Virginia Tech Consequences?
- Thread starter junkpile
- Start date
rellascout
Moderator
That situation is different. In that case they had an armed individual who had escaped from jail and killed at least 1 cop. In that case they knew immediately exactly what they were dealing with. Even with that it took several hours to lock down the campus.
Basically they told everyone to stay put in their classroom or dorm.
Hind sight is always 20/20.
Basically they told everyone to stay put in their classroom or dorm.
Hind sight is always 20/20.
FAL-schutter
New member
rellascout said:
I agree. Of course, if the campus cops had locked the place down, and thus managed to prevent the shootings beyond the first two, how would anybody know those additional shootings would have taken place? Instead, you'd have everyone complaining because the campus cops overreacted to an "isolated incident."
JuanCarlos
New member
Well, if they found the guy with a couple hundred rounds of ammunition, and considering the package he had mailed to the media, and the notes he left behind, people would probably have found out just how lucky they were that the campus cops had done so. In this case, at least.
Also, there is a slight difference, in my opinion, between this campus and your hypothetical "town." I'm allowed to own/carry a gun in "town." Everybody on this campus is disarmed, thus in theory the university has taken on the responsibility of protecting them to the best of their ability. More so than the police force of the average town.
Lastly, murders on campus are, I'd think, an uncommon enough occurrence that taking "extreme" measures in response shouldn't be an issue. I mean yeah, the student paper might write an article about how silly it was (in the other 99% of cases where it's not obvious that worse was planned), but if it only happens every few years who cares?
Yes it was. I just didn't read it the first time. If I had, most of my questions would have been answered.
I still have several concerns about the methodology. Only 1000 people were polled, which is a pitifully small sample size for this kind of survey. We don't know how the phone numbers were chosen and if the choice was random. In addition, there are serious sampling errors introduced with a phone survey. The time of day that the survey was done affects the results as does gender and any accent the interviewer has. In addition, the number and type of people who will answer the questions does not represent a random sample of the population despite how carefully the numbers were chosen.
All of these problems render any conclusion meaningless despite their own admission of sampling error and 95% confidence interval.
JuanCarlos
New member
lockedcj7, I'm just curious: do you actually question the results of the survey? Because I can almost guarantee that if you get away from all your fellow gun enthusiasts, and start talking to "everybody else," you'll find that a startling number of people really are in favor of "common sense gun control" (yes, I hate that description of it as well).
I mean really, off the range and outside the military I've met few people who don't favor tougher restrictions on firearms.
I mean really, off the range and outside the military I've met few people who don't favor tougher restrictions on firearms.
I'm uncomfortable writing off a Gallup Survey in this manner. These people's jobs concerns proper polling. Pollsters are taught to recognize all kinds of bias, and there are ways (inverse mills ratio, etc.) to correct for normal sample bias. Were it an ABC poll, fine. But Gallup Surveys are scientific. To dismiss them out of hand is, I think, uncalled for.
As far as updates go, an excerpt:
I believe this may cause the question to move away from guns and toward mental illness and background checks, which is not so much a concern.
I believe this may cause the question to move away from guns and toward mental illness and background checks, which is not so much a concern.
Not in my state. (I don't recall if this is PA or Federal). You can transfer rifles and shotguns FTF, but handguns in PA require a FFL Dealer to transfer. I don't know if FFL dealer does bg checks, but easy enough for him to be a middleman there. So...no, I don't mean background checks which are completely subverted in FTF transfers, as, in my understanding, those are (at least in PA) only rifle and shotgun transfers, which were not used in this crime.
I don't necessarily question the results of the poll. I'm 95% certain that those are the actual results that they obtained + or - 3%. Extrapolating those results to the rest of the population though, is rife with problems. Gallup is asking us to believe that their sample of 1000 people was random and does accurately represent the feelings of the entire population. I find that hard to believe based on my experience.
Drawing conclusions from any data set is always difficult and one must be very careful not to "read too much" into the data.
I'm not around gun-people most of the time. (I work in a public school that is filled with liberals) Nobody I know (except for one) is talking about gun control. Everybody here is talking about how the carnage could have been limited by decisive action like on flight 93. At least one other teacher has her CWP and others seem open to the idea of trained individuals being allowed to carry on campus.
