Armed Citizen analysis

Forest / Trees

If it is real, and it happened, it is data. Even anecdotes are date. Even in plural.

There is no bad data, (except that which is clearly false), what we are missing here is that its not the data in error, it is the CONCLUSIONS you are drawning from the data.

The Armed Citizen is a fine example of data. The events are real. But to assume that the data in the Armed Citizen is comprehensive, and shows accurate percentages of all possible outcomes is rediculous. Its a bad conclusion, and anything drawn from it will also be equally (or even more) flawed.

Perhaps it is a symptom of our modern era, with its obsession on statistics, but there are a lot of things in this world for which quantifiable data simply does not, and cannot exist.

Look at the number of times a crime was thwarted (or never even attempted) because of the presence of a gun in the hands of the potential victim. You cannot. Simply because the data does not exist, and cannot be accurately collected. The best we can do is make an estimate.

Data is facts. Conclusions are opinions. Don't confuse the two.

You can look at a thousand cases, 999 of them never needed to reload (or whatever), and one did. Statistically insignificant, right? So you decide you don't need a reload. Now, what happens when the incident YOU,personally, get involved in is case #1000? You could be SOL. Sure, things tend to follow the majority, but in each and every case, there is a 50% probability that it will be the exception, rather than the rule.
 
Back
Top