kallend 2,147 #51 September 29, 2006 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteHow can we make our schools safe? Give everybody a gun. How many police officers get robbed/killed in comparison to the rest of the population? LOD Statistics On average, a law enforcement officer is killed in the line of duty every 57 hours in the USA. Too bad we can't say that about the populace in general, huh? Can't say what? The police rate is higher than that of the population in general. Really? What is the average time between murders in the US? Do you know what a homicide RATE is?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #52 September 29, 2006 Yes, I do.... you said that a police officer gets killed approximately every 57 hours... how many hours between murders in the general populace? Oh, I forgot.. that number won't help your argument, will it?Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lindsey 0 #53 September 29, 2006 QuoteYes, I do.... you said that a police officer gets killed approximately every 57 hours... how many hours between murders in the general populace? Oh, I forgot.. that number won't help your argument, will it? Only if you then consider how many police officers per capita. linz-- A conservative is just a liberal who's been mugged. A liberal is just a conservative who's been to jail Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #54 September 29, 2006 QuoteQuoteYes, I do.... you said that a police officer gets killed approximately every 57 hours... how many hours between murders in the general populace? Oh, I forgot.. that number won't help your argument, will it? Only if you then consider how many police officers per capita. linz According to the UCR, there were 57 officers killed in 2004. By my calculations, that's one death every 153.68 hrs. Also according to the UCR, there were 16,137 murders in 2004. That works out to one death every 0.54 hours. Looks like overall, an individual police officer is a good bit safer than the populace at large.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
craddock 0 #55 September 29, 2006 QuoteBanning guns is maybe not the ultimate solution (and as stated earlier, this is not going to happen in countries where men like to feel like John Wayne :) )... but regulating their use could help. If dad (sorry for being sexistic, i fell that women are more mature about this) has a rifle in the cupboard, then it's easier for his kid to get it and shoot half of his classmates. If only people who need it have one, and lock them well when not in use, well it's harder for this kid to achieve his video-game bloodbath. who do you refer to when you day "this kid" That spot isn't bad at all, the winds were strong and that was the issue! It was just on the downwind side. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,147 #56 September 29, 2006 QuoteQuoteQuoteYes, I do.... you said that a police officer gets killed approximately every 57 hours... how many hours between murders in the general populace? Oh, I forgot.. that number won't help your argument, will it? Only if you then consider how many police officers per capita. linz According to the UCR, there were 57 officers killed in 2004. By my calculations, that's one death every 153.68 hrs. Also according to the UCR, there were 16,137 murders in 2004. That works out to one death every 0.54 hours. Looks like overall, an individual police officer is a good bit safer than the populace at large. Ahem - there are far fewer police officers than the populace at large. The RATE (homicides per 100,000 per year) is higher for police officers.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #57 September 29, 2006 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteYes, I do.... you said that a police officer gets killed approximately every 57 hours... how many hours between murders in the general populace? Oh, I forgot.. that number won't help your argument, will it? Only if you then consider how many police officers per capita. linz According to the UCR, there were 57 officers killed in 2004. By my calculations, that's one death every 153.68 hrs. Also according to the UCR, there were 16,137 murders in 2004. That works out to one death every 0.54 hours. Looks like overall, an individual police officer is a good bit safer than the populace at large. Ahem - there are far fewer police officers than the populace at large. The RATE (homicides per 100,000 per year) is higher for police officers. You answered a question I didn't ask... I didn't ask what the murder rate was... I asked how much time between murders for the populace at large, since you responded with an amount of time between officer murders. As it happened, I found the numbers in the UCR... so I didn't need the answer after all (although your 57 hours figure doesn't seem to be supported)Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #58 September 29, 2006 QuoteAhem - there are far fewer police officers than the populace at large. The RATE (homicides per 100,000 per year) is higher for police officers. You're confusing Rate testing with Proportion testing, professor. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,465 #59 September 29, 2006 QuoteYou answered a question I didn't ask... I didn't ask what the murder rate was... I asked how much time between murders for the populace at large, since you responded with an amount of time between officer murders. As it happened, I found the numbers in the UCR... so I didn't need the answer after all (although your 57 hours figure doesn't seem to be supported) To compare apples to apples you would either have to include officers while off dute, or only include murders in the general populace that occured while working. See, when you compare the number of officers killed while on duty with the number of pediatric neurosurgeons while working, you will quickly see that we should deploy pediatric neurosurgeons to our schools to make them safer. Plus, it shows that we shouldn't give guns to our kids, we should give bonesaws to our kids.... