Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Orlanth wrote:

Though as the normal US presidential election system works over an extended time period with primaries etc this is telling you nothing you won't already have seen for yourself closer to home.

It also helps that it is presently my job to analyze stats, tell other people what they mean, and tell them what they shouldn't do as a result.

Guys, please don't spam the thread with posts only containing videos/one liners. Thanks

Isn't one of the recommended ways of clearing a failure to drop the magazine and insert a new one to rule out the possibility of a defective magazine contributing to the failure? (It's late, I'm not sure if my way of explaining what I'm talking about makes sense...)

So at the very least I would want one in the gun, one backup, and one replacement in case of a mechanical failure in either one of those.

 dogma wrote:


However, it is mistaken to believe that the analysis of collected data has no place in political decision making.

I wouldn't dare try and advocate that. Good analysis requires raw data. However the data highlighted for pubic interest differs from the raw data considerably. It needs to because of TLR as much as for concealing unwanted data or preventing the press from jumping to conclusions.

 dogma wrote:

At least in this country statistics developed for the press are generally based on the assessment of political opinion regarding a person or an issue. This usually involves a fairly simple survey with some form of multiple choice response set, designed to produce a sample of respondents numbering ~1000. This sort of data can only really be influenced by likely respondents, and the specific wording of a given question. The former can be

It is true that the majority instances of press statistical data comes from polls. Polls are catchy, can be applied to any question, are fixable if this is desired by choosing the demographic or location canvassed and are easy to run by the press themselves.
However the press takes great interest in other statistical data if it is catchy, or presented at an opportune time. Crime, health and employment statistics are favoured examples of the media, and need not be linked to any study based on an opinion poll.

 dogma wrote:

Oh, you mean the Bell Curve? If so, the criticism I 'm most familiar with was centered around the notion that intelligence was genetically heritable. I know there was also a lot of mudslinging, but that didn't stay in the public eye for long as it was primarily grounded in long-held grudges within the psychology community.

IQ is only a broad and not particularly accurate marker for inheritance, and any study of intelligence should take education into account, which a tally of IQs over a large section of the populace does not do.

This is not news even a the time, though the particular study had not been done before. IQ by nationality was graphed, IIRC Japan has an average IQ of 110, the highest in the world. This data may well be outdated, and not professionally sourced - from memory of an 80's copy the the Guinness Book of Records.

Still the point being made is that a statistical study or a large scale for academic research purposes can easily have political and/or social consequences which might demand a redaction of the scientific data; even if this results in a corruption of the standard scientific protocols for he impartial and dispassionate collection of data.

 Dreadwinter wrote:

I asked for evidence and was not provided with any where a cop needed more than one additional clip. Either way, this is the wrong thread to be discussing this in.

I don't want to go back so apologies if this was answered, but depending on caliber, there's not a ton of ammo in magazines for a larger round/single stack, like a 1911 and it's variants, or a 10mm - we're talking like 8 rounds. It's one of the reasons I switched my personal CCW from a 1911 (which I love) to a compact 9mm (which I totally don't love, but it holds 13 rounds and is pretty damn small).

Since magazines aren't especially large or heavy from a LEO perspective - we're not talking someone feeding a 240 - is there a compelling reason why they shouldn't carry 2 or 3 magazines?

 Ouze wrote:

 Dreadwinter wrote:

I asked for evidence and was not provided with any where a cop needed more than one additional clip. Either way, this is the wrong thread to be discussing this in.

I don't want to go back so apologies if this was answered, but depending on caliber, there's not a ton of ammo in magazines for a larger round/single stack, like a 1911 and it's variants, or a 10mm - we're talking like 8 rounds. It's one of the reasons I switched my personal CCW from a 1911 (which I love) to a compact 9mm (which I totally don't love, but it holds 13 rounds and is pretty damn small).

Since magazines aren't especially large or heavy from a LEO perspective, is there a compelling reason why they shouldn't carry 2 or 3 magazines?

I answered this with a video and then a post of the Hollywood/Bank of America robbery on why its a piss poor decision to carry "one" mag

Little background on what Jihadin was talking about. Granted, not a regular occurrence in law enforcement.

Magazines fail, the springs can and do break which renders the weapon unable to fire and unlike revolvers it's quite difficult to manually camber rounds in a clip fed weapon. While rare it's also not unheard of for a clip to not lock in place which can cause it to fall free from the weapon. Mechanical failures do occur which require swapping out the magazine for a new one.

