Hackery in Action, or Correlation is NOT Causation

Look, if you don’t know a lot about guns, it’s probably a pretty bad idea to write about guns. Here’s the headline of a Fiscal Times “article” about the Army’s effort to field a replacement for its sidearm, the 9mm M9: The Army’s New Handgun: A Weapon for Criminals? Maureen Mackey goes on to say…

Look, if you don’t know a lot about guns, it’s probably a pretty bad idea to write about guns.

Here’s the headline of a Fiscal Times “article” about the Army’s effort to field a replacement for its sidearm, the 9mm M9:

The Army’s New Handgun: A Weapon for Criminals?

Maureen Mackey goes on to say quote from an article in The Atlantic:

At issue, though, is that “the last time the military challenged the industry to make a better handgun, all the innovations intended for the battlefield also ended up in the consumer market, and the severity of civilian shootings soared,” writes Matt Valentine in The Atlantic. He explains:

Studying gunshot injuries in the D.C. area in the 1980s, Daniel Webster of Johns Hopkins University noticed an alarming trend – as time went on, more and more patients were arriving at the emergency room with multiple bullet wounds. In 1983, at the beginning of the study period, only about a quarter of gunshot patients had multiple injuries, but in the last two years of the study, that proportion had risen to 43 percent.
Over the same period, semiautomatic pistols with a capacity of 15-rounds (or more) were replacing six-shot revolvers as the most popular firearms in the country. It’s not difficult to see the correlation – more bullets in the guns, more bullets in the victims.

There’s two obvious problems with conflating the incidence of multiple GSW with the Army adoption of the M9.

First, the M9 wasn’t some radical new technology. It was an off the shelf purchase of an existing, in production pistol. Indeed, the general trend at the time was a shift away from revolvers toward semi-automatic pistols, particularly 9mm semis with a capacity of 15 rounds or so. That trend wasn’t just the military, but also among the civilian population, and quite a few police departments.

The second obvious causal factor, as pointed out in the comments of the post, was that 1983 was also the year crack cocaine became the drug of choice, with a corresponding increase in gun violence, particularly among gang members who entered into the lucrative trade. More especially, the same commentor noted that the study Mackey linked even admits this in the abstract of the study:

Temporal changes in admission rates and wound profiles were consistent with the city’s epidemic of drug-related violence and with a shift in weaponry toward high-capacity, semiautomatic handguns.

Agenda journalism wouldn’t be so bad if it weren’t always so bad.

Tags:

  1. ultimaratioregis

    “Agenda journalism” is not journalism at all. Alas, it is a pretense of reporting, fueled by the genuflection to the far-left benefactors who increasingly fund the failing ventures, that is nothing more than an extension of a political propaganda campaign. Often, it has little to do with truth, and sometimes nothing at all. (See: WAPO and the Valerie Plame stories)

    Fortunately, such tripe as you cite above convinces nobody who has not already swallowed the hook, and erodes what trust remains of mainstream media in any person who attempts even a modicum of intellectual inspection.

    Like

  2. David Navarre

    In recent years, I’ve been able to use a look at the statistics in the UK (homicides overall increasing as gun control increased) to at least stop friends from trying to use the Piers Morgan tactic. They won’t admit to a correlation between increasing homicides and more severe gun control, but at least they stop citing lower firearms homicides (since only the method of homicide changed, not the end result).

    Like

  3. SFC Dunlap 173d RVN

    There are those who believe (and I do not), that crack was something “done to” the African American community, further the incorporation of higher capacity was merely an up gunning the “bad guys” who were now shooting back at LEO’s, and with high capacity/Automatic weapons like Ingrams etc. this is in part why I have little problem with armament LEO’s use as they’re merely “keeping even.” Again, until I see LEO’s with 240B’s mounted, and frags instead of flash ants it’s just the cost of societal disintegration….in my humble opinion. Have mercy on us all.

    Like

Leave a comment