|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Today's Posts | Search |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
January 15, 2009, 10:44 AM | #76 | ||
Junior member
Join Date: January 24, 2005
Location: SW Louisiana
Posts: 2,289
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
January 15, 2009, 10:47 AM | #77 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 27, 2007
Location: Texas
Posts: 932
|
Quote:
This is a quite common mistake for people to make about statistics; even people who have had training and should know better. It is very common, for example, for physicians (most of whom have had some training in statistics) to quote statistics on medications and procedures in such a way as to communicate to the patient that: Because a certain medication/procedure has been shown to be effective in 78% of cases, then, should the patient choose this medication/procedure, she has a 78% chance of success. Not so, of course. In fact, no probability value for success/failure (in this one case) can be assigned with any confidence. I suppose a person could be excused for saying something like; “I think you’ve got a pretty good chance of success here” (not mathematically sound, but excusable). Back to the main point; while statistics can be useful in the general sense of preparation for the average occurrence, it would be a serious error to depend upon them to predict how a particular situation will develop, let alone how it will work out in the end. Stay safe and let your statistic be counted in the alive and breathing set. Best, Will
__________________
Show me the data |
|
January 15, 2009, 10:47 AM | #78 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 20,064
|
There can be a tiger in your house. A few years ago, San Antonio had a major flood. Just a few miles from me, it washed out the fences on an animal rescue preserve. The lion got out. It ate the ostrich and then wandered down the road. It's distance and path was not in our direction. However, if it had chosen to walk in another direction, it would have reached our house.
True, it would have had quite a few other houses to choose from. Years, ago - my mother-in-law moved into a neighborhood where some dirt bag kept a lion in the backyard as a pet. Thus, I do worry about large predator attacks and plan accordingly. Ok - one problem with this debate is that some of you (no offense) really don't understand statistical methodology usage. I keep seeing the error of planning as if the central tendency is guaranteed to happen and not understand confidence intervals and the various errors / risks associated with it. It's very easy - what value to you give to the extremes in planning?
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc. - Aux Armes, Citoyens |
January 15, 2009, 10:59 AM | #79 | ||||
Junior member
Join Date: January 24, 2005
Location: SW Louisiana
Posts: 2,289
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
||||
January 15, 2009, 11:10 AM | #80 | ||
Junior member
Join Date: January 24, 2005
Location: SW Louisiana
Posts: 2,289
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
January 15, 2009, 11:15 AM | #81 | ||||
Senior Member
Join Date: March 31, 2005
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 1,775
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
For instance I have heard the statistic used that one in 200 people will need a gun. When I investigated further I found that statistic was not really true. That number comes from the UCS which says that 1 in 200 people out of the total population will be assaulted. But that number is misleading to apply to everyone as the poster did. It didn't take into account a whole lot of variables such as who really gets assaulted. Sometimes it is the same person many times because they live with an abusive husband or in a bad neighborhood on and on. I think I'll stick with training and some acknowledged experts who might even use some statistics BUT you know what they mean and apply them by common sense.
__________________
"God and the Soldier we adore, in time of trouble but not before. When the danger's past and the wrong been righted, God is forgotten and the Soldier slighted." Anonymous Soldier. |
||||
January 15, 2009, 11:26 AM | #82 |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 28, 2004
Posts: 666
|
Grandfather
My grandfather would say, "the first step in any scientific investigation is to get your head out of your ass". Everyone would chuckle, and somehow I got the sense that everyone knew what he meant.
|
January 15, 2009, 11:42 AM | #83 | |||
Junior member
Join Date: January 24, 2005
Location: SW Louisiana
Posts: 2,289
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
As I've said before, I find it strange that so many in the world of guns seem to think that lack of knowledge is a good thing when it comes to DGU planning and response. Last edited by David Armstrong; January 15, 2009 at 02:53 PM. |
|||
January 15, 2009, 12:28 PM | #84 |
Staff
Join Date: April 13, 2000
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 41,383
|
As far as I'm concerned, there's really only one important rule in a self-defense situation.