Additionally having more than one clip is crucial should the officers find themselves in an extended engagement with multiple assailants or a situation where they need to control a hostile gunman by use of suppressive fire. Volume of fire is often best way to combat somebody with a superior weapon such as a criminal with an automatic weapon such as an AK-47, if they are faced with a lot of shots coming at them it forces them to keep their head down and restricts their ability to move without opening them up to the likelyhood of being hit. That can be absolutely vital in terms of buying time for other officers to arrive or for civilians to escape the area.

A lot of gang bangers are already better armed then the police, suggesting that the police should make due with a pistol and only one clip is simply absurd. Why not just demand they only get one bullet? Heck lets make it so the police can only use nerf bats.

 Ouze wrote:
Little background on what Jihadin was talking about. Granted, not a regular occurrence in law enforcement.

To be fair though, you're not carrying three magazines because using them is a regular occurrence. It's for those worst case scenario type situations.

 paulson games wrote:
A lot of gang bangers are already better armed then the police, suggesting that the police should make due with a pistol and only one clip is simply absurd.

Hmm? Drug dealers and other heavy criminals maybe, but basic street hoodlums? The (USA) top ten guns used in crimes are mostly cheap low-quality guns or stuff that's so common you can't fail to loot one if you're on a burglary spree. Nine handguns and the incredibly common Mossberg 12gauge. Things like that Hollywood shootout is pretty rare no matter what American films might tell us. Not that a shoddy .380 autoloader can't kill, ofc - especially at point-blank range. Many of those police officers who get killed on the job are surprised at very short ranges, whatever weapon they carried unused when help arrives.

One dead and three critical wounded at a convenience store in St. Louise now. What a way to start Xmas

http://news.yahoo.com/four-shot-one-fatally-downtown-st-louis-050034846.html

 Dreadwinter wrote:


I asked for evidence and was not provided with any where a cop needed more than one additional clip. Either way, this is the wrong thread to be discussing this in.

Just as an aside since this is a personal pet peeve of mine - in firearms parlance, magazine and clip are not synonyms. I seriously doubt there are many police agencies which utilize clips.

 Orlanth wrote:
However the data highlighted for pubic interest differs from the raw data considerably. It needs to because of TLR as much as for concealing unwanted data or preventing the press from jumping to conclusions.

I never said that it didn't. In fact I've specifically said exactly the opposite several times now.

 Orlanth wrote:

However the press takes great interest in other statistical data if it is catchy, or presented at an opportune time. Crime, health and employment statistics are favoured examples of the media, and need not be linked to any study based on an opinion poll.

They're also not generally produced for the press. They are generally taken from state sponsored surveys, made available outside the filter of the press.

 Orlanth wrote:

Still the point being made is that a statistical study or a large scale for academic research purposes can easily have political and/or social consequences which might demand a redaction of the scientific data; even if this results in a corruption of the standard scientific protocols for he impartial and dispassionate collection of data.

The Bell Curve was published, without peer review, for popular consumption. It is literally one of the best, modern cases of two social scientists going against the standards of their discipline for the sake of airing their grievances against their philosophical opponents. And, justifiably, they were ripped apart by their peers.

And, to go back, The Bell Curve is not a study in the sense that you mean. It is an interpretation of one called the NLSY which was not developed for the purpose of academic research; at least not solely.

 DarkLink wrote:

Tell you what. Go invent phasers or blasters with a stun setting. Get a nobel peace prize. In the meantime, the police will just have to work with the tools they have.

Really? You mean you can't just use stuff that hasn't been invented and have to rely on stuff that exists? Have you let anyone else know this? It seems like something people need to know!

Back to the original topic...

Protests seem to be building over this. They're blocked I-170 last night.

This is growing beyond stupid. Why do we live in a society where defending your life is wrong?

 djones520 wrote:
This is growing beyond stupid. Why do we live in a society where defending your life is wrong?

Because the stupid breed too quickly to die off like they should.

 djones520 wrote:
Protests seem to be building over this. They're blocked I-170 last night.

What time? Given the speed of traffic normally on I-170, how did anyone even notice?

It's just what I read on KSDK. Says they blocked the road, and then traveled to protest at the gas station some more.

 daedalus wrote:

 djones520 wrote:
Protests seem to be building over this. They're blocked I-170 last night.

What time? Given the speed of traffic normally on I-170, how did anyone even notice?

On other days the bricks aren't moving faster than the traffic.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 dogma wrote:

 Orlanth wrote:
However the data highlighted for pubic interest differs from the raw data considerably. It needs to because of TLR as much as for concealing unwanted data or preventing the press from jumping to conclusions.

I never said that it didn't. In fact I've specifically said exactly the opposite several times now.

