Doing the math...

[Alfonse]

can be so helpful for perspective. Here is a little math from a "risk analyst." (http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2012/07/foghorn/why-people-are-over-reacting-to-the-midnight-movie-massacre-mathematically-speaking/)

[QuercusMax]

That article is spot on.

The vast majority of humans greatly overestimate the likelihood of the improbable. In other words, a spectacular but very rare event always gets lot of attention, while less severe but much more common events do not.

As the article says, mathematically it's like this:


Risk = Threat x Vulnerability x Consequence

If any of these factors is zero or near zero, the risk is near zero.

Thus many people fear the possibility of dying in a plane crash (very rare event) while rarely worrying about the possibility of being in a car accident (much more likely). It also explains why people foolishly buy lottery tickets: the occasional payouts can be spectacular, but virtually never happen.

And it also explains how the media works: They devote endless coverage to the spectacular - because that's what catches people's interest, and gets them riled up.

[yqtszhj]

Excellent post.

So since we are doing math how about this. To possibly reduce the likelihood that a mass shooter might attack the public, and to increase the likelihood that if there is a mass shooter there are multiple persons to stop the shooter, let every person that can legally purchase a firearm and desires to carry it do so legally concealed without the need for a permit in order to serve the public good. This would work for terrorist and nut jobs both.

Someone had this idea before me...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=68xSoecsoq0

[Charlie]

Carry a ccw,light,reload,and cell. Let the math take care of itself.

[chrish]

Great article on The Blaze today from a Navy Seal. Recommended everyone get a 200+ lumen flashlight. Would have been invaluable to someone up front the other day. Could have given them the time they needed to get out of the way or even act upon the threat (ccw or not). This guy was a pretty small guy from the pictures, wouldn't have taken much to disorient him and just physically overcome him w/ that helmet on and 200 lumen strobe in the face.

Still, gun would have been better.

Armchair sheep dog in action :-)

[7shot]

The problem with someone trying to overcome this nut job phisically is that most guys there were with wife's or girlfriends, thus there first thought was to save there ass.

Unfortunately us civilians aren't trained like military, unless maybe you take a course a week on defensive handgun skills. And then you still don't have numbers on this guy. Too bad a dude with a handgun wasn't sitting right where this guy entered and could of unloaded 13 rounds in him before he really got going. Man the media would be singing a whole different tune if that would of happened...

[MikeyKahr]

Too bad a dude with a handgun wasn't sitting right where this guy entered and could of unloaded 13 rounds in him before he really got going. Man the media would be singing a whole different tune if that would of happened...

The media would have blamed the CHL owner for taking the life of a young intelligent youth who was just turning the corner and about to become a fruitful member of society. :what:

[Alfonse]

Okay, here is one other good article that a friend on facebook has on dealing with an issue like that (http://www.outdoorhub.com/opinions/dealing-the-joker-wake-aurora-shooting/).

And, still on the math subject, this map of the ratios of gun ownership rates and gun homicides (http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/interactive/2012/jul/22/gun-ownership-homicides-map?fb=native) shows no direct correlation. In other words, low gun ownership rates do not necessarily correlate with low gun homicide rates. Check out Brazil.

[jocko]

Great article on The Blaze today from a Navy Seal. Recommended everyone get a 200+ lumen flashlight. Would have been invaluable to someone up front the other day. Could have given them the time they needed to get out of the way or even act upon the threat (ccw or not). This guy was a pretty small guy from the pictures, wouldn't have taken much to disorient him and just physically overcome him w/ that helmet on and 200 lumen strobe in the face.

Still, gun would have been better.

Armchair sheep dog in action :-)

thats what the fokk I am gonna do, shine a damn light in the guys face who is holding a shotgun or AR and I have my 200 lumens light. WTF. IMO u might as well kiss ur ass good by. Just sayin He might be a navy seal but I would bet in his other hand was some type of semi auto or full auto weapon to.

excuse me, I think I will pass on that. Just sayin.

[muggsy]

If the risk of being attacked is so small, why are we carrying guns? That's the problem with statistics. You can use them to prove anything that you want to prove. Figures lie and liars figure. I carry for that one in a million chance that I'll be the next victim of an attempted mass killing.

[jocko]

well for damn sure when they say one in a million there is still #1 for some unlucky fokker and it just might be U.

Yup figures don't lie but liars do figure. Just sayin
Like I have stated before ,,, I don't carry because I am scared, I carry because I am not scared......