2 ms·

Also interesting that I've had two downvotes for this. You know, you're not meant to downvote something you don't like. I'm assuming that is the reason, as ther

Also interesting that I've had two downvotes for this. You know, you're not meant to downvote something you don't like. I'm assuming that is the reason, as there are no comments with valid arguments against my comment (and even the invalid replies didn't have enough karma to downvote). I can only assume there are some anonymous gun-nuts on HN. If I've said something incorrect, feel free to comment.

ctdonath 13y ago
Downvotes because you're saying the article is wrong, then make assertions which are in line with the article's conclusion. BTW: there a LOT of not-anonymous gun-nuts on HN.
- cpncrunch 13y ago
  I just read the article's conclusion, and it's just says "more gun control != fewer deaths". My comment is saying that their data is wrong (or cherrypicked) and their attempt to disprove any correlation doesn't hold water. What I would expect to see would be a scatter graph showing all the countries in the world with guns on one axis and homicides on the other axis - that would make the article a bit more scientific rather than just cherrypicking a few countries. Most of their argument seems to be based on the fact that Russia has a high homicide rate and they have banned handguns. However we all know that Russia has law and order issues. EDIT: I just did a quick search, and it seems there are graphs of homicides vs gun ownership for all countries, e.g. http://www.neontommy.com/news/2012/07/doing-math-guns http://www.neontommy.com/news/2012/07/doing-math-guns So it certainly does look like gun ownership isn't correlated to homicide rates. However that doesn't necessarily mean that gun control is a bad idea. Does gun control reduce homicides when you control for other factors? The article is arguing that it does not, but my argument is that Canada vs USA shows that it does.

2 ms·

Also interesting that I've had two downvotes for this. You know, you're not meant to downvote something you don't like. I'm assuming that is the reason, as ther

by cpncrunch 13y ago

ctdonath 13y ago
Downvotes because you're saying the article is wrong, then make assertions which are in line with the article's conclusion. BTW: there a LOT of not-anonymous gun-nuts on HN.
- cpncrunch 13y ago
  I just read the article's conclusion, and it's just says "more gun control != fewer deaths". My comment is saying that their data is wrong (or cherrypicked) and their attempt to disprove any correlation doesn't hold water. What I would expect to see would be a scatter graph showing all the countries in the world with guns on one axis and homicides on the other axis - that would make the article a bit more scientific rather than just cherrypicking a few countries. Most of their argument seems to be based on the fact that Russia has a high homicide rate and they have banned handguns. However we all know that Russia has law and order issues. EDIT: I just did a quick search, and it seems there are graphs of homicides vs gun ownership for all countries, e.g. http://www.neontommy.com/news/2012/07/doing-math-guns http://www.neontommy.com/news/2012/07/doing-math-guns So it certainly does look like gun ownership isn't correlated to homicide rates. However that doesn't necessarily mean that gun control is a bad idea. Does gun control reduce homicides when you control for other factors? The article is arguing that it does not, but my argument is that Canada vs USA shows that it does.