You need to quote the context of the comments, please. You would then see that on this particular issue we are on the same page.

 dogma wrote:

 Orlanth wrote:

However the press takes great interest in other statistical data if it is catchy, or presented at an opportune time. Crime, health and employment statistics are favoured examples of the media, and need not be linked to any study based on an opinion poll.

They're also not generally produced for the press. They are generally taken from state sponsored surveys, made available outside the filter of the press.

You are behind the times there Dogma, at least with regards to the UK. If the US hasn't caught this trend fair enough, but if it hasn't it likely soon will.

Polls are hosted by the media directly, especially with online editions of broadsheet and tabloid newspapers both. Its as simple as asking a topical question and seeing how people vote.
It provides little data of any value except for press titilation, and the questions themselves are often on lowbrow topics. Nevertheless the press place store by the outcomes, and thus they are given a legitimacy that is generally undeserved.
To add to that serious 'credible' polls are also commissioned by the press. Pretty much identically to how polls are commissioned by the government, by hiring polling orgnisations to handle the work for them. You could argue that it is therefore not the press holding to poll, but the sponsorship is clearly labeled, and as the press group involved is the paying client they get to word the questions, time the poll and critically choose the poll location.
The poll tally itself is performed by legions of temps from the call centre industry, either from call centres or on the streets.

 dogma wrote:

 Orlanth wrote:

Still the point being made is that a statistical study or a large scale for academic research purposes can easily have political and/or social consequences which might demand a redaction of the scientific data; even if this results in a corruption of the standard scientific protocols for he impartial and dispassionate collection of data.

The Bell Curve was published, without peer review, for popular consumption. It is literally one of the best, modern cases of two social scientists going against the standards of their discipline for the sake of airing their grievances against their philosophical opponents. And, justifiably, they were ripped apart by their peers.

And, to go back, The Bell Curve is not a study in the sense that you mean. It is an interpretation of one called the NLSY which was not developed for the purpose of academic research; at least not solely.

Much of the criticism of the study was due to its supposed divisive findings. A more politically agreeable conclusion might not have gathered the same attention or critique.
As mentioned earlier I have problems with the application of the study, and with some of its conclusions, but not the data. There is a known link between nationality and IQ, so it is understandable that the factors are real, and therefore exploring an ethnic link is logical.

However the authors conclusion that 40%-80% of factors regarding IQ are inherited isn't convincing, and doesn't allow for migration and how the average IQ in a society with a stable education system does not fluctuate significantly due to third world immigration.
Cultural differences and uneven opportunity are IMHO far more likely to result in high or low IQ development. However the study conclusions are interpreted offense would be taken due to the nature of the data.

Anyway the entire reason for mentioning the study was to indicate how data studies for scientific usage can still have a political dimension, and that dimension can overshadow the hard science involved.

I believe that the legal system in this country is pretty screwed up as far as parity towards people of color, and I'm totally sympathetic towards protesting this fact, but a guy who pulled a gun out on a cop isn't a very good poster child for the cause - I suspect even the most radical and extreme protestor knows in their heart of hearts that a white guy would have gotten equally shot in that situation.

Stick with Eric Garner, I say. That was outrageous even to people predisposed to not believing there's a systemic problem with law enforcement.

 Ouze wrote:

Any job with a lot of driving is going to have a high on-the-job-casualty rate because driving is statistically the most dangerous thing most people do.

Which is why, in 2013, almost twice as many enforcement officers were killed in the line of duty accidentally as compared to felonious acts. It is also interesting to note that out of the of 23 offices killed in automobile accidents, 14 of them were not wearing seatbelts (with three in a parked patrol car at the time of the accident). In 2013, the fatality rate of LEOs was 11.1 per 100,000, which as previously stated by a few other people is nowhere near that of various other jobs (like loggers, construction workers, commercial fisherman, etc.).

Now of course it needs to be understood that this isn't to say that an officer's job is not difficult, because it certainly is. There were 49,851 officer assaults in 2013, which is expected considering police officers often have to confront some of the less-than-savory members of our society. My aunt, who recently retired from the Fairfax County Police Department here in Northern Virginia, had her fair share of assaults when she was a patrolman. Amongst other things, she was thrown down a flight of stairs and was seriously injured as a result (obviously...).

Of course, it would be helpful if people remembered that nothing is above criticism in this country, including the police. Concern for police officers well being and respect for their often times difficult job and still recognizing that there are problems with the criminal justice system as a whole aren't mutually exclusive ideas.

 d-usa wrote:
Isn't one of the recommended ways of clearing a failure to drop the magazine and insert a new one to rule out the possibility of a defective magazine contributing to the failure? (It's late, I'm not sure if my way of explaining what I'm talking about makes sense...)

