# So you killed your kid while cleaning your gun. **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [March 26, 2013, 5:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-you-killed-your-kid-while-cleaning-your-gun/654020 "2013-03-26T17:03:44Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 13
**Author:** ![snakebita13](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/7993a0/32.png) [@snakebita13](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/snakebita13)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2013, 5:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-you-killed-your-kid-while-cleaning-your-gun/654020/241 "2013-03-30T17:30:30Z")
I have to agree with anyone about dumb gun accidents. The only dumb thing about them is the idiot that did them. This is the real meaning to GUN Control, what an unforgivable thing to happen! TE=Machine Elf;16134396][Father cleaning shotgun shoots 10-year-old son in the head in N.C.](http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/03/26/17470862-father-cleaning-shotgun-shoots-10-year-old-son-in-the-head-in-nc?lite) Congratulations on demonstrating an astounding level of negligence when it really, really mattered. Not only did you _not_ check to see that your gun was unloaded, you actually managed to point it at your son’s head and pull the trigger. Now your son is dead, his sister is severely traumatized, and I hope you suffer a lifetime of ostracism and horrible guilty feelings as a result of your felonious stupidity. In fact, if [Johannes Mehserles](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johannes_Mehserles) can be made to serve two years for grabbing (and firing) the wrong weapon in a high-tension moment, then you surely deserve at least that much time behind bars for neglecting just about every firearm safety rule ever created. [/QUOTE] ---
**Author:** ![Kable](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ed655f/32.png) [@Kable](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kable)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2013, 6:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-you-killed-your-kid-while-cleaning-your-gun/654020/242 "2013-03-30T18:57:11Z")
> [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](#): > > Says the guy who has been desperately trying for several pages to cherry-pick a non-significant uncontrolled univariate effect as interpretable in his preferred direction. Let’s make it simple Hentor. In Kellerman’s study, were those homes with a rifle or shotgun more likely or less likely to hava a homicide than homes without? ---
**Author:** ![dropzone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dropzone/32/7515_2.png) [@dropzone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dropzone)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2013, 7:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-you-killed-your-kid-while-cleaning-your-gun/654020/243 "2013-03-30T19:06:54Z")
> [@Kable](#): > > Though I suppose in Crazycatwoman’s neighborhood such behavior wouldn’t be considered “lady like.” Actually? Yeah. The women I grew up with in Virginia would be shocked she knew how to use a shotgun, though we now know from this thread that guns can and will do whatever is necessary to defend themselves. They’d also suspect that being a widow at nineteen showed some negligence on her part so we can ignore what they think, but they’d still think it. ---
**Author:** ![filmore](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/7993a0/32.png) [@filmore](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/filmore)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2013, 7:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-you-killed-your-kid-while-cleaning-your-gun/654020/244 "2013-03-30T19:17:05Z")
> [@Kable](#): > > Let’s make it simple Hentor. In Kellerman’s study, were those homes with a rifle or shotgun more likely or less likely to hava a homicide than **homes without**? By “homes without”, do you mean homes without guns of any kind? Or just homes without rifles or shotguns, although they may have other guns? Home A: No guns Home B: Handgun only Home C: Rifle only Home D: Handgun and Rifle Do you mean Home A or Homes A and B? ---
**Author:** ![Kable](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ed655f/32.png) [@Kable](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kable)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2013, 7:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-you-killed-your-kid-while-cleaning-your-gun/654020/245 "2013-03-30T19:26:52Z")
> [@filmore](#): > > By “homes without”, do you mean homes without guns of any kind? Or just homes without rifles or shotguns, although they may have other guns? > > Home A: No guns > Home B: Handgun only > Home C: Rifle only > Home D: Handgun and Rifle > > Do you mean Home A or Homes A and B? I imagine Home A. Looking more at Kellerman’s table 3 he gives a crude odds ratio for any gun kept unlocked, but not any gun kept locked. I wonder why the omission. ---
