The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > Hogan's Alley > Tactics and Training

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old December 6, 2012, 12:02 PM   #126
TheNocturnus
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 29, 2011
Location: Missouri
Posts: 1,093
I love seeing all of the statistics thrown around. They really mean nothing. I have been a victim of armed robbery 3 times in my life, I have been shot at and have narrowly avoided getting pummeled multiple times.

Odds of these things happening all to one person must be astronomical. These things happen more frequently depending on the area you live in or the places you travel to. My wife and I do not live in a bad neighborhood but there is one just a few miles away from our house.
__________________
My EDC:
Gun
Wallet
Brain (Use this one the most)
TheNocturnus is offline  
Old December 6, 2012, 12:19 PM   #127
OldMarksman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 8, 2008
Posts: 2,030
Quote:
Posted by dayman: I don't buy that [(On average, the lifetime chance of a twelve year old being attacked by a violent criminal actor at least once is about 50%)].
I remembered it wrong. The estimated lifetime average likelihood of a twelve year old being injured in a violent crime at least once calculates out to 40%. The likelihood of being attacked at least once is estimated at 83%. The calculations are based on National Crime Statistics annual victimization rates and life-span stats from the National Center for Health Statistics. See this.

That's using some assumptions, one of which is that the probability of victimization in any one year remains constant, which it will not. An older person is less likely than a younger one to go to bars or go to class or work in a quick-shop at night, but he represents and easier victim when he is vulnerable.

Quote:
Without doing the math, I know a lot of people and - outside of the line of duty - none of them has been the victim of a violent crime, maybe I"m forgetting something, but nowhere near 50%.
What has happened to those whom you know proves nothing.

Quote:
Doing the math, if in a given year you have a 0.38% chance of being the victim of a violent crime, you can't simply multiply the odds by the number of years.
Correct.

Quote:
To get a 50% probability of being victimized in an 80 year time frame you'd have to have a live in an area with an 0.86% chance in a given year, or 860 per 100,000. If that's the case, you might want to look for a new place to live.
Not really. Where you live is but one factor. Others include where you work and where you go and when, how physically imposing you are, what you wear, whom you know, how you use situational awareness, and other thing.

Quote:
And obviously you can significantly reduce even those odds by making responsible lifestyle choices - not being a gang member, not mouthing off at bikers in bars, etc.
Yep.

The link also provides some information about household victimizations.
OldMarksman is offline  
Old December 6, 2012, 12:49 PM   #128
Brian Pfleuger
Staff
 
Join Date: June 25, 2008
Location: Central, Southern NY, USA
Posts: 18,791
Quote:
Originally Posted by OldMarksman
I remembered it wrong. The estimated lifetime average likelihood of a twelve year old being injured in a violent crime at least once calculates out to 40%. The likelihood of being attacked at least once is estimated at 83%. The calculations are based on National Crime Statistics annual victimization rates and life-span stats from the National Center for Health Statistics. See this.
Even if we accept that math as valid, this is a good example of why averages tend to be worthless.

I literally don't know a single person who has ever had to defend themselves against a violent crime, with the possible exception of a lady or two who has been a victim of domestic abuse.

Otherwise,

No one.

Not a single person.

There is absolutely no way that 8 out of 10 people that I know have been attacked or 4 out of 10 have been victims of violent crime.

Even if I include school yard fights and other teenage-type fisticuffs, it doesn't come close to 40%, say nothing of 80%.

The only way those numbers could possibly be even remotely close to correct is if there are massive populations of people wherein nearly 100% have been attacked or victims of violent crime.

I find it completely implausible.
__________________
Still happily answering to the call-sign Peetza.
---
The problem, as you so eloquently put it, is choice.
-The Architect
-----
He is no fool who gives what he can not keep to gain what he can not lose.
-Jim Eliott, paraphrasing Philip Henry.
Brian Pfleuger is offline  
Old December 6, 2012, 12:54 PM   #129
hogdogs
Staff In Memoriam
 
Join Date: October 31, 2007
Location: Western Florida panhandle
Posts: 11,069
93.47% of statistics are made up... Just sayin...

