More junk science from some anti-gun "talking head"
--------------------------
University of Pennsylvania researcher Charles Branas, shown in his
Phildelphia, Pennsylvania, office on September 30, 2009, has studied
whether carrying a gun increases a person's chance of being shot
themselves. FAYE FLAM, The Philadelphia Inquirer
PHILADELPHIA -- Meleanie Hain of Lebanon, Pa., used to tell the news
media that she carried a Glock 26 pistol everywhere she went to
protect herself and her children. Then last week she was shot to death
by her husband in what police called a murder-suicide.
For years, researchers have been trying to investigate whether
carrying a gun is protective or risky. But getting the answer through
science has proved elusive. Now, University of Pennsylvania researcher
Charles Branas has tried a new tack -- employing methods normally used
by epidemiologists to study cancer and other diseases.
Branas compared a group of shooting victims to a similar set of
"controls" who had not been shot. His results, he said, show that guns
did not, on average, protect those who possessed them from being shot
in an assault -- and in fact raised the risk by four times or more.
"People shouldn't feel that firearms are going to enhance their
safety," Branas said. The study was published in the current issue of
the prestigious American Journal of Public Health.
More national news: Cleveland.com/nation
Several statisticians, however, called this conclusion a stretch, and
questioned whether the Penn group could account for all differences
between the shooting victims and the comparison group.
Where the experts do agree is on the need for solid scientific
information about the risks or benefits of guns. More research could
help lawmakers formulate gun policies to stem the carnage.
But gun research is fraught with difficulty, the experts say. Not only
is it politically and emotionally charged but privacy issues also make
it hard to get large-scale data on who owns a gun and who carries
one.
Branas, a former paramedic trained as an epidemiologist, designed an
ambitious study that he said stemmed from his experience transporting
victims of urban violence.
For this study, he and his colleagues relied on the cooperation of
police to get information on shootings in Philadelphia between 2003
and 2006 -- a total of 3,485.
The researchers got information as the shootings occurred -- the
location, the victims' description and whether they had guns with them
at the time.
Researchers randomly chose 677 of those victims for the study. They
came from various occupations -- taxi drivers, bartenders, nurses and
drug dealers. Fifty-three percent had criminal records
-----------------------------------------------
Fifty three percent had criminal records!
Well that's certainly typical of the average law abiding gun
owner.................
It's actually scary that someone actually paid for this word vomit.
:banghead::banghead::banghead:
--------------------------
University of Pennsylvania researcher Charles Branas, shown in his
Phildelphia, Pennsylvania, office on September 30, 2009, has studied
whether carrying a gun increases a person's chance of being shot
themselves. FAYE FLAM, The Philadelphia Inquirer
PHILADELPHIA -- Meleanie Hain of Lebanon, Pa., used to tell the news
media that she carried a Glock 26 pistol everywhere she went to
protect herself and her children. Then last week she was shot to death
by her husband in what police called a murder-suicide.
For years, researchers have been trying to investigate whether
carrying a gun is protective or risky. But getting the answer through
science has proved elusive. Now, University of Pennsylvania researcher
Charles Branas has tried a new tack -- employing methods normally used
by epidemiologists to study cancer and other diseases.
Branas compared a group of shooting victims to a similar set of
"controls" who had not been shot. His results, he said, show that guns
did not, on average, protect those who possessed them from being shot
in an assault -- and in fact raised the risk by four times or more.
"People shouldn't feel that firearms are going to enhance their
safety," Branas said. The study was published in the current issue of
the prestigious American Journal of Public Health.
More national news: Cleveland.com/nation
Several statisticians, however, called this conclusion a stretch, and
questioned whether the Penn group could account for all differences
between the shooting victims and the comparison group.
Where the experts do agree is on the need for solid scientific
information about the risks or benefits of guns. More research could
help lawmakers formulate gun policies to stem the carnage.
But gun research is fraught with difficulty, the experts say. Not only
is it politically and emotionally charged but privacy issues also make
it hard to get large-scale data on who owns a gun and who carries
one.
Branas, a former paramedic trained as an epidemiologist, designed an
ambitious study that he said stemmed from his experience transporting
victims of urban violence.
For this study, he and his colleagues relied on the cooperation of
police to get information on shootings in Philadelphia between 2003
and 2006 -- a total of 3,485.
The researchers got information as the shootings occurred -- the
location, the victims' description and whether they had guns with them
at the time.
Researchers randomly chose 677 of those victims for the study. They
came from various occupations -- taxi drivers, bartenders, nurses and
drug dealers. Fifty-three percent had criminal records
-----------------------------------------------
Fifty three percent had criminal records!
Well that's certainly typical of the average law abiding gun
owner.................
It's actually scary that someone actually paid for this word vomit.
:banghead::banghead::banghead:
~