**Author:** ![Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2013, 7:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-you-killed-your-kid-while-cleaning-your-gun/654020/246 "2013-03-30T19:43:03Z")
> [@Kable](#): > > Let’s make it simple Hentor. In Kellerman’s study, were those homes with a rifle or shotgun more likely or less likely to hava a homicide than homes without? It is simple. It has already been simple. You’re asking the same thing over and over. The paper answers this. I’ve answered it like five times already. The answer is neither. The likelihood of homicide in those conditions could not be determined to be different than the zero effect. The estimated odds ratio tells you the likelihood. The estimate for the odds ratio in both those conditions fell in a range that included the zero effect. Thus, there was no significant effect for rifles or for shotguns. I’ve done all I can do to help you to understand this. I will not attempt to do so anymore after this. You will simply have to get someone else to explain it to you. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2013, 8:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-you-killed-your-kid-while-cleaning-your-gun/654020/247 "2013-03-30T20:14:00Z")
Have you any research from certified non-gungrabbers to verify this? Please note the word “certified”, because there are a lot of gun-grabbers who pretend they aren’t. Most of the people in this thread, come to think on it. Which conclusively proves that being a gun-grabber is so un-American and unpopular, they won’t admit it! Then, of course, you got gun-grabbers who don’t even know they are gun-grabbers. These would have to be subjected to the **Kable** Vision Truth Machine (pat. pend.), so we can be sure. Pretty sure \*\*Kable \*\*is certified, or at the very least, certifiable. ---
**Author:** ![Kable](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ed655f/32.png) [@Kable](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kable)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2013, 9:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-you-killed-your-kid-while-cleaning-your-gun/654020/248 "2013-03-30T21:22:37Z")
> [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](#): > > The answer is neither. The likelihood of homicide in those conditions could not be determined to be different than the zero effect. Stop hiding Hentor, .7 and point 8 mean something and they don’t mean 1.0. They are less then 1 and certainly not greater than 1. Explain to the good people again what a negative number means. ---
**Author:** ![Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2013, 9:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-you-killed-your-kid-while-cleaning-your-gun/654020/249 "2013-03-30T21:56:42Z")
> [@Kable](#): > > Stop hiding Hentor, .7 and point 8 mean something and they don’t mean 1.0. They are less then 1 and certainly not greater than 1. Explain to the good people again what a negative number means. I love arrogant stupidity! Hey stupid, a negative odds ratio would mean that you did something very, very wrong. Odds ratios cannot be negative. Boy, you really don’t know anything. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2013, 10:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-you-killed-your-kid-while-cleaning-your-gun/654020/250 "2013-03-30T22:19:03Z")
Could have a negative knowledge ratio. Wherein his presence actually decreases the amount of information that exists. ---
**Author:** ![Cartooniverse](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cartooniverse/32/3084_2.png) [@Cartooniverse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cartooniverse)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2013, 1:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-you-killed-your-kid-while-cleaning-your-gun/654020/251 "2013-03-31T01:56:20Z")
Had this whole long rant composed about the N.R.A… but it’s just not worth it. Suffice to say, this kind of event is as much a crowning moment of triumph for the N.R.A. as the school shooting in Sandy Hook, CT. A real American exercising his God-given 2nd Amendment Right to bear arms, being cruelly castigated by limp-wristed peaceniks. Oh wait. This is the Pit. Fucking Gun Nuts. :mad::mad::mad: ---
**Author:** ![Kable](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ed655f/32.png) [@Kable](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kable)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2013, 2:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-you-killed-your-kid-while-cleaning-your-gun/654020/252 "2013-03-31T02:49:04Z")
> [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](#): > > Hey stupid, a negative odds ratio would mean that you did something very, very wrong. Odds ratios cannot be negative. Boy, you really don’t know anything. Anything to dodge the question, you knew what I meant. Less than one means what? .7 and .8 means what? ---