Brent
hogdogs is offline  
Old December 6, 2012, 12:56 PM   #130
MLeake
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 15, 2007
Location: Outside KC, MO
Posts: 10,128
Brian, maybe I just have a talent for finding them, but I'd estimate that 3/5 to 2/3 of the women I've dated over the years had at least one incident of molestation as kids or sexual assault or date rape as adults, at least if their stories were to be believed.
MLeake is offline  
Old December 6, 2012, 01:11 PM   #131
Brian Pfleuger
Staff
 
Join Date: June 25, 2008
Location: Central, Southern NY, USA
Posts: 18,791
Quote:
Originally Posted by MLeake
Brian, maybe I just have a talent for finding them, but I'd estimate that 3/5 to 2/3 of the women I've dated over the years had at least one incident of molestation as kids or sexual assault or date rape as adults, at least if their stories were to be believed.
Even if we accept those numbers, the results would be TERRIBLY misleading for the purposes of this type of discussion.

What happened to you when you were 5 really has no bearing on the odds of the guy at the door being an attacker or the concept that going through life unprepared WILL result in your being a victim.

Just like we can take the "80 year" life-span and calculate the odds based on the 0.38% rate.

It's really not relevent, since a fair number of those years are totally outside the concept of self defense.

The numbers would have to be broken down in a way that we could remove the instances of molestation and other things that happen to children. As terrible as they are, there's really no bearing on the day to day danger presented to a typical adult. We'd also have to remove drug dealer, gang violence and similar happenings that aren't real dangers to law-abiding citizens.
__________________
Still happily answering to the call-sign Peetza.
---
The problem, as you so eloquently put it, is choice.
-The Architect
-----
He is no fool who gives what he can not keep to gain what he can not lose.
-Jim Eliott, paraphrasing Philip Henry.
Brian Pfleuger is offline  
Old December 6, 2012, 01:36 PM   #132
MLeake
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 15, 2007
Location: Outside KC, MO
Posts: 10,128
Brian, if we do that...

I've had a knife pulled on me by a road rager, once. I didn't leave my car; he realized that he had not seen, and had run, a stop sign, and put the knife away with the most sheepish grin... but still, he had pulled a knife to make a point, before he got a clue. (I did not shoot him with the .357 I had out of his sight line, below the car window. Worked out well for both of us. He never knew, but that's just fine.)

I've intervened in what I thought was a mugging, only to have it turn out to be domestic assault in public between a homeless couple.

My ex intervened in a domestic assault at a public beach, and ended up stalked by the aggressor and a friend of his. (Guns and dogs are good.)

My best friend had to draw a .357 to fend off carjackers in Orlando.

A squadronmate killed a would-be carjacker at an I-10 rest stop in Louisiana.

A former flight student of mine was murdered in a random drive by shooting near Whidbey Island, by three losers who wanted to see what shooting a random stranger would be like.

I could go on, and actually quite a bit; most events would not be in the home, but some would. Point is, though, that in all cases a decent, law-abiding person who had not gone anywhere unseemly - the homeless domestic I mistook for a mugging took place in front of the Federal Building in downtown Orlando, where I was going for a meeting with US Navy officer recruiters at the time - had crime thrust upon him or her.

So, while you don't know any, I know many. The averages may not be so skewed as you propose.
MLeake is offline  
Old December 6, 2012, 01:46 PM   #133
Brian Pfleuger
Staff
 
Join Date: June 25, 2008
Location: Central, Southern NY, USA
Posts: 18,791
If you could name 50, how many people do you know, and what percentage would it be?

It can't possibly even approach 40% of people you know, say nothing of the 0 out of how ever many I know.

I'm not saying there is no violence. I'm saying it doesn't remotely approach a number of even 40%, say nothing of 80% of people.

There's no possible way.

I've never known anyone who was carjacked, or attempted. In fact, I don't recall have ever seen a report of such on the news anywhere in the area.

I've never known anyone who suffered a home-invasion, or again heard of it happening anywhere around here, that wasn't directly drug related.

I know quite a few police officers and, while they spend an inordinate amount of their time dealing directly with violence, they also spend almost all of that time in about a 2 block radius in the city and in the same mobile home parks in the country. (I'm not being derogatory, that's where it happens around here.) In other words, it's the same people, over and over and over again.
There might be 500 instances of domestic assault or other fights in our one city of about 15,000 people in one year, but it's the same 50 people doing it, over and over again.
__________________
Still happily answering to the call-sign Peetza.
---
The problem, as you so eloquently put it, is choice.
-The Architect
-----
He is no fool who gives what he can not keep to gain what he can not lose.
-Jim Eliott, paraphrasing Philip Henry.
Brian Pfleuger is offline  
Old December 6, 2012, 01:54 PM   #134
OldMarksman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 8, 2008
Posts: 2,030
Quote:
Posted by Brian Pfleuger: Even if we accept that math as valid, this is a good example of why averages tend to be worthless.
Averages have very little if any value except in risk pool calculations.

