The value for Intentional homicides (per 100,000 people) in Japan was 0.40 as of 2009. As the graph below shows, over the past 14 years this indicator reached a maximum value of 0.57 in 1998 and a minimum value of 0.40 in 2009.
| Year | Value |
|---|---|
| 1995 | 0.54 |
| 1996 | 0.49 |
| 1997 | 0.54 |
| 1998 | 0.57 |
| 1999 | 0.54 |
| 2000 | 0.51 |
| 2001 | 0.51 |
| 2002 | 0.48 |
| 2003 | 0.55 |
| 2004 | 0.55 |
| 2005 | 0.51 |
| 2006 | 0.49 |
| 2007 | 0.45 |
| 2008 | 0.51 |
| 2009 | 0.40 |
Dear Mr. TS, This is called a reverse correlation. Very few guns - very low murder rate.
No, that's called "one data point" (over time). Now do this for all the other countries and show me a correlation. Or show me how the murder rate changed over time with the passage of gun laws. That would be a correlation.
ReplyDeleteSorry, that's not according to the dictionary.
Deletecor·re·la·tion (kôr-lshn, kr-)
n.
1. A causal, complementary, parallel, or reciprocal relationship, especially a structural, functional, or qualitative correspondence between two comparable entities: a correlation between drug abuse and crime.
Remember when I gave you that tutorial on correlation calculation using Excel? Go plug in just Japan and see what you get. You get an error. Because you need a least a second point in order for it to give you an answer on how correlated the two are.
DeleteThink of it as an x-y plot where y=strictness of gun laws, and x=Murder rate. You can't mathematically form a regression hypothesis with one dot on the graph. So add in all the other countries.
Why don't we just use the first definition of the word and speak English?
DeleteRight. Any talk of statistics, and I'm not speaking English- but you know what correlation means because you looked it up in the dictionary, and the dictionary told you that you can have a correlation with a sample size of one...
DeleteWhat I know is you're hiding behind a technical very specific meaning of that word. In simple conversation, honest people know that the lack of guns in Japan directly relates to the low murder rate - not the gun-murder rate, but the overall one. Naturally, you want to divert the entire conversation away from those simple facts and debate at length whether we can use the word correlate or not.
DeleteMikeb, you shouldn't criticize "hillbillies" and then use this aw shucks, just plain folks approach to data analysis.
DeleteThe simple conversing people who conclude that are people who don't understand correlation/regression analysis statistics, and who draw conclusions off single points of data while ignoring the rest of the data body.
Delete"This is called a reverse correlation. Very few guns - very low murder rate."
ReplyDeleteJapan has its own culture that needs to be taken into account. For example, Japan ranked 10th in the world for suicides with a rate of just under 22 per 100k.
In 2009, the number totaled nearly 33,000. That is in a population of about 127 million.
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/world/2010-05/13/content_9845670.htm
Japan also has different attitudes about civil liberties. For example, you know that 36 hour rule before we are required to appear before a judge? In Japan, its 240 hours, that's right, ten days, which can be extended for another ten days be a judge before indictment.
And while "voluntary" the police are required to stop by regularly,
"One of their primary tasks is to conduct twice-yearly house-by-house residential surveys of homes in their areas, at which time the head of the household at each address fills out a residence information card detailing the names, ages, occupations, business addresses, and vehicle registration numbers of household occupants and the names of relatives living elsewhere."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_enforcement_in_Japan
http://www.who.int/mental_health/prevention/suicide_rates/en/
ReplyDeleteJAPAN suicide rate in '09 per 100,000 males 36.2, females 13.2
USA suicide rate in '05 per 100,000 males 17.7, female 4.5
Why don't you care about suicides when they are committed without the use of a firearm.
This discussion is about murder, or the lack thereof when there are few guns. We've talked about suicides many many times.
DeleteJapan's suicide rate is around fifteen per hundred thousand over that period. But I thought you didn't like comparisons with Japan.
ReplyDeleteWhy are you dodging the discussion of low murder rate when there are fewer guns?
DeleteThe point is that people are still dying. Culture affects what kind of death that is, but the tool isn't relevant.
DeleteBecause you blame Japan's suicides on their culture, but you don't apply the same thinking to their murders.
DeleteYou mean to their LACK of murders?
DeleteCulture definitely has something to do with it, but so does the scarcity of guns.
Japan has a long tradition of using bladed weapons. This difference is cultural, not dependent on the tools available.
DeleteMike, there's a good book on reasons other countries cultures effect crime by David Kopel titled "The Samurai, The Mountie, and The Cowboy".
DeleteGreg, with their "long history of using bladed weapons," why is the murder rate so low?
DeleteMikeb, Japan has a long tradition of collectivism, of minimizing the individual against the demands of the society and family. That goes a long way toward explaining why murders are fewer, but suicides are much more common. The tool being used in either case isn't relevant.
DeleteWhat was that suicide rate again? And correlation?
ReplyDeleteorlin sellers
FYI, Mike, few guns and low murders would be direct, not an inverse correlation. It's when we talk about Brady scores where you are rooting for the correlation to be inverted (high scores/low murder).
ReplyDeleteSo, now you agree that there is a correlation? You're making me dizzy.
DeleteNo! I'm only using the comparison you used to point out that you were using the word "reverse" incorrectly. IF both things are low, that's direct.
DeleteYou bet your ass it's direct. Low gun count, low murder count.
DeleteSo what do you call all the places with few guns and high murders? Or lots of guns and low murders?
Delete