns in home means YOU, YOUR FAMILY, YOUR FRIENDS, YOUR LOVED ONES, YOUR WIVES, G/F are all at a very significantly higher risk of getting injured. That is just the history of what has happened in this country. No magic, no special statistics, just the raw numbers. [/QUOTE]

Verification