|
correlation isn't causation but this pattern is striking https://twitter.com/larry_levitt/status/1549096253039882244
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2022 15:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 00:48 |
|
|
I really don't know what to do about the problem that people are more attached to the fantasy of heroically shooting down an assailant than they are to their own lives or their families' lives, let alone the lives of strangers. It seems like an unsolvable problem, sometimes.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2022 10:19
|
|
|
Cease to Hope posted:I really don't know what to do about the problem that people are more attached to the fantasy of heroically shooting down an assailant than they are to their own lives or their families' lives, let alone the lives of strangers. It seems like an unsolvable problem, sometimes. You probably start by trying to do a better job defining the problem because while the bolded may look accurate from your perspective, it is not and framing it that way does you no favors among the crowd you allegedly wish to persuade.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2022 13:02
|
|
|
Harold Fjord posted:You probably start by trying to do a better job defining the problem because while the bolded may look accurate from your perspective, it is not and framing it that way does you no favors among the crowd you allegedly wish to persuade. It isn't a problem that gets solved by me individually evangelizing people anyway. Even if I was supernaturally persuasive, there aren't enough hours in the day. The issue is the fantasy that owning a gun makes you safer, and that all the problems with guns come from Bad People with guns. This individualist exceptionalism pervades gun culture thinking, where suicide and domestic violence and crime risks happen to other people, who are irresponsible and maybe even inveterate criminals, but not to me, because I am the Good Gun Owner. Good Gun Owners don't commit suicide (even when they talk freely about a history of ideation or avoiding therapy because a counselor or psych might tell them having a gun is a bad idea), Good Gun Owners don't commit crimes of passion, Good Gun Owners only shoot people who deserve it. The guns in your safe stay there forever, in the hands of a Good Gun Owner, and never get stolen or just resold as part of your estate. Good Gun Owners are safer because of guns, because of the fantasy narrative of preventing harm by threatening or shooting the Bad People. It's not a narrative anyone reasoned themselves into believing based on any facts anyway. It's a narrative that chiefly insulates people from facts, because it has a convenient exit chute for any negative social consequences of guns. Those are problems that happen to other people, and therefore they don't matter, only happen to defective people, and/or are a sign of a social sickness that has to be cured before we can even talk about guns. And since shooting people who deserve it demonstrably happens and all the negative consequences of guns don't count, therefore guns must be a net social good. If you personally aren't stuck in this trap, fine. But it's a common fantasy, one as pervasive as "rich people are rich because they work hard" and "I don't see race," and just as impervious to reality. You can't treat fantasies with kid gloves; they don't deserve it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2022 13:43
|
|
|
Harold Fjord posted:You probably start by trying to do a better job defining the problem because while the bolded may look accurate from your perspective, it is not and framing it that way does you no favors among the crowd you allegedly wish to persuade. What part of that do you take issue with? It’s pretty well established at this point that gun ownership increases your risk of dying in a gun-related incident, and does not turn you into the protagonist of a Clint Eastwood movie. Baronash fucked around with this message at 14:19 on Jul 20, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2022 14:11
|
|
|
Statistics don't apply cleanly to people as individuals and insisting that people treat themselves statistically is an absurd fantasy. I was more disagreeing with notion that they look at all those statistics and then just weigh them against how much they want to shoot someone in self-defense, this general approach of using stats to govern your individual choices is not persuasive no matter how much you insist that it's the right approach, and since the statistics don't apply cleanly I don't think it is. Yes people with a history of suicidal ideation should probably not buy guns. But for that same reason that they increase the statistics on one side, people without such history may reasonably conclude that they are more likely to come outok.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2022 14:24
|
|
|
Harold Fjord posted:Statistics don't apply cleanly to people as individuals This is the individualist thinking that pervades gun culture. I am the exception, it's everyone else who's affected by wider trends. The Good Guy With A Gun.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2022 14:32
|
|
|
Cease to Hope posted:I really don't know what to do about the problem that people are more attached to the fantasy of heroically shooting down an assailant than they are to their own lives or their families' lives, let alone the lives of strangers. It seems like an unsolvable problem, sometimes. you don't really, this is an american cultural preference. we love unnecessarily large vehicles, we love surrounding our homes with big lawns, and we love owning firearms to perpetuate the fantasy that at some point we will righteously gun down the criminal horde/the evil government/the nazi death squads Harold Fjord posted:Statistics don't apply cleanly to people as individuals and insisting that people treat themselves statistically is an absurd fantasy. this is why i don't wear a seatbelt, i will simply use my superior reflexes to brace myself against the dashboard in the event of a crash
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2022 14:41
|
|
|
