Letter: Beware statistics bent to create 'fact'
PUBLICATION: The StarPhoenix (Saskatoon)
DATE: 2004.01.10
EDITION: Final
SECTION: Forum
PAGE: A12
BYLINE: Joe Johnson
SOURCE: The StarPhoenix
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Beware statistics bent to create 'fact'
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In Facts show new firearms program worthwhile (SP Jan. 8), Tim Quigley suggests that citizens need to base their opinion on the gun control debate on facts rather than priorities.
Facts are usually conveyed in statistical form, i.e. numbers, percentages, fractions.
While facts are very beneficial for basing decisions and formulating arguments, statistics can be dangerous. It is simple to state a statistic and make your argument look sound. But it is difficult to account for all the variables which may affect this statistic.
Quigley's comparison of Canadian and American homicide rates and his "strongest validation of the new law" are weak. If Canada had poverty, homelessness, the cities and the ghettos resembling those of the U.S., our murder rate would certainly be much higher. Maybe our health-care and social system help keep the murder rate down. Who knows exactly?
What I do know is that there are a lot more variables to consider than the presence, or lack thereof, of a gun registry system.
I am also curious as to why Quigley decided to compare the number of murders with rifles and shotguns in 1989 to those in 2002. Why not compare 2002 with the numbers for the year before Bill C-68 was introduced? It may be because the murder rate wasn't much different and, therefore, the argument wasn't as convincing.
I, too, urge citizens to base their opinions on facts -- but to be aware that statistics can be misleading.
Joe Johnson
North Battleford
PUBLICATION: The StarPhoenix (Saskatoon)
DATE: 2004.01.10
EDITION: Final
SECTION: Forum
PAGE: A12
BYLINE: Joe Johnson
SOURCE: The StarPhoenix
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Beware statistics bent to create 'fact'
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In Facts show new firearms program worthwhile (SP Jan. 8), Tim Quigley suggests that citizens need to base their opinion on the gun control debate on facts rather than priorities.
Facts are usually conveyed in statistical form, i.e. numbers, percentages, fractions.
While facts are very beneficial for basing decisions and formulating arguments, statistics can be dangerous. It is simple to state a statistic and make your argument look sound. But it is difficult to account for all the variables which may affect this statistic.
Quigley's comparison of Canadian and American homicide rates and his "strongest validation of the new law" are weak. If Canada had poverty, homelessness, the cities and the ghettos resembling those of the U.S., our murder rate would certainly be much higher. Maybe our health-care and social system help keep the murder rate down. Who knows exactly?
What I do know is that there are a lot more variables to consider than the presence, or lack thereof, of a gun registry system.
I am also curious as to why Quigley decided to compare the number of murders with rifles and shotguns in 1989 to those in 2002. Why not compare 2002 with the numbers for the year before Bill C-68 was introduced? It may be because the murder rate wasn't much different and, therefore, the argument wasn't as convincing.
I, too, urge citizens to base their opinions on facts -- but to be aware that statistics can be misleading.
Joe Johnson
North Battleford