The point of the math is that one cannot take an annual statistic and draw any conclisions about risk over an extended period.

Quote:
I literally don't know a single person who has ever had to defend themselves against a violent crime, with the possible exception of a lady or two who has been a victim of domestic abuse.

Otherwise,

No one.

Not a single person.
To the extent that you have known me in cyberspace for several years, that's not true. It's just that you didn't know it.

I was attacked by several persons with clubs at a school event in a "safe" community in 1959. Being a fast runner, I escaped. Several girls were sexually assaulted, however.

I have used firearms to defend myself against violent burglars on three occasions, without firing. All occurred in good neighborhoods.

Last year, I prevented an obvious armed robbery in the making in a store in a very safe neighborhood, simply by noticing the suspicious actions of two persons. As a result, no one was victimized.

Quote:
There is absolutely no way that 8 out of 10 people that I know have been attacked or 4 out of 10 have been victims of violent crime.
Whether one actually knows someone who has been victimized or knows about it has nothing to do with whether crimes have occurred. I had a distant cousin, an elderly female, who was stabbed while walking home in an upscale neighborhood before dark many years ago. She survived. I once had a co-worker who was beaten and cut with a bottle, probably under questionable circumstances. Someone else who worked in the same building was murdered. A coworker was convicted of murdering a judge two decades ago.

But the vast majority of violent criminal attacks that I know of involved people whom I did not know. Those include two persons carjacked in a "safe place" days apart, witnessed by my physician's wife; another car-jacking victim the following week; a young lady who was murdered by the suspects in one of the car-jackings in a so called safe place weeks later; and a recent victim of attempted sexual assault who was jogging on a pedestrian trail.

Quote:
The only way those numbers could possibly be even remotely close to correct is if there are massive populations of people wherein nearly 100% have been attacked or victims of violent crime.
If you do some modeling, you will realize that that is not true.

Quote:
I find it completely implausible.
One has to separate the subjective from the objective and what one is personally aware of from other incidents.

I have friends who routinely go to certain restaurants and other establishments who have never been victimized and who are not personally aware of anyone who has. They feel very safe indeed. But I know law enforcement officers who know the relevant facts who will not go to the same places when off-duty, and they carry guns.
OldMarksman is offline  
Old December 6, 2012, 01:59 PM   #135
TheNocturnus
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 29, 2011
Location: Missouri
Posts: 1,093
@Brian

As I stated in my earlier post, it all matters where you live and where you go. You may not know anyone that has been a victim and I am happy for you.

I know of plenty victims including myself. I have a cousin that was shot with a 12 gauge shotgun while trying to sell his car. I have another cousin that was car jacked at gunpoint. I knew a guy that was shot and killed over a parking spot. Know a guy that was beaten and robbed in front of a 7-11.
__________________
My EDC:
Gun
Wallet
Brain (Use this one the most)
TheNocturnus is offline  
Old December 6, 2012, 02:03 PM   #136
Brian Pfleuger
Staff
 
Join Date: June 25, 2008
Location: Central, Southern NY, USA
Posts: 18,791
Quote:
As I stated in my earlier post, it all matters where you live and where you go. You may not know anyone that has been a victim and I am happy for you.

I know of plenty victims including myself. I have a cousin that was shot with a 12 gauge shotgun while trying to sell his car. I have another cousin that was car jacked at gunpoint. I know a guy that was shot and killed over a parking spot. Know a guy that was beaten and robbed in front of a 7-11.
That's my whole point.

It goes back to the post to which I was originally responding, wherein the poster said that if you go through life not paying attention "you WILL be a victim".

It's nonsense.

We can go back and forth about who knows how many for the next 100 years.

Point is, even if the 80% number is correct, you still have a 20% chance of NOT being a victim.

I think the 80% is ridiculously high, but even if it's not, 80% is a long way from a guarantee.

That's the point. Most people WILL NOT be victims, whether or not they pay attention to anything.

Statements like "you WILL be" robbed, a victim, whatever, are just silly.
__________________
Still happily answering to the call-sign Peetza.
---
The problem, as you so eloquently put it, is choice.
-The Architect
-----
He is no fool who gives what he can not keep to gain what he can not lose.
-Jim Eliott, paraphrasing Philip Henry.
Brian Pfleuger is offline  
Old December 6, 2012, 02:12 PM   #137
dayman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 18, 2011
Location: The Woods
Posts: 1,140
I printed out the study - I was thinking it might be something I could give my Stats students to look over - but it doesn't really detail any of the input data, or methodology for computing his final numbers. It just describes the numbers he presents.
I suspect either the period he were looking at ('76-'84) was much more violent than average, or they were using some unsound methods. But, again, it's hard to say without looking at his raw data or methodology.