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #60 September 29, 2006 QuoteQuoteYou answered a question I didn't ask... I didn't ask what the murder rate was... I asked how much time between murders for the populace at large, since you responded with an amount of time between officer murders. As it happened, I found the numbers in the UCR... so I didn't need the answer after all (although your 57 hours figure doesn't seem to be supported) To compare apples to apples you would either have to include officers while off dute, or only include murders in the general populace that occured while working. See, when you compare the number of officers killed while on duty with the number of pediatric neurosurgeons while working, you will quickly see that we should deploy pediatric neurosurgeons to our schools to make them safer. Plus, it shows that we shouldn't give guns to our kids, we should give bonesaws to our kids.... Disagree - my premise is that (as has been proven over and over) criminals will not attack an armed person given other options. This premise gets proven again every time another state passes concealed carry laws... the overall crime rates for the state go down dramatically. I do like the bonesaw option, though... I think we should keep that as a standby!Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,147 #61 September 29, 2006 QuoteQuoteAhem - there are far fewer police officers than the populace at large. The RATE (homicides per 100,000 per year) is higher for police officers. You're confusing Rate testing with Proportion testing, professor. No, I'm using the same definition of crime RATES that the FBI and USDoJ does.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,147 #62 September 29, 2006 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteYes, I do.... you said that a police officer gets killed approximately every 57 hours... how many hours between murders in the general populace? Oh, I forgot.. that number won't help your argument, will it? Only if you then consider how many police officers per capita. linz According to the UCR, there were 57 officers killed in 2004. By my calculations, that's one death every 153.68 hrs. Also according to the UCR, there were 16,137 murders in 2004. That works out to one death every 0.54 hours. Looks like overall, an individual police officer is a good bit safer than the populace at large. Ahem - there are far fewer police officers than the populace at large. The RATE (homicides per 100,000 per year) is higher for police officers. You answered a question I didn't ask... I didn't ask what the murder rate was... I asked how much time between murders for the populace at large, since you responded with an amount of time between officer murders. As it happened, I found the numbers in the UCR... so I didn't need the answer after all (although your 57 hours figure doesn't seem to be supported) It's obvious why you asked the wrong question, you wanted to suggest an erroneous conclusion. You quoted only one year. www.aphf.org/lodstats.html On average, a law enforcement officer is killed in the line of duty every 57 hours in America. Between 1976 and 1998, of the over 1,800 officers killed-- 16% were on disturbance calls 14% were in robbery arrest situations 14% were investigating suspicious persons/circumstances 13% were making traffic pursuits/stops 13% were attempting arrests for offenses other than robbery or burglary 10% were in ambush situations 7% were in an arrest situation involving drug-related matters 5% were in a burglary arrest situation arrests 6% were in other situations Of the 901 assailants identified in the killing of law enforcement officers from 1989-98 -- almost half had a prior conviction almost one-fifth were on probation or parole at the time Most law enforcement officers are killed with firearms, particularly handguns. SOURCE: U.S. Department of Justice Bureau of Justice Statistics ... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,147 #63 September 29, 2006 QuoteQuoteQuoteYou answered a question I didn't ask... I didn't ask what the murder rate was... I asked how much time between murders for the populace at large, since you responded with an amount of time between officer murders. As it happened, I found the numbers in the UCR... so I didn't need the answer after all (although your 57 hours figure doesn't seem to be supported) To compare apples to apples you would either have to include officers while off dute, or only include murders in the general populace that occured while working. See, when you compare the number of officers killed while on duty with the number of pediatric neurosurgeons while working, you will quickly see that we should deploy pediatric neurosurgeons to our schools to make them safer. Plus, it shows that we shouldn't give guns to our kids, we should give bonesaws to our kids.... Disagree - my premise is that (as has been proven over and over) criminals will not attack an armed person given other options. ! So once every sane adult is armed, criminals will only attack children and the insane. OK.