**Author:** ![Kable](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ed655f/32.png) [@Kable](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kable)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2013, 1:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-you-killed-your-kid-while-cleaning-your-gun/654020/253 "2013-03-31T13:15:47Z")
> [@Kable](#): > > Anything to dodge the question, you knew what I meant. Less than one means what? .7 and .8 means what? To be clear I think it means the following: > [@Hentor](#): > > An odds ratio below 1.0 means that the relationship is inverted, so that increasing units of the predictor are associated with a reduction in the likelihood of the outcome occurring. So you really do agree with me. Units of the predictor being rifles and shotguns, and outcomes being the number of homicides in the home. We both agree he found this in his study he just wasn’t able to reach statistical significance. Right? ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2013, 5:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-you-killed-your-kid-while-cleaning-your-gun/654020/254 "2013-03-31T17:39:36Z")
In which case, had he claimed that those results were “significant”, we might well say that he was dishonest, since we have every reason to believe he knows better. In your case, we may apply the more forgiving possibility of “stubbornly ignorant”. Seems sensible enough. I would expect, drawing simply on my own biases and preconceptions, that the presence of “long guns” would be a predictor of lower chance of homicide in the home, since that would tend to indicate a “sportsman” category, a hunter, a target shooter. More likely to be safety trained, more likely to keep his guns safe. Even more so if long guns are the only sort of gun kept, to the exclusion of hand guns. Compare to the man who keeps only a handgun or more than one. The subset of that is the man who nourishes his own paranoid fantasies about “self-defense”, a man who makes decisions based on fear and dread. If I were to bet, I’d bet the latter example is much more likely to suffer a homicide in the home, as his irrational state is already clear. What would skew the results is the guy who has _both_ hand guns and long guns, who fear his government almost as much as he fears his fellow citizens. The “gun nut”. Are there no such people, **Kable**? Is that a projected fantasy of the “gun grabber” media machine? And if “yes, there are”, how many? Wouldn’t you like to know? Wouldn’t it be in our best interests to have some handle on that? We have skads of people trained to design and carry out such studies, and you say you approve objective research enthusiastically. We could start tomorrow, if it were not for the belligerent opposition of certain well-known groups. We can count on your support, then? ---
**Author:** ![Kable](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ed655f/32.png) [@Kable](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kable)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2013, 7:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-you-killed-your-kid-while-cleaning-your-gun/654020/255 "2013-03-31T19:37:41Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > Seems sensible enough. I would expect, drawing simply on my own biases and preconceptions, that the presence of “long guns” would be a predictor of lower chance of homicide in the home, since that would tend to indicate a “sportsman” category, a hunter, a target shooter. More likely to be safety trained, more likely to keep his guns safe. Even more so if long guns are the only sort of gun kept, to the exclusion of hand guns. That all seems sensible to me. > [@](#): > > Compare to the man who keeps only a handgun or more than one. The subset of that is the man who nourishes his own paranoid fantasies about “self-defense”, a man who makes decisions based on fear and dread. If I were to bet, I’d bet the latter example is much more likely to suffer a homicide in the home, as his irrational state is already clear. I was thinking more of gang bangers, and also people who really were at a higher risk for homicide, hence they got a handgun. > [@](#): > > What would skew the results is the guy who has _both_ hand guns and long guns, who fear his government almost as much as he fears his fellow citizens. The “gun nut”. Or the guy who just likes shooting guns cause its fun so he has several types, target shooters who use handguns rifles and shotguns, collectors, etc. Separated from the alcoholic, the bipolar, and the drug dealers who probably are a higher risk to themselves and others. > [@](#): > > We could start tomorrow, if it were not for the belligerent opposition of certain well-known groups. I support you starting tomorrow. I don’t think anybody is stopping you from doing so, and yes you have my support. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2013, 7:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-you-killed-your-kid-while-cleaning-your-gun/654020/256 "2013-03-31T19:58:09Z")
Ah! So, you didn’t see the news reports about the NRA thwarting such research? Here’s just one of many… [http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/01/10/us-usa-guns-scientists-idUSBRE90915F20130110](http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/01/10/us-usa-guns-scientists-idUSBRE90915F20130110) > [@](#): > > …The federal Centers for Disease Control has cut firearms safety research by 96 percent since the mid-1990s, according to one estimate. Congress, pushed by the gun lobby, in 1996 put restrictions on CDC funding of gun research into the budget. Restrictions on other agencies were added in later years. > > The NRA, the main lobbyist for gun rights, has taken credit for the research halt. “These junk science studies and others like them are designed to provide ammunition for the gun control lobby by advancing the false notion that legal gun ownership is a danger to the public health instead of an inalienable right,” it said in 2011… You might well wonder why they are so eager to prevent such research. You might wonder, I don’t, I think its pretty clear they already know what the results would be, and don’t want to hear it. Still, good to have you on board. ---
**Author:** ![Kable](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ed655f/32.png) [@Kable](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kable)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2013, 8:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-you-killed-your-kid-while-cleaning-your-gun/654020/257 "2013-03-31T20:08:49Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > Ah! So, you didn’t see the news reports about the NRA thwarting such research? Oh, so you don’t want to do research on your own? Rather you want the government to pay you a salary to do research? I don’t support that. I think balancing the budget is more important. But I do support you doing research on guns. I’ll even help with free suggestions. ---
**Author:** ![Trepa\_Mayfield](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/edb3f5/32.png) [@Trepa\_Mayfield](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trepa_Mayfield)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2013, 8:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-you-killed-your-kid-while-cleaning-your-gun/654020/258 "2013-03-31T20:23:02Z")
> [@Cartooniverse](#): > > Had this whole long rant composed about the N.R.A… but it’s just not worth it. > > Suffice to say, this kind of event is as much a crowning moment of triumph for the N.R.A. as the school shooting in Sandy Hook, CT. > > A real American exercising his God-given 2nd Amendment Right to bear arms, being cruelly castigated by limp-wristed peaceniks. > > Oh wait. This is the Pit. > > Fucking Gun Nuts. > > :mad::mad::mad: No. No it isn’t. It isn’t a triumph for the NRA, it isn’t a triumph for the “gun grabbers”, it isn’t a triumph for anyone. There is no sane person in the USA who is happy to hear about this. No, not even the people who disagree with you. And hyperbole like this is exactly the reason why the gun control debate is the worst political debate in the US. ---
**Author:** ![Ethilrist](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ethilrist/32/4604_2.png) [@Ethilrist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ethilrist)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2013, 10:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-you-killed-your-kid-while-cleaning-your-gun/654020/259 "2013-03-31T22:06:54Z")
> [@Kable](#): > > Oh, so you don’t want to do research on your own? Rather you want the government to pay you a salary to do research? I don’t support that. I think balancing the budget is more important. But I do support you doing research on guns. I’ll even help with free suggestions. You’d count research done by individual researchers as more reliable than that done by the CDC? Or do you just think the government shouldn’t be paying for it? ---
**Author:** ![Kable](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ed655f/32.png) [@Kable](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kable)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2013, 11:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-you-killed-your-kid-while-cleaning-your-gun/654020/260 "2013-03-31T23:17:37Z")
> [@Ethilrist](#): > > You’d count research done by individual researchers as more reliable than that done by the CDC? I suppose that would depend on the individual. > [@](#): > > Or do you just think the government shouldn’t be paying for it? Certainly the government should not be paying for research for which the conclusion might be that we disarm the people and dump the 2nd amendment. Next someone might get the idea we could save lives by dumping the 1st amendment. And in case I hadn’t mentioned it, I really think government should be trying to save money and balance the budget and pay back debt. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-you-killed-your-kid-while-cleaning-your-gun/654020.md?page=12) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-you-killed-your-kid-while-cleaning-your-gun/654020.md?page=14)