As Samuel Clemens (I think) said: "there are lies, damned lies, and statistics". Statistics are far more subject to manipulation than most any other form of mathematics, and it would be in the DOJ's interest to paint a pretty dark picture for funding's sake - much like they release studies that show how gun control reduces crime.
__________________
si vis pacem para bellum
dayman is offline  
Old December 6, 2012, 02:12 PM   #138
TheNocturnus
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 29, 2011
Location: Missouri
Posts: 1,093
Quote:
That's the point. Most people WILL NOT be victims, whether or not they pay attention to anything.

Statements like "you WILL be" robbed, a victim, whatever, are just silly.
Yeah I tend to agree with you there. Most people will not be a victim of violent crime. Sucks for those of us that have though. The point of this thread was just to see if there was anything I or my wife could have done differently. I think some great ideas were brought up and I will follow through with them.

This thread has gone off on a tangent and I don't really see it needing to continue unless you guys feel more relevant information can be added.
__________________
My EDC:
Gun
Wallet
Brain (Use this one the most)
TheNocturnus is offline  
Old December 6, 2012, 02:46 PM   #139
Brian Pfleuger
Staff
 
Join Date: June 25, 2008
Location: Central, Southern NY, USA
Posts: 18,791
Somebody should check my math, but Detroit is the most dangerous city in America, with a 2137 per 100,000 rate of violent crime.

If I did the math right, that comes out to an 82% chance in an 80 year life.

What does that say about an 80% chance nationwide, where the average (which includes Detroit!) is a bit under 400? Not even 1/5th as high?!

Tells me that the nationwide average is no more than 20%, tops.

So, somebody with 3/5th or 2/3s of everyone they know that's been attacked, knows some people who are astonishingly unlucky, live in some incredibly dangerous places or make astoundingly stupid choices.
__________________
Still happily answering to the call-sign Peetza.
---
The problem, as you so eloquently put it, is choice.
-The Architect
-----
He is no fool who gives what he can not keep to gain what he can not lose.
-Jim Eliott, paraphrasing Philip Henry.
Brian Pfleuger is offline  
Old December 6, 2012, 04:25 PM   #140
OldMarksman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 8, 2008
Posts: 2,030
Quote:
Posted by Brian Pfleuger: I've never known anyone who was carjacked, or attempted.
Nor have I, that I know of.

But I never knew that a cousin had been stabbed years before until I happened to ask what had led to their moving out of town. And very few people whom I know happen to be aware that I have defended myself against violent home invaders on more than one occasion.

Quote:
In fact, I don't recall have ever seen a report of such on the news anywhere in the area.
I have--about half a dozen times since June.

Quote:
I've never known anyone who suffered a home-invasion, or again heard of it happening anywhere around here, that wasn't directly drug related.
Regarding both, I have. Perhaps the perps needed money to pay back a drug dealer, but the victims were innocent, and I wouldn't call them directly drug related.

Crime occurrence is not a homogenous phenomenon. If you look at crime maps, the pattern appears more "marbleized;" no large area is immune, but crime seems to occur more often in shopping areas or entertainment areas near highways where ease of ingress and egress brings mobile undesirables to and from the places where the victims are.

The other issue is whether the crimes are reported. In many instances they are not. The Koppel study makes use of large-sample interview data that are intended to include both reported and unreported crime.

In 1984, I happened to witness a youth knock another off his bicycle with a bludgeon blow to the head directly outside the New York City City Hall, and ride away on the victim's bicycle. While we sat at the traffic light, the victim staggered to his feet, climbed on the bicycle that had been left by the attacker, and rode away. Do you think that crime was ever incorporated into the official statistics?

Quote:
Most people WILL NOT be victims, whether or not they pay attention to anything.
That is certainly true on average, and peoples' exposure will vary according to areas in which they live, work, or attend school, circumstance, daily schedules, occupations, lifestyles, physical size, gender, and other things.

Quote:
Tells me that the nationwide average is no more than 20%, tops.
With all due respect, that conclusion seems much less scientific than the estimates contained in the BJS Report.
OldMarksman is offline  
Old December 7, 2012, 01:02 AM   #141
pax
Staff
 
Join Date: May 16, 2000
Location: Washington state
Posts: 6,983
Long way off topic, time to shut it down.

Thanks for the good discussion, everyone.

pax
__________________
Kathy Jackson
My personal website: Cornered Cat
pax is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:56 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.13211 seconds with 8 queries