Wednesday, December 19, 2012

Gun control should be a lower priority; yes, even now.



The horror of an event lasts, but the real and overall numbers belie weightier problems 

This info-graphic has been floating around the internet, as a kind of perspective on the recent tragedy of school shootings.[1] I think there are two suggestive things here. First, that we get upset over something which has comparatively very small impact (in terms of total number of deaths of citizens); and, second, that emotion of recent events easily clouds our judgement on overall factors.

I am presuming that since all deaths happen only once to each citizen, they must be counted as equal. Yet since so many more deaths occur in all these other categories, guns are actually a much smaller problem for the country as a whole than these other issues. However, the emotive baggage toward guns and the highly publicized (albeit terrible) episodes involving them is what biases a response in people.  But that doesn't change what facts there are on the actual numbers of deaths. So, as an overall assessment, I'd say the gun worries are overblown.

One might counter that self inflicted or accidental deaths are not a "problem" that the country needs to deal with, certainly not with legal solutions. In fact, some libertarians would further are that (1) we should be allowed to harm ourselves, and (2) we can't legislate accidents away.[2]

But I think there is a way to approach the matter which moves the issue to the first or initiating causes of citizen deaths. Just as a badly broken mental health system can allow a person to end up using a gun in terrible ways, so can other broken social systems -- such as substandard auto monitoring, allowing under monitored or dangerous practices,  perpetuating addictive cigarettes in society, etc. -- all these allow other consequences where many, many citizens die. Therefore, it's the initiating causes that we should be worrying about, and the initiating causes for gun deaths have far, far less consequences in terms of citizen deaths than the initiating causes behind these other social issues that lead to citizen deaths. So (and again), as an overall assessment, I argue that gun worries are overblown.

 O.

[1] One should also note that the claim about FBI and baseball bats is incorrect (source).

[2] Of course, if one can't legislate accidents away, there is this mystery of what the Occupational Safety and Health Administration has been doing all these years.





Labels: , , , ,

Monday, May 07, 2007

Three Republican Stooges vs. Science: who *not* to vote for



{ Audio this essay @ .5MB @ 3Min. } Last Thursday night when the Republican party’s 10 candidates for president were trying to introduce themselves to the American consciousness, they were asked whether they believed in Evolution. Three of these — Senator Sam Brownback of Kansas; Mike Huckabee, former governor of Arkansas; and Representative Tom Tancredo of Colorado — indicated they did not believe in Evolution.

Such a position by any politician is a deal-breaker for obtaining my vote. It shows one (or perhaps both) of two things: (1) that such a politician is inadequately educated in the sciences so as to be unworthy to lead at a national level; or, (2) that s/he is the kind of politician willing to lie about his or her personal beliefs in order to appease a scientifically illiterate constituency, so as to stay in, or gain, political power.

On flaw one, such a pseudo-leader could not make informed policy decisions about stem-cells or other biology-based technology advances. Thus, the economy and scientific literacy of a nation is threatened, which is not in the best interests of the American voter.

On flaw two, instead of trying to inform and educate the constituency, such a pseudo-leader chooses to lie in order to remain (or gain) power; thus, these types of flawed politicians greatly increase the likelihood of implementing dangerously inadequate policies which make the uninformed and/or voluntarily ignorant the standard for policy evaluation. (Note: although there are indeed times that a politician should publicly lie in the best interests of a nation, lies about long- and well- established scientific issues are never in that best interest.)

In light of just these simple concerns, a scientifically informed and responsible conservative should not vote for these three stooges:

Sam Brownback, Senator - Kansas
Mike Huckabee, ex-governor - Arkansas
Tom Tancredo,. Representative - Colorado


O.

Labels: , , , , ,