Lately there are so many statistics being thrown around by both sides of this debate that I wanted to start a thread to collect and discuss the statistics about guns and violence so we can strengthen our 1A to retain our 2A.
One of the most common statistics and arguments used is that Australia has low gun violence and they have high gun control. It is an accurate statement and this is a common graphic that depicts the argument.
However, the aspect of the argument that I rarely hear about is that Australia started with much lower gun violence and it has not decreased at a faster rate after their control measures than before. In the graphic below, the decline in violence rates is about the same between the US and Australia before and after their ban was in place.
There is a difference between experimental statistics and observational statistics. All gun violence statistics are observational and cannot be credited with causation due to correlation. In this example, the declining violence rate is likely due much more to socio-economic factors than anything else. It's important to look at both sides of the argument in order to better understand and win the debate that seems so obvious to us and those like us. Sometimes it feels so common sense that we fail to find the data that accurately counters the bad arguments we come across.
I would love to see more examples of an anti argument along with why it's flawed and the more elaborate version of the statistics to better infer an accurate conclusion.
One of the most common statistics and arguments used is that Australia has low gun violence and they have high gun control. It is an accurate statement and this is a common graphic that depicts the argument.
However, the aspect of the argument that I rarely hear about is that Australia started with much lower gun violence and it has not decreased at a faster rate after their control measures than before. In the graphic below, the decline in violence rates is about the same between the US and Australia before and after their ban was in place.
There is a difference between experimental statistics and observational statistics. All gun violence statistics are observational and cannot be credited with causation due to correlation. In this example, the declining violence rate is likely due much more to socio-economic factors than anything else. It's important to look at both sides of the argument in order to better understand and win the debate that seems so obvious to us and those like us. Sometimes it feels so common sense that we fail to find the data that accurately counters the bad arguments we come across.
I would love to see more examples of an anti argument along with why it's flawed and the more elaborate version of the statistics to better infer an accurate conclusion.