Custom making a seatbelt for my motorcycle because I am a good understander of statistics and contributing factors.Cease to Hope posted:This is the individualist thinking that pervades gun culture. I am the exception, it's everyone else who's affected by wider trends. The Good Guy With A Gun. No this is just reality and basic math. Each individual does not have the same exact odds of outcome as all individuals in aggregate. Insisting that they do makes you look stupid as gently caress on top of ineffective approach to changing their minds
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2022 14:43
|
|
|
Mr. Fall Down Terror posted:you don't really, this is an american cultural preference. we love unnecessarily large vehicles, we love surrounding our homes with big lawns, and we love owning firearms to perpetuate the fantasy that at some point we will righteously gun down the criminal horde/the evil government/the nazi death squads i would've included smoking on that list 25 years ago but here we are. i don't think these fantasies and preferences are immutable truths, even if i can't see a solution. Harold Fjord posted:No this is just reality and basic math. Each individual does not have the same exact odds of outcome as all individuals I'm aggregate. Insisting that they do makes you look stupid as gently caress on top of ineffective approach to changing their minds every single gun owner thinks they are the exception, though.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2022 14:44
|
|
|
Yes. And that's a problem But you don't solve it with incoherent arguments based on bad math.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2022 14:46
|
|
|
"statistics are a lie because individual outcomes can be different in my mind" is a breathtakingly new frontier of goofy internet arguments, gotta applaud this one
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2022 14:50
|
|
|
Mr. Fall Down Terror posted:"statistics are a lie because individual outcomes can be different in my mind" is a breathtakingly new frontier of goofy internet arguments, gotta applaud this one It was a little shocking to see someone reply to "every gun owner thinks they are the exception to the statistics" with "actually I am an exception," I gotta admit.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2022 14:53
|
|
|
If we take more individualized statistics into consideration, men should be banned from owning guns.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2022 14:54
|
|
|
Well you certainly aren't going to fix the issue you claim to want to fix if you insist that lovely math is the way to do it. Don't ask a question if you aren't open to real answers, imo.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2022 14:57
|
|
|
Cease to Hope posted:It was a little shocking to see someone reply to "every gun owner thinks they are the exception to the statistics" with "actually I am an exception," I gotta admit. Who did this?
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2022 14:57
|
|
|
mobby_6kl posted:If we take more individualized statistics into consideration, men should be banned from owning guns. i simply would not murder my wife and family in a fit of rage, so i don't understand what the big deal is with this so called "public health epidemic of intimate partner violence". maybe people need to exercise more personal responsibility? Harold Fjord posted:Well you certainly aren't going to fix the issue you claim to want to fix if you insist that lovely math is the way to do it. Don't ask a question if you aren't open to real answers, imo. so you're really going with "i am the true math understander" here bold. i admire your confidence in yourself Mr. Fall Down Terror fucked around with this message at 15:02 on Jul 20, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2022 14:59
|
|
|
If you don't even have the most basic understanding of confounding statistical factors and the difference between an aggregate of individuals and an individual then you really should probably just shut the gently caress up about how to change anything in reality. You want to persuade people away from guns, you talking dumb poo poo about statistics you don't understand is not going to do it. Harold Fjord fucked around with this message at 15:09 on Jul 20, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2022 15:07
|
|
|
Why are we fighting about math, I haven't seen a single equation. We're still firmly in the public health and psychology wilds here.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2022 15:07
|
|
|
It goes back to this. "why can't people understand themselves the way I understand them, as a faceless statistic"Cease to Hope posted:I really don't know what to do about the problem that people are more attached to the fantasy of heroically shooting down an assailant than they are to their own lives or their families' lives, let alone the lives of strangers. It seems like an unsolvable problem, sometimes. I'm trying to get at, you have to start with people where they are. You can't just wave aggregate stats at people who know those stats are full of confounding favors that don't apply to them and expect them to conclude that they personally exactly fit the population average and should change accordingly . Harold Fjord fucked around with this message at 15:14 on Jul 20, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2022 15:12
|
|
|
Epic High Five posted:Why are we fighting about math, I haven't seen a single equation. We're still firmly in the public health and psychology wilds here. claiming that everyone who disagrees with me is simply too stupid to count to 10 is much easier than accepting the fact that the #1 cause of death for pregnant women in the united states is being murdered by a partner, the majority of which are caused by firearms maybe these women should simply try not becoming a statistic? it is such a cliche Harold Fjord posted:You can't just wave aggregate stats at people who know those stats are full of confounding favors that don't apply to them and expect them to conclude that they personally exactly fit the population average and should change accordingly . i agree with you that evidence based approaches are simply not accepted by people unwilling to confront a truth that they disagree with, yes. this was amply demonstrated by the number of people who refused to get vaccinated against COVID Mr. Fall Down Terror fucked around with this message at 15:17 on Jul 20, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2022 15:14
