Red V Blue state: Crime and Safety

[rambot]

I'm convinced that people just say things but don't really understand what they mean. Nothing about the post I made was "ad hominem". It directly addressed the data you presented and explained why it was nothing more than p-hacked propaganda.

It addressed the terms, not the data. If I had more time, I'd investigate how "significant" this difference is. But given that you, dismissed the entirety of my post because of this difference (including info from other sources) without investigating whether the difference was significant enough to raise as a concern with the data, yeah, seems like ad hominem isn't the worst label. The only other thing you said was your "concern" with bias.

If your primary purpose is to prove that Democrat-run areas fare better in crime statistics than in Republican-run areas, then it makes perfect sense to exclude DC and pretend like it doesn't exist. But if your purpose is to objectively determine whether Democrat- or Republican-run areas fare better in crime statistics, then you would absolutely include it.

If you think it's reasonable to compare an area with a population density of 11,000/mile2 to a state with 6/mile2, I really am not sure what to tell you there.

You might also note that in your link that references FBI data, it states this:

The FBI cautions against using any one demographic marker to draw conclusions about the causes of crime, which they describe as manifold, complex and often “not readily measurable.” ​

Oh sure. I can understand that.

 

[rambot]

You're doing a great job of illustrating my point.

There are FAR too many confounders to simply say, RED state = more crime, BLUE state = less crime. To quote the FBI, the causes of crime are MANIFOLD, COMPLEX and NOT READILY MEASURABLE.

In this post, you've just suggested that population density has more to do with crime than whether Republicans or Democrats are in control. That's just one confounder of many.

The point is, this is all just propaganda dressed up as data. To reiterate what the FBI said, these things are "not readily measurable", and any attempt to correlate "red" states with more crime, or worse, trying to imply some causation, is nothing more than an exercise in p-hacking and confirmation bias.

So we could take this message to the California thread too then.

 

[probinson]

It addressed the terms, not the data.

It addressed the erroneous classification of the data.

If I had more time, I'd investigate how "significant" this difference is.

If one data point is obviously and blatantly wrong, that calls into question the validity of the study.

But given that you, dismissed the entirety of my post because of this difference (including info from other sources) without investigating whether the difference was significant enough to raise as a concern with the data,

It is. It not only exposes an error in the data classification, but it also calls into question why they would classify it like that. I suppose it's just a nifty coincidence that the wrong classification of the data helps bolster their narrative.

yeah, seems like ad hominem isn't the worst label.

It's the WRONG label. Ad hominem literally means "against the person".

The only other thing you said was your "concern" with bias.

Everyone should be concerned with bias when they read these kinds of studies.

If you think it's reasonable to compare an area with a population density of 11,000/mile2 to a state with 6/mile2, I really am not sure what to tell you there.

Thank you for reiterating that there are multiple, unquantifiable confounders in determining causes of crime.

 

[probinson]

So we could take this message to the California thread too then.

We sure could. But I thought you started this thread because you didn't want to talk about just California.

 

[Hank77]

There are FAR too many confounders to simply say, RED state = more crime, BLUE state = less crime. To quote the FBI, the causes of crime are MANIFOLD, COMPLEX and NOT READILY MEASURABLE.

How about data from the CDC?

States With The Highest Gun Death Rates​

According to data from the CDC, these are the states with the highest firearm mortality rates per 100,000 in 2021: ...

Red States Have Higher Gun Death Rates Than Blue States. Here’s Why

Some Republican politicians have used high crime and murder rates as an attack on Democratic lawmakers and the areas they represent, but data shows these rates are actually higher in Republican-led states.

www.forbes.com