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #64 September 29, 2006 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteYou answered a question I didn't ask... I didn't ask what the murder rate was... I asked how much time between murders for the populace at large, since you responded with an amount of time between officer murders. As it happened, I found the numbers in the UCR... so I didn't need the answer after all (although your 57 hours figure doesn't seem to be supported) To compare apples to apples you would either have to include officers while off dute, or only include murders in the general populace that occured while working. See, when you compare the number of officers killed while on duty with the number of pediatric neurosurgeons while working, you will quickly see that we should deploy pediatric neurosurgeons to our schools to make them safer. Plus, it shows that we shouldn't give guns to our kids, we should give bonesaws to our kids.... Disagree - my premise is that (as has been proven over and over) criminals will not attack an armed person given other options. ! So once every sane adult is armed, criminals will only attack children and the insane. OK. Yeah, John... and they're not going to know if the adults / teachers / hospital staff / random passerby is armed or not. Little concept called "deterrence" - you may have heard of it??Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Riley 0 #65 September 29, 2006 QuoteInteresting stats, but not of much real meaning. Do you console the parents of dead kids by telling them that: "We are very sorry for your loss, but you know the schools are 66% safer than they were in 1993, except for that nasty little blip in the late 90's. But the bottom line is that this is very uncommon, you just happen to be very unlucky. Let us know if we can be of further assistance, and have a nice day." The numbers are small, but the drop from 42 to 25 to 13 is no concillation at all. Hope we're not supposed to feel better becuase kids are now only at 1/2 the risk of being killed as opposed to a few years back (just don't pick 99 as a comparison point) and only at 1/3 the risk as in 1993. The statistics meant a bit more than a fallacy based on an emotional appeal and actually prove that much of our fear of violence is a reaction to media coverage. Whatever has been done to prevent/reduce violence in the past has, apparently, worked. There are more students in schools now than in the past and, while there have been periods of higher activity, as a whole, there is a decrease. Akin to the skydiving incidents discussions where, because of certain safety/training measures, incidents due to a specific reason decrease, the same could be said for school violence. Not the best analogy, no, but then again, we eventually want to look at past incidents (school and/or skydiving, your choice) and try to learn from them--especially when what has changed in the past seems to work. Obviously more still needs to be done, of course, but at least there has been a start. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lindsey 0 #66 September 29, 2006 The question that you answered with your question was QuoteHow many police officers get robbed/killed in comparison to the rest of the population? Then you asked "how much time...." which does not speak to the relative safety of being a police officer vs an average joe. linz-- A conservative is just a liberal who's been mugged. A liberal is just a conservative who's been to jail Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #67 September 29, 2006 QuoteNo, I'm using the same definition of crime RATES that the FBI and USDoJ does. blindly listening to everything your government tells you is a bad way to understand statistics ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,147 #68 September 29, 2006 QuoteQuoteNo, I'm using the same definition of crime RATES that the FBI and USDoJ does. blindly listening to everything your government tells you is a bad way to understand statistics It's convenient to use the same definition the FBI statisticians use, though, especially when that definition makes sense in the context of relative safety of police vs the population at large. Now, if it came from the Bush White House, that would be different.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,147 #69 September 29, 2006 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteYou answered a question I didn't ask... I didn't ask what the murder rate was... I asked how much time between murders for the populace at large, since you responded with an amount of time between officer murders. As it happened, I found the numbers in the UCR... so I didn't need the answer after all (although your 57 hours figure doesn't seem to be supported) To compare apples to apples you would either have to include officers while off dute, or only include murders in the general populace that occured while working. See, when you compare the number of officers killed while on duty with the number of pediatric neurosurgeons while working, you will quickly see that we should deploy pediatric neurosurgeons to our schools to make them safer. Plus, it shows that we shouldn't give guns to our kids, we should give bonesaws to our kids.... Disagree - my premise is that (as has been proven over and over) criminals will not attack an armed person given other options. ! So once every sane adult is armed, criminals will only attack children and the insane. OK. Yeah, John... and they're not going to know if the adults / teachers / hospital staff / random passerby is armed or not. Little concept called "deterrence" - you may have heard of it?? Apparently you read what you wanted to read, and not what I actually wrote. And explain why police are shot so often, given that they are armed, known to be armed, and well trained.