|
|
|
When did I not "accept" that as a fact? I'm responding to a post about addressing other people, and discussing the perspective of those people. Stop putting dumb poo poo in my mouth I never said
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2022 15:16
|
|
|
Harold Fjord posted:It goes back to this. "why can't people understand themselves the way I understand them, as a faceless statistic" The way I understand gun owners is that their one single shared characteristic, besides guns, is an attitude that the danger isn't real or only applies to other people. (Similar to smoking in that way, albeit with much less "the hazard is real and I welcome it.") It was foolhardy of you to argue that the danger does not apply to you but rather only to other people, but it is helpful to me as an illustrative example. What do you do about a whole group that of individuals who refuse to see their similarity to the group? Once I figure that out, I'll install myself as immortal philosopher-king.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2022 15:19
|
|
|
When did I make that argument? (I did not) I'm trying to explain that aggregate arguments are often not persuasive to individuals and you might need a different tack. A gay man probably isnt very worried about flying into a rage and murdering his pregnant partner. If you are actually trying to find an effective approach and not just own someone for presenting the perspective you think is bad, work on it more. Because it seems like you just want to win against me personally on the internet when I'm here trying to help you understand the problem you say you want to solve, so now I'm gonna stop doing that. Harold Fjord fucked around with this message at 15:23 on Jul 20, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2022 15:20
|
|
|
Harold Fjord posted:When did I make that argument? (I did not) Harold Fjord posted:Statistics don't apply cleanly to people as individuals and insisting that people treat themselves statistically is an absurd fantasy. Do you think your gun ownership poses a danger to yourself or anyone else? I've been operating on the assumption that your answer is "no" and that your statement above is justifying that belief. You also bring up another "confounding" element that isn't confounding at all: gay men aren't any less prone to domestic abuse than heterosexual men, it's just harder to measure because of archaic legal standards. It's always endless special pleading like that. Cease to Hope fucked around with this message at 15:27 on Jul 20, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2022 15:25
|
|
|
Harold Fjord posted:It goes back to this. "why can't people understand themselves the way I understand them, as a faceless statistic" I think you're on the money. Personally, I find statistical evidence like what is being presented to be helpful in figuring out the exact line on guns should be but as you say, people aint statistics. Some folks have genuine and serious concerns for their own safety these days. Right wing violence is on the rise and isn't looking like its going to get better. Targets of this violence are not going to be dissuaded by talking about statistical risk because in their reality owning a gun may actually reduce their chances of getting successfully attacked, or at least give them an option besides "roll over to the mob". Call it a totem or whatever makes folks feel better but I feel that's going to convince precisely zero people who are actually on the chopping block. The risks of private firearm ownership can and often are mitigated/eliminated by the individual. Risk of hatecrimes are largely outside the individual's control. Surely we can understand why people are inclined towards the former these days. One could (correctly) argue that gun bans in the past could have reduced this risk but it didn't happen and now we're at a point where bans are effectively impossible/useless for a lot of reasons. I don't think any kind of nationwide ban is realistic and dems should absolutely stop wasting political capital on it. Surely measures like requiring references for sales, limiting private transfers, dealing with social/econ issues etc are more palatable (and probably more effective).
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2022 15:53
|
|
|
Anchor Wanker posted:I think you're on the money. Personally, I find statistical evidence like what is being presented to be helpful in figuring out the exact line on guns should be but as you say, people aint statistics. This is what makes the fantasy that a gun makes you safer attractive. People feel endangered, and want something that makes them feel safe, so they buy a gun, which does the opposite of making them safer. Or they feel powerless, and want something that makes them feel empowered, and guns do do that, it's just that it only empowers them to scare and hurt people. The concerns are real, the solution is not, and the fantasy papers over the cracks. The gun is keeping me safe, the gun gives me the power I've been denied. Everyone thinks they've appropriately mitigated the risks they take, or else they wouldn't take them, and the fantasy pumps up the value of guns out of proportion to reality and minimizes the risks (and externalities, which we haven't even gotten into). Statistics are useful in showing that the fantasy isn't real, which is useful for actuaries, but people don't adopt fantasies because of dry factual reasons. I don't know how you break the back of that fantasy.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2022 16:12
|
|
|
No one's gonna want to help you work out how to break the back of that fantasy if you attack them as holding that position when they propose to start there. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2022 16:21
|
|
|
Harold Fjord posted:No one's gonna want to help you work out how to break the back of that fantasy if you attack them as holding that position when they propose to start there. Do you think your gun ownership poses a danger to yourself or anyone else?
