5 ms·
Correlation does not imply causation. As noted elsewhere in this discussion, there are plenty of other potentially relevant correlations, and as also noted, if
by hga 11y ago
Correlation does not imply causation. As noted elsewhere in this discussion, there are plenty of other potentially relevant correlations, and as also noted, if you cast the net wider than the ODEC we no longer are an "extreme outlier".
- res0nat0r 11y agoI'm not sure how we've deluded ourselves into thinking that the two are not directly related. As other commenters have mentioned, it isn't big scary guns, but the hundreds of millions of handguns everywhere and easily available in the USA that do most of the damage.
- hga 11y agoSee where I just commented on the fact that our murder rate has halved since the 1970-90s period while gun ownership rates have not changed, strongly suggesting we should look elsewhere, perhaps, as I note, demographics: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9838517 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9838517
- res0nat0r 11y agoThe murder rate overall has gone down, but we are still an outlier when it comes to the number of guns and gun homicides.
- tedunangst 11y agoThis is a strange definition of correlated, where one variable changes and the other does not.
- res0nat0r 11y agoOur outlier high gun homicide rate is dependent on our extremely high number of guns easily available to commit those homicides.
- hga 11y agoSo you're saying these two variables are correlated, even though they are not, in fact, correlated?
- res0nat0r 11y agoThey are correlated.
- tedunangst 11y agoWho's on first?