SOP for all military weapons for a misfiring weapon is to drop the mag, charge it (to clear blockages), and inspect the breech of the weapon while holding the weapon in the "open" position, to inspect that there's no round in the chamber, double feed, etc. You don't simply drop the mag, slap in a new one and pull the trigger, as that may not have cleared anything.

 AegisGrimm wrote:
[size=24]Someone needs to tally up all the instances in 2014 where a white guy met the same fate, and throw it in their faces.

This is a bit tricky. The FBI would usually be the best source for this information, however, not all law enforcement agencies send data on this to the FBi (it's voluntary). New York, for example, does not. Compare the FBI's 460 odd killed compared to other sources more than one thousand for 2013. Some other sources have a running tally from local media reports as a source, such as http://www.killedbypolice.net/, however, the race of the deceased is not always available.

Fox tried your approach, but to get a big enough 'white' number, they included Latinos as 'white', which didn't fly.

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

 d-usa wrote:
Isn't one of the recommended ways of clearing a failure to drop the magazine and insert a new one to rule out the possibility of a defective magazine contributing to the failure? (It's late, I'm not sure if my way of explaining what I'm talking about makes sense...)

SOP for all military weapons for a misfiring weapon is to drop the mag, charge it (to clear blockages), and inspect the breech of the weapon while holding the weapon in the "open" position, to inspect that there's no round in the chamber, double feed, etc. You don't simply drop the mag, slap in a new one and pull the trigger, as that may not have cleared anything.

Well, I knew that there was a little more than that. I was just focusing on the "you loose a mag, full or not" when you clear..

I can't speak for the other branches, but SOP for the Air Force is not to drop the mag.

We use SPORTS. Slap, Pull, Observe, Release, Tap, Shoot.

Slap the magazine to make sure it's fully placed. Pull the charging handle. Observe the chamber to see if there is an obstruction. Release the handle (cycling a new round). Tap the forward assist (if your weapon has one). Shoot.

You follow those steps until your weapon fires.

 djones520 wrote:
I can't speak for the other branches, but SOP for the Air Force is not to drop the mag.

We use SPORTS. Slap, Pull, Observe, Release, Tap, Shoot.

Slap the magazine to make sure it's fully placed. Pull the charging handle. Observe the chamber to see if there is an obstruction. Release the handle (cycling a new round). Tap the forward assist (if your weapon has one). Shoot.

You follow those steps until your weapon fires.

Ensis you had a brain fart. Its this.

 Jihadin wrote:

 djones520 wrote:
I can't speak for the other branches, but SOP for the Air Force is not to drop the mag.

We use SPORTS. Slap, Pull, Observe, Release, Tap, Shoot.

Slap the magazine to make sure it's fully placed. Pull the charging handle. Observe the chamber to see if there is an obstruction. Release the handle (cycling a new round). Tap the forward assist (if your weapon has one). Shoot.

You follow those steps until your weapon fires.

Ensis you had a brain fart. Its this.

'


Yeah.. initially it's that... my bad

 Jihadin wrote:

 djones520 wrote:
I can't speak for the other branches, but SOP for the Air Force is not to drop the mag.

We use SPORTS. Slap, Pull, Observe, Release, Tap, Shoot.

Slap the magazine to make sure it's fully placed. Pull the charging handle. Observe the chamber to see if there is an obstruction. Release the handle (cycling a new round). Tap the forward assist (if your weapon has one). Shoot.

You follow those steps until your weapon fires.

Ensis you had a brain fart. Its this.

Yup. Or if you are a sexy ass SAW gunner - crank the charging handle, swear at your weapon loudly and verbosely and cut loose again. Gotta love belt fed weapons that fire from the open bolt. Magazines are for suckers.

 Orlanth wrote:

Polls are hosted by the media directly, especially with online editions of broadsheet and tabloid newspapers both. Its as simple as asking a topical question and seeing how people vote.
It provides little data of any value except for press titilation, and the questions themselves are often on lowbrow topics.

Hosting is not the same as conducting, and whether or not the questions are about "lowbrow" topics has no bearing on the validity of the responses.

 Orlanth wrote:

Much of the criticism of the study was due to its supposed divisive findings.

Well, no, the criticism was of the book The Bell Curve; not the study on which it was based.

 Orlanth wrote:

A more politically agreeable conclusion might not have gathered the same attention or critique.

I suspect that a well supported conclusion would also not have attracted the same degree of criticism.

 Bromsy wrote:
Magazines are for suckers.

Unless they're twin 90mm or 105mm revolving mags. I love semiautomatic tank guns. I hear the Germans are working on one that's full auto, but I can only imagine how heavy THAT belt would be to carry around.