Thread: Pondering......

Originally Posted by Bruno

Yet despite the absence of guns, our violent crime rate and murder rate is 1/3 of yours.

Could it be the coticules ?

Kidding aside, we have a considerably larger population unless you're figuring per capita. Add to that our history. In the USA we won our freedom with guns. We defended ourselves and expanded our boundaries through wilderness areas with guns. From the pre revolutionary war days, through the Indian wars and the expansion that became the 'wild' west we have a history of rugged individualism and guns.

Europe suffered two brutal wars on their home soil. I suspect that was enough violence to last many generations.

Originally Posted by earcutter

You think that's a kind of violence begets violence thing?

No way! Violence begetting violence sounds to me like some freaky aussie stuff, way past the slippery slope of incest and sodomy.

Begetting (and/in violence?) should be reserved as something special between one man and one woman (at a time), as it was intended (or has been back in the old days of our ancestors).

Originally Posted by JimmyHAD

In the USA we won our freedom with guns. We defended ourselves and expanded our boundaries through wilderness areas with guns. From the pre revolutionary war days, through the Indian wars and the expansion that became the 'wild' west we have a history of rugged individualism and guns.

Europe suffered two brutal wars on their home soil. I suspect that was enough violence to last many generations.

But these two arguments are mutually exclusive

That would argue that Europe has had a bit too much violence, and despite all the guns US hasn't had enough yet. May be another war over guns? I have a hunch it would be won by those with the bigger guns, which won't be the liberals. Unless the liberals who have much fewer private guns happen to be in charge of the government ones. I think I've already heard this somewhere

Originally Posted by gugi

Fear, not I am not afraid of a sexy face even with a rose!

What about the entropy of a gaussian distribution being the logarithm of its variance? I am pretty sure it is statistical, but is it a fact?

Secondly, I postulate that the universe is gaussian, and if you don't accept this as a statistical fact, you better come to the land of easy guns and defend your position with a roo sack or whatever you use down there

All these things are mathematical assumptions or definitional. They've got nothing to do with statistics beyond the fact that they share the underlying probability theory.

To my mind the only real "truth" is probability theory, in the philosophical sense. Pragmatically, probability and measure theory suffers from the same problems that much of classical mathematics suffers from - it is axiomatic, and today's "so evident that it is taken as true without question" is tomorrow's "laughably naive assumptions".

James.

Jimmy that was put very politely..
Myself I would have said,, The difference between a Subject and a Citizen is the weapon in their hand..

Be it a gun (today) or a sword (yesteryears) it is deeply ingrained in many American's psyche that without the 2nd Amendment we become Subjects it really doesn't make any difference whether it is true or not...

Originally Posted by Jimbo

All these things are mathematical assumptions or definitional. They've got nothing to do with statistics beyond the fact that they share the underlying probability theory.

To my mind the only real "truth" is probability theory, in the philosophical sense. Pragmatically, probability and measure theory suffers from the same problems that much of classical mathematics suffers from - it is axiomatic, and today's "so evident that it is taken as true without question" is tomorrow's "laughably naive assumptions".

So, you're saying it's all just another 'theory'

I think I would simply retort like Pilate "What is truth?" and go out

I just watched an historical documentary about Abraham Lincoln. It seems to me that guns were necessary to win the war against vampires in the US. And axes tipped with silver.

Now that the vampires have all left and gone to Hollywood to make television series, perhaps there is no need for guns anymore (or at least no need for guns outside the sets of Twighlight, Vampire Diaries, and True Blood - you are more than welcome to take your guns and mow down the cast of those shows if you like).

James.

I find it funny that people (left or right) believe that taking away guns would solve this violence. If someone wanted to commit this level of evil, how would a law against guns prevent him/her (doubt her though) from doing so? In that thinking, that would mean we don't have illegal drugs in the US? The best thing to do is fight fire with fire, put armed guards at every school. It wouldn't stop a crazy person from trying to murder helpless people, but it would either eliminate or drastically reduce the body count. I also agree that the sensationalist media should not idolize the attacker.

It ain't Vampires, it is Zombies that we need Assault rifles for Duuuuuuhuhhhh

Originally Posted by mhenson

I find it funny that people (left or right) believe that taking away guns would solve this violence. If someone wanted to commit this level of evil, how would a law against guns prevent him/her (doubt her though) from doing so? In that thinking, that would mean we don't have illegal drugs in the US? The best thing to do is fight fire with fire, put armed guards at every school. It wouldn't stop a crazy person from trying to murder helpless people, but it would either eliminate or drastically reduce the body count. I also agree that the sensationalist media should not idolize the attacker.

Just a thought - but I have lived in places where many institutions got armed guards. It wasn't long before every institution and location that had any wealth had armed guards!

Was it a police state? Nope. Did it make you feel any safer? Nope. It sucks living someplace that has armed guards everywhere! Absolutely sucks!