J-Greens wrote:
Lol, the Harvard statistics don't need a second going through, it's quite clear the conclusion.
Haven't a clue why you wasted your time. Confused
Not really. I've seen a number of studies that say this or that (peer reviewed), to support a common goal, with a broad statement regarding its outcome -- even though it can mislead you in what it's actually showing (hence why I say it's supporting a common goal). Not a waste of time (as you'll see), and I like breaking things down myself to see what the actual truth is overall (an interest).
Take this for example:
Quote:
2. Across high-income nations, more guns = more homicide.
We analyzed the relationship between homicide and gun availability using data from 26 developed countries from the early 1990s. We found that across developed countries, where guns are more available, there are more homicides. These results often hold even when the United States is excluded.
You can say that there's more homicides in the 24 developed countries I listed when there's higher firearm ownership (the top 24), but that's misleading as it doesn't mention that there's four times the firearm ownership for the small increase in overall homicides between the two groups.
See, what I found is that high income + more guns = more homicides; just what they say they found out
But in reality, that's only a very narrow way in looking at it.
(The mental illness one will be fun.)