Quiet, Almost too quiet

Paul in Saudi · May 7, 2014

In 2013, the United States suffered 35 mass killings (4 or more dead in one "emotional event" with a gun, shooter counts). Call it something like one every ten days. So far in 2014 we have had only eight such events. The last qualifying mass shooting shooting was the Fort Hood on 2 April. Since then, nothing.

Going by last year's pace we "should have had" about 11 mass killings this far into the year. Perhaps this year will have fewer such crimes than last year. Perhaps the pace will pick up.

We will see.

nc-1701 · May 7, 2014

8 vs 11? That sound like it's well within normal variance, which you would expect to be high for something like this?

Paul in Saudi · May 7, 2014

I suppose 11 would be high. But look the temporal varation

2014 Mass Killing in USA

1) 16 January 2014 Spanish Fork UT, 5 killed
2) 3 February 2014 Cypress TX, 4 killed
3) 6 February 2014 Defiance OH, 4 dead
4) 20 February 2014 Indianapolis IN, 4 killed
5) 20 February 2014 Alturas, CA, 4 killed
6) 24 February 2014 Glade Springs VA 4 killed
7) 26 February 2014 Oak Lawn IL, 4 killed.
8) 2 April 2014 Fort Hood, TX, 4 killed

Total Incidents 8
Total killed 33

Do not make too much of two events on one day. That happened last year too (29 October). But look how insanely bloody February was. Last February had only two mass killings. (October on the other hand, had four events last year.)

I am unschooled on statistics. Perhaps this all quite normal. Perhaps the gruesome weather we had earlier this year had some impact on all this.

nc-1701 · May 7, 2014

Yeah, you should expect them to happen more or less randomly. There's no particular reason they should (or should not) cluster as they are basically independent events (there may be some copycat elements, effects from weather, etc.) From a statistical standpoint it would be more surprising if we didn't see some clustering and random dry spells.

BenitoChavez · May 7, 2014

You're trying to extrapolate a single data point (# of shootings in 2014) from a single data point (# of shooting in 2013). If the # of shootings per year is highly variable you're going to get wildly different numbers from year to year. It would be better to look at a larger sample size, like the # of shooting in each of the past 10 years, and try to extract any trends from that data to see if this year is somehow an outlier.

schlaufuchs · May 7, 2014

Paul in Saudi said:
Perhaps the pace will pick up.

This is not how regressing to the mean works.

Antilogic · May 7, 2014

nc-1701 said:
Yeah, you should expect them to happen more or less randomly. There's no particular reason they should (or should not) cluster as they are basically independent events (there may be some copycat elements, effects from weather, etc.) From a statistical standpoint it would be more surprising if we didn't see some clustering and random dry spells.

This.

And let's hope that despite our silly permissiveness of mass murdering, fewer events take place.

Paul in Saudi · May 7, 2014

Over the years crime, gun crime, murders and mass murders have all declined. Odd people feel unsafe when the numbers point the other direction.

What has increased is the unofficial category of large mass killings. That is a dozen or more killed by a single shooter in one emotional event, with the shooter counting toward the talley. The first of these happened in the 1940s in New Jersey. Since then the pace has picked up and looking at the trend line we might expect one of these to happen every two or three years.

Antilogic · May 7, 2014

Paul in Saudi said:
Over the years crime, gun crime, murders and mass murders have all declined. Odd people feel unsafe when the numbers point the other direction.

What has increased is the unofficial category of large mass killings. That is a dozen or more killed by a single shooter in one emotional event, with the shooter counting toward the talley. The first of these happened in the 1940s in New Jersey. Since then the pace has picked up and looking at the trend line we might expect one of these to happen every two or three years.

The number of bodies, though, is still measured in the ten thousand to hundred thousand range per year (obviously depending on method, intent, perpetrators, whether suicides and wounded are counted, etc.).

schlaufuchs · May 7, 2014

Antilogic said:
The number of bodies, though, is still measured in the ten thousand to hundred thousand range per year (obviously depending on method, intent, perpetrators, whether suicides and wounded are counted, etc.).

Also Chicago and New Orleans and Oakland still exist.