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2022 16:34
|
|
|
If it wasn't dangerous, I'd have to get one that was
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2022 16:44
|
|
|
Statistics are what matters when determining public policy. I don't see how you could convince someone who thinks "I am the most responsible person on earth, will never let kids or other unauthorized persons handle the gun, have it stolen, pull it out when under the influence or angry or depressed. I will never use it to escalate a situation, and will lways make the perfect fight or flight decision instantly, and when forced to shoot, will have 100% accuracy and not hit any bystanders. When the cops show up, they won't shoot me because I'm clearly To some degree I get it. About 15 years ago my dad was attacked and stabbed and it's easy to imagine that if only he had a gun, he would've been able to defend himself. Buuut realistically? He either wouldn't have drawn it in time (because he was just walking around like normal and not in a war zone), had it taken from him, or, probably more likely, if guns were easily accessible, the attacker would've had a gun as well.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2022 16:46
|
|
|
Yes. The current discussion is not what is the best public policy or way to make it, but how to ever move towards implementation via changing the other side. You got to start with people from where they are. Yelling at me that they are wrong does not change this.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2022 16:49
|
|
|
Harold Fjord posted:Statistics don't apply cleanly to people as individuals and insisting that people treat themselves statistically is an absurd fantasy. I was more disagreeing with notion that they look at all those statistics and then just weigh them against how much they want to shoot someone in self-defense, this general approach of using stats to govern your individual choices is not persuasive no matter how much you insist that it's the right approach, and since the statistics don't apply cleanly I don't think it is. The idea that suicide statistics are somehow being skewed by "people with a history of suicidal ideation" doesn't really make any sense. This is just a variant on the "gun violence won't happen if we don't sell guns to violent people" way of thinking that inspires proposals for weak gun control. Refusing to sell guns to people with a violent criminal record won't stop people with clean records from making their first violent crime a mass shooting. And refusing to sell guns to people with a documented history of suicidal ideation won't do anything to help people who already had guns before they started feeling suicidal ideation. People like to think that they're an exception to the statistics, but the fact of the matter is that they aren't.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2022 16:50
|
|
|
Harold Fjord posted:Yes. The current discussion is not what is the best public policy or way to make it, but how to ever move towards implementation via changing the other side. The fact that you're wrong means you don't have a lot of insight into how to break the fantasy, though, as a subscriber to it. Main Paineframe posted:People like to think that they're an exception to the statistics, but the fact of the matter is that they aren't. Exactly. Everyone is a good guy with a gun until they aren't. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2022 16:51
|
|
|
mobby_6kl posted:Statistics are what matters when determining public policy. yes, but we must employ decorum so that we do not offend the people we need to persuade out of bad thinking look, just because i drink while driving a lot doesn't mean my behavior is dangerous. i've never hit anyone, i'm very careful! the rules shouldn't apply to me! i just like to have a drink from time to time and i have places to be, and if you call me reckless or an alcoholic i will simply ignore you as the shrieking moralist you are
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2022 16:53
|
|
|
Cease to Hope posted:The fact that you're wrong means you don't have a lot of insight into how to break the fantasy, though, as a subscriber to it. I'm not. I'm trying to start from where they are. You clearly care more about jerking off to your self-righteousness than any real discussion (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST) Harold Fjord fucked around with this message at 16:58 on Jul 20, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2022 16:55
|
|
|
An interesting statistic I've never seen posted and I'm going to start looking for is what the likelihood of being used to shoot a person is for any individual firearm.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2022 17:01
|
|
|
I'm sure the people trying to get sick owns off on the person they need to convince will one day change something. I mean hopefully it's actually being good at delivering sick owns, because it's sure as gently caress not going to be changing gun laws in America. Like you can't say "Man how do I change this fantasy?", follow it up with "Yeah but you hold that fantasy, why would I listen to you?", and then act baffled at why things are the way they are. I don't know, maybe it's because you are poo poo at talking to people? e: Like this in particular is a very personal and specific argument. You are asking how to change minds, and when given a perfect example of a mind you want to change, your first instinct is....attack? That's not going to work on anyone. Mulva fucked around with this message at 17:26 on Jul 20, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2022 17:22
|
|
|
Its very much reminding me of talking to votescolders. The best thing you can do for your cause are: 1. donate to a professional PR campaign and 2. stop talking about it
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2022 17:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 00:48 |
|
|
i hate to inform you, but people arguing on the something awful forums has zero impact on public policy. in fact, this is much more likely to be a defensive and childish reaction to being publicly mocked on a discussion forum - "how dare you make fun of me?! your political policies will never be enacted so long as you continue to post like this" and whatnot
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2022 17:26
|
|