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #70 September 29, 2006 Quoteguns...regulating their use could help. Darn right. We need more laws controlling who can have 'em, where you can shoot 'em, what type you can own, and so on. We've already got 20,000 gun regulation laws on the books, but I'm sure just a few more are all we need to finally make this strategy effective. Just think of the poor children! QuoteIf only people who need it have one, and lock them well when not in use, well it's harder for this kid to achieve his video-game bloodbath. Yes! Government bureaucrats should get to determine who "needs" a firearm, and for everyone else - tough! And there should be random home inspections of anyone who is an approved gun owner, to make sure their guns are locked up. Now we're talking! Penalty for an unlocked gun: 10 years in prison. QuoteSomeone who liked the theory of Michael Moore in "Bowling for Columbine" Culture of terror, everybody is afraid of everybody... so everybody is more likely to shoot at sight... Absolutely, and Michael Moore is a highly acclaimed producer of documentaries, so we should listen to what he has to say and heed his advice. I like your ideas! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sockpuppet 0 #71 September 29, 2006 Quote>didn't you know it's only fair for that 110 lb, 5 foot 2 inch woman to >engage in a fistfight with her 225 lb, 6 foot 2 inch attacker?? Bad example. I know a 130 lb, 5'5" woman who could break anyone here in half. It's all about how safe you want to be. Does she charge by the hour...i feel like getting my ass kicked. Banning guns is not the answer. In Switzerland there are more automatic rifles than people. Everyone has to complete military service and then is assigned thier rifle for life which they keep at home. There are rarely ever any murders using the weapons. ------ Two of the three voices in my head agree with you. It might actually be unanimous but voice three only speaks Welsh. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #72 September 29, 2006 QuoteAnd explain why police are shot so often, given that they are armed, known to be armed, and well trained. Potential answer #1 - because sometimes they try to take people that break the law and try to put them in jail even though the lawbreakers don't want to go to jail? Some of these lawbreakers have guns too (by both legal and illegal means) and someone who doesn't respect law might also not respect life and shoot at a cop just doing his job? Potential answer #2 - all cops are crooked and just need a good shooting Potential answer #3 - guns are evil. If they have guns, other guns magically try to shoot them Potential answer #4 - the pediatric neurologists chased all the bullets onto the streets where, in fear of bone saws, they try to hide themselves just under the skin of a cop - where they feel warm and protected. I'm going with #1 - it's the job of a cop to put himself in harm's way sometimes If you want to compare equivalence, you might ask how many cops get shot in situations unrelated to their duty and compare with non-gun owners. It would be more fair. If you were a crook, would you prefer robbing the house of a cop known to be armed? or the unarmed sociology professor on Elm Street? or the bone saw wielding pediatric neurologist and his pet elk? You have 3 seconds, please fill in the ovals completely or the test score may not accurately rate your performance. Edit: moral of the story. those that go looking for a fight might get shot. In the case of cops, this is an admirable thing. In the case of others, just stupid. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BillyVance 35 #73 September 29, 2006 One way would be to lock all exterior doors from the outside except the main entrance, and have a guard at the main entrance. If they can't get a guard, then have some kind of double entrance foyer where sensors can tell if the person is packing and lock the interior doors before he can get inside... Now where would the funding come from to pay for that... "Mediocre people don't like high achievers, and high achievers don't like mediocre people." - SIX TIME National Champion coach Nick Saban Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
warpedskydiver 0 #74 September 29, 2006 QuoteOne way would be to lock all exterior doors from the outside except the main entrance, and have a guard at the main entrance. If they can't get a guard, then have some kind of double entrance foyer where sensors can tell if the person is packing and lock the interior doors before he can get inside... Yeah and a floor that slides out and under it tank with shark that have lasers on their freakin heads! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BillyVance 35 #75 September 29, 2006 QuoteQuoteOne way would be to lock all exterior doors from the outside except the main entrance, and have a guard at the main entrance. If they can't get a guard, then have some kind of double entrance foyer where sensors can tell if the person is packing and lock the interior doors before he can get inside... Yeah and a floor that slides out and under it tank with shark that have lasers on their freakin heads! I like that! "Mediocre people don't like high achievers, and high achievers don't like mediocre people." - SIX TIME National Champion coach Nick Saban Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