Core Imposter · May 7, 2014

2010 Date on US deaths:

Number of deaths for leading causes of death:
•Heart disease: 597,689
•Cancer: 574,743
•Chronic lower respiratory diseases: 138,080
•Stroke (cerebrovascular diseases): 129,476
•Accidents (unintentional injuries): 120,859
•Alzheimer's disease: 83,494
•Diabetes: 69,071
•Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome, and nephrosis: 50,476
•Influenza and Pneumonia: 50,097
•Intentional self-harm (suicide): 38,364

My rough estimate for the probability of eventual human mortality: 100%

Why do we worry about gun deaths so much?

Edit: Oh, I remember, politics. Specifically the liberal politics of increasing centralized power by reducing liberty.

BenitoChavez · May 7, 2014

Core Imposter said:
Why do we worry about gun deaths so much?

I would say its because its (in theory) entirely preventable and not as strongly correlated to living a long time, unlike many of the other causes you listed.

Antilogic · May 7, 2014

Core Imposter said:
My rough estimate for the probability of eventual human mortality: 100%

So why do anything besides sit around and jack off?

Tee Kay · May 7, 2014

Core Imposter said:
My rough estimate for the probability of eventual human mortality: 100%

Why do we worry about gun deaths so much?

Edit: Oh, I remember, politics. Specifically the liberal politics of increasing centralized power by reducing liberty.

I take it you're a-okay on abortion then.

Light Cleric · May 7, 2014

Antilogic said:
So why do anything besides sit around and jack off?

Now you're getting it!

Gori the Grey · May 7, 2014

Core Imposter said:
Why do we worry about gun deaths so much?

Edit: Oh, I remember, politics. Specifically the liberal politics of increasing centralized power by reducing liberty.

I don't see how politics matters. Whether you're a liberal trying to prevent mass killings or a conservative worried about the jackbooted thugs of the centralized power, in both cases, your approach is driven by "worry about gun deaths." In the one case, actual; in the other, hypothetical.

peter grimes · May 7, 2014

Paul in Saudi said:
I am unschooled on statistics. Perhaps this all quite normal. Perhaps the gruesome weather we had earlier this year had some impact on all this.

I read a great book about statistics called "The Drunkard's Walk". A truly random flip of a coin will result in stretches of various length with nothing but heads and equally long stretches of nothing but tails. Human intuition seeks agency behind a perceived pattern. But indeed the pattern we perceive is a artifact of our wetware, not inherent in the flipping.

Humans naturally Stat badly.

warpus · May 7, 2014

Core Imposter said:
2010 Date on US deaths:

Number of deaths for leading causes of death:
Heart disease: 597,689
Cancer: 574,743
Chronic lower respiratory diseases: 138,080
Stroke (cerebrovascular diseases): 129,476
Accidents (unintentional injuries): 120,859
Alzheimer's disease: 83,494
Diabetes: 69,071
Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome, and nephrosis: 50,476
Influenza and Pneumonia: 50,097
Intentional self-harm (suicide): 38,364

My rough estimate for the probability of eventual human mortality: 100%

Why do we worry about gun deaths so much?

Edit: Oh, I remember, politics. Specifically the liberal politics of increasing centralized power by reducing liberty.

Yeah, stupid liberals! Why do they worry about terrorism so much? I don't even see it on your list.

Core Imposter · May 7, 2014

warpus said:
Yeah, stupid liberals! Why do they worry about terrorism so much? I don't even see it on your list.

Well, since you brought it up I didn't support the invasion of Iraq nor do I support the wholesale use of drone attacks. Both of those are neocon (=liberal) blunders.

Goodfella · May 7, 2014

Core Imposter said:
Why do we worry about gun deaths so much?

Edit: Oh, I remember, politics. Specifically the liberal politics of increasing centralized power by reducing liberty.

No, it's because there's something infinitely more horrifying about 7 year olds being shot to death than old people dying of cancer.

Quiet, Almost too quiet

Emperor

bombombedum

Emperor

bombombedum

Elderly Tortoise

Break My Heart

--

Emperor

--

Break My Heart

Deity

Elderly Tortoise

--

Three days sober

ElCee/LC/El Cid

The Poster

...

In pork I trust

Deity

Showing results for

Similar threads