(msnyder{at}redhat.com) writes:
> Mark Borgerson nattered:
>> In article ,
>> msnyder{at}redhat.com says...
>> >
>> > Mark Borgerson wrote:
>> > > In article ,
>> >
>> > > > They picked them because they COULD obtain a very large
>> > > > and very representative sample from them.  It wasn't a few
>> > > > dozen -- it was a significant fraction of *all* of the large
>> > > > urban counties in the US, and "large"
doesn't mean "bigger
>> > > > than a million".
>> > > >
>> > >
>> > > A large sample---yes.  Representative of the whole US?   I doubt
>> > > it, or they would have said so.
>> >
>> > They did say so, Mark:
>> >
>> >     The sample was drawn from State prosecutor files in 33 of the
>> >     75 [most populous counties in the U.S.].  The counties were
>> >     widely scattered, from Los Angeles and San Diego, Denver and
>> >     Dallas, to Philadelphia and Dade County (Miami).  [...] The 75
>> >     counties are where a little over half of all murders in the
>> >     nation occur.
>> >
>> > The sample, therefore is representative of a little over half
>> > of all murders in the U.S.
>>
>> Yes,  but they represent the half that occurs in a specific
>> demographic data set---large counties with populations
>> greater than about 500,000.   The DOJ acknowledges that
>> the patterns of homicide are different between large cities
>> and smaller cities, suburban and rural areas:
>>
>> This report from the DOJ says :
>> " Intimate homicides (spouses, ex-spouses, boyfriends, and
>> girlfriends) made up a larger percentage of murders in rural
>> areas than in suburban or urban areas"
>>
>> http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/city.htm
>>
>> Since murders in rural and suburban areas are more likely to involve
>> intimates and family members,  I think that my hypothesis that
>> the spousal murder statistics for the 75 largest counties may not
>> be representative of the statistics for rural and suburban areas
>> is supported.
>>
>> You might also find it interesting that murder by poison (more common
>> among women offenders) represents a disproportionately large
>> percentage of murders in suburban and rural areas.  (See the DOJ
>> report cited above).  That would indicate to me that murder of men
>> by women might actually be more common in suburban and rural areas
>> than is the case in the large cities.
>
> Then why all the quibbling?  A study that represents more than half
> of the *entire possible sample* is  certainly large enough to be
> significant.  It's always possible for those outside the sample
> to have changed the results, but you yourself argue that it isn't
> all that likely to have changed them in the direction that would
> make them less interesting.

Because, like Parg, Big Daddy Sir Galahad Borgerson ( As Chris
Raum so accurately identified Borgerson with ) *cannot* face the
meanings of the facts presented here. He's either an " I'm
all right jack, screw the rest of you " narcissist, and/or a
Feminist supporter, so in that case, he'd have to quibble, as
no actual facts support his prattling.

> Mark, this is what you do on a regular basis -- find some trivial
> quibble and then beat it into the ground.  Why don't you try
> commenting on the content instead?

How could he do that ? That'd mean that he'd have to cop to being...
*wrong*.

Like a Feminist, he'll do anything to avoid that dark fate.

Thats why I've kill filed the loon, as, just as with Parg, BDSGBorgerson
offers *nothing* on topic, ever.

Pay him no mind, for he has none.

Andre



--
" I'm a man... But, I can change... If I have to... I guess. "
                                    The Man Prayer, Red Green.


--- UseNet To RIME Gateway {at} 4