random

An Arguement for Using Statistics

In my, now discontinued, debate about gun control Andy Skelton he argued against using statistics. Since I didn’t feel they were central to the argument for gun control (actually I never even mentioned them) I let it go. But within minutes I was annoyed with myself for doing so.

People often say you can prove anything with statistics. That isn’t true, but you can prove anything with *bad* statistics. What this means is that you need to carefully choose which statistics to place faith in. However, Skelton wasn’t concerned with that, he made the more dubious assertion that statistics were some sort of hip way to confuse people into become some sort of borg.

Discarding a point because it uses statistics is scary. It is an easy (mindless) way for people to toss out the facts and stick with what they think the answer is despite other things pointing to a contrary answer. Discarding statistics because they are “fashionable” is just bizarre though. For one, statistics have been a fashionable way to support an idea (which is something any good idea needs) since people first started counting. That’s quite a trend. Second, is that “fashionable” itself is a statistic. Somehow people try to assert that using statistics that have no scientific backing (ie “the voice of the people” or “my accounting of the world”) is okay to use while the geeks trying to accurately account for things are just misguided.

The moral: use statistics, but choose them wisely and be sure you can back them up with well reasoned analysis. If people don’t like that you are doing this it is probably because they aren’t right.

Standard
random

Why Do Gun Control Arguments Boil Down to Silly Analogies

I read a quote on Casey Bisson’s blog of a quote from Andy Skelton’s blog. It went like this: “Gun control is like trying to reduce drunk driving by making it tougher for sober people to own cars.”

A more proper analog would be that gun control is like trying to make it harder for drunk people to drive cars. Or even better, gun control is like trying to make sure people can drive safely before giving them a driver’s license. Of course that doesn’t sound so crazy so it is a lot harder to make gun control seem like a bad thing.

Personally, I think that gun ownership is stupid. Guns don’t stop crime and all it takes is looking at other countries with strict gun laws to see what the result is. It isn’t defenseless families killed by maniacs, but a safer country to live in with less violent crime. If people insist on owning guns then that is their choice, but as a country everyone in the US should take a stand and say certain people should never be allowed to buy guns: over the internet, if they have any history (ever) of mental sickness, or if they have ever been arrested. These three rules alone would likely decrease violent crime. What I find most interesting about the analogy is that it hits on something I believe people should consider, and that is that gun ownership should be a privilege just like a driver’s license is.

Standard