Gallup makes no pretence of conducting scientific research. They are a political polling organization and work for whomever pays them. I've done too much real scientific research to believe that a survey accurately represents any population other than the sample that was polled. There are ways to correct or control for bias but any statistical transformation of the data has an associated set of problems. Phone surveys are especially notorious for skewing results for the reasons I mentioned in my first post. The site also says that these questions were part of other polls. What were the questions like on the rest of those polls and were they likely to introduce bias?
Having said all that, I'm not resting on my laurels. I'm voting in on-line polls, writing my letters, making my phone calls and sending my money to the NRA.
Drawing conclusions from any data set is always difficult and one must be very careful not to "read too much" into the data.
I'm not around gun-people most of the time. (I work in a public school that is filled with liberals) Nobody I know (except for one) is talking about gun control. Everybody here is talking about how the carnage could have been limited by decisive action like on flight 93. At least one other teacher has her CWP and others seem open to the idea of trained individuals being allowed to carry on campus.
Gallup makes no pretence of conducting scientific research. They are a political polling organization and work for whomever pays them. I've done too much real scientific research to believe that a survey accurately represents any population other than the sample that was polled. There are ways to correct or control for bias but any statistical transformation of the data has an associated set of problems. Phone surveys are especially notorious for skewing results for the reasons I mentioned in my first post. The site also says that these questions were part of other polls. What were the questions like on the rest of those polls and were they likely to introduce bias?
Having said all that, I'm not resting on my laurels. I'm voting in on-line polls, writing my letters, making my phone calls and sending my money to the NRA.
Last edited:
I follow, locked.
Interesting development, in terms of consequences. (link to firing line thread). I hadn't expected a Luby's-like positive step forward.
Interesting development, in terms of consequences. (link to firing line thread). I hadn't expected a Luby's-like positive step forward.
junkpile, juan carlos, lockedcj7:
I did not see the poll you all are discussing however re polls, studies and surveys, a couple of points.
1. The exact wording of the question(s) is always an important factor.
2. You might have heard this before, however I'll chance repeating it here. He or she who controls the wording of the question also controls, to a significant extent, the answers, especially since it is the poser of questions that usually gets to interpret the answers.
I did not see the poll you all are discussing however re polls, studies and surveys, a couple of points.
1. The exact wording of the question(s) is always an important factor.
2. You might have heard this before, however I'll chance repeating it here. He or she who controls the wording of the question also controls, to a significant extent, the answers, especially since it is the poser of questions that usually gets to interpret the answers.
alan... poll is referenced in post #96 by me.
The wording is the same over the last 16 years.. maybe more important that the actual results are the results over a year by year basis.
yes we've had this conversation before
The only reason I brought out a poll was that it was in response to a statement that was unsupported. Poll results are better than nothing. . .
The wording is the same over the last 16 years.. maybe more important that the actual results are the results over a year by year basis.
yes we've had this conversation before
The only reason I brought out a poll was that it was in response to a statement that was unsupported. Poll results are better than nothing. . .
applesanity
New member
True, but for some reason, NRA members are more politically active: they write more letters, make more phonecalls, and vote more often than the average American, who is eligible to vote.
As much a minority as we may be, we are loud.
One consequence we are having in our area are newspaper cartoons against gun shop owners. This is probably inevitable, although not fair. The latest here shows a gun shop owner selling a gun to a death skeleton. The caption is saying that the buyer (death skeleton) is clean...no background problems. Of course the implication is the shop owner is as evil as the killer.
I think this could go a copuple ways:
1. People realize that even in a post columbine world, school shooting can still happen, and you need to have a prepared public that is able to defend itself.
2. More likely, the anti-gun crowd will say something like "If such carnage can be perpetrated by someone with only a couple handguns, think of what an assault rifle would do!!!!!!!" and proceeed to try and ban everything.
1. People realize that even in a post columbine world, school shooting can still happen, and you need to have a prepared public that is able to defend itself.
2. More likely, the anti-gun crowd will say something like "If such carnage can be perpetrated by someone with only a couple handguns, think of what an assault rifle would do!!!!!!!" and proceeed to try and ban everything.