Do everything needed to survive. |
January 15, 2009, 01:00 PM | #85 |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 14, 2004
Posts: 283
|
I like to cc my S&W 50 cal, cause everyone else is making predictions based on the assumption that I'll carry something sensible. So, I can shoot thru armor, most bullet proof glass, can put down a lion, and can use the muzzle blast as a flamethrower if I need to clear any tunnels.
Just kidding --thanks JohnSA for the explanation of the bucket o dice. That was really bugging me but I didn't know how to say it. I really just carry a 9mm, six shot kahr, and only at night or when going to bars. That's my read from the "stats" I've mentally collected over the years...that is, all the fights I have witnessed have been in bars, and the only times I have been threatened were at night. Stats help us, but they can mislead too. Most folks twist and crush stats to fit the notions they already have. People are just like that, but in the end, math doesn't lie, and inductive logic can be very useful. (90% of the folks who tried this drug died, but the rest were healed. So I'll probably pass on this drug unless I have a 100% chance of dying without it.) I play poker and make all kinds of decisions based on math, and based on patterns, such as repeated behaviors (odds and stats). Any night I might loose, but over the long run I'm a winner. That's because I respect and use math and observation...that is stats. |
January 15, 2009, 04:26 PM | #86 | ||||||
Senior Member
Join Date: March 31, 2005
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 1,775
|
Well David, I thought I was on your ignore list I guess you "changed your mind" To your points.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
"God and the Soldier we adore, in time of trouble but not before. When the danger's past and the wrong been righted, God is forgotten and the Soldier slighted." Anonymous Soldier. |
||||||
January 15, 2009, 05:12 PM | #87 |
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: June 25, 2008
Location: Austin, CO
Posts: 19,578
|
Statistics can be accurate and not applicable at the same time.
Take the "1 in 200" stat as an example. The problem with that number is that it is all-inclusive. It is ENTIRELY accurate that only 1 in 200 of ALL THE PEOPLE WHO CARRY in the ENTIRE COUNTRY will ever need their guns. What that number fails to do however is take into account regional variations. In my area, there is probably a 1 in 10,000 chance of ever needing my gun. In Portland, OR, especially right now, there might be a 1 in 10 chance. The other problem is that we very often get no information except the "average", usually the "mean". While that information may be helpful, in and of itself there is no way of knowing what it tells us. Look at this example: I have a set of 500 numbers with an average of 500. What sort of distribution do those numbers occupy? You have NO WAY of knowing without additional information. I could have 499 "1's" and 1 "249,501" and the average would be 500. I could have 500 "500's" and the average would still be 500. Much helpful information, like Standard Deviation and Median, are left out of the information available to the public because, frankly, most people wouldn't have the foggiest idea what it meant anyway. Why am I talking about this on a gun forum? I forget now, but it's interesting.
__________________
Nobody plans to screw up their lives... ...they just don't plan not to. -Andy Stanley |
January 15, 2009, 05:34 PM | #88 |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 15, 2007
Location: Illinois
Posts: 3,746
|
"I may say that this is the greatest factor -- the way in which the expedition is equipped -- the way in which every difficulty is foreseen, and precautions taken for meeting or avoiding it. Victory awaits him who has everything in order -- luck, people call it. Defeat is certain for him who has neglected to take the necessary precautions in time; this is called bad luck."
--from The South Pole, by Roald Amundsen.
__________________
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms."- Thomas Jefferson ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ (>_<) |
January 15, 2009, 05:53 PM | #89 |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 31, 2005
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 1,775
|
Hey nate!
Roald made it to the South Pole but Robert Falcon Scott died trying.
__________________
"God and the Soldier we adore, in time of trouble but not before. When the danger's past and the wrong been righted, God is forgotten and the Soldier slighted." Anonymous Soldier. |
January 15, 2009, 06:36 PM | #90 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 20,064
|
Ahem, I have been talking about not assuming central tendency always happens, distributional shape, cut offs and the various errors from such, since we started talking about statistics.
So your point, Peetzakilla is well taken. BTW, did you know that the NRA had/has folks trained in the social sciences that look at the gun research. They even go to the meetings where such is presented and raise criticisms.
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc. - Aux Armes, Citoyens |
January 15, 2009, 07:00 PM | #91 | |
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: June 25, 2008
Location: Austin, CO
Posts: 19,578
|
Quote:
__________________
Nobody plans to screw up their lives... ...they just don't plan not to. -Andy Stanley |
|
January 15, 2009, 07:56 PM | #92 | ||||||
Junior member
Join Date: January 24, 2005
Location: SW Louisiana
Posts: 2,289
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
As my dear Mother has been known to say, "Ignorance is bliss" and for whatever reason way too many folks in the gunworld have way too much bliss. |
||||||
January 15, 2009, 08:42 PM | #93 | ||||||||
Senior Member
Join Date: March 31, 2005
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 1,775
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
"God and the Soldier we adore, in time of trouble but not before. When the danger's past and the wrong been righted, God is forgotten and the Soldier slighted." Anonymous Soldier. |
||||||||
January 15, 2009, 08:52 PM | #94 |
Junior member
Join Date: October 22, 2008
Posts: 416
|
When I started this thread, I didnt mean to discuss complex statistical math or formulas.
My simple point is that if you do something enough times then the improbable becomes probable. The more traffic stops a police officer makes then the more probable that they will get attacked for example. That was my original point. |
January 15, 2009, 08:59 PM | #95 | |
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: June 25, 2008
Location: Austin, CO
Posts: 19,578
|
Quote:
Let's say that the odds of an attack are 1 in 10,000, just as an example. Statistically, each and every stop has those very same odds. If the officer has made 9,999 stops, is he guaranteed to be attacked on the next one? Nope. The odds are still 1 in 10,000. If you had 4 officers that had made 40,000 stops you could expect 4 attacks in those stops. Those attacks could have all been on the same officer or 1 each or any other combination. The part of your statement that is correct is that every stop has a small chance of resulting in an attack. Therefore, if the officer keeps making stops forever he will eventually be attacked. However, there is never any way of predicting which stop will result in an attack. The improbable NEVER becomes probable. Having a rare event happen doesn't make it not rare. If you have a 1: 100 million chance of winning the lottery, and you do win, it was not suddenly "probable" that you would win. You just got really lucky being the "1" and not the "99,999,999"
__________________
Nobody plans to screw up their lives... ...they just don't plan not to. -Andy Stanley |
|
January 16, 2009, 06:06 PM | #96 | |||||||
Junior member
Join Date: January 24, 2005
Location: SW Louisiana
Posts: 2,289
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
|||||||
January 16, 2009, 06:30 PM | #97 | ||||||||
Senior Member
Join Date: March 31, 2005
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 1,775
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
"God and the Soldier we adore, in time of trouble but not before. When the danger's past and the wrong been righted, God is forgotten and the Soldier slighted." Anonymous Soldier. |
||||||||
January 16, 2009, 06:58 PM | #98 | ||||||||
Junior member
Join Date: January 24, 2005
Location: SW Louisiana
Posts: 2,289
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
||||||||
January 16, 2009, 07:01 PM | #99 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 31, 2005
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 1,775
|
Quote:
__________________
"God and the Soldier we adore, in time of trouble but not before. When the danger's past and the wrong been righted, God is forgotten and the Soldier slighted." Anonymous Soldier. |
|
January 20, 2009, 12:53 AM | #100 |
Staff
Join Date: February 12, 2001
Location: DFW Area
Posts: 24,975
|
I should'a stayed on vacation...
__________________
Do you know about the TEXAS State Rifle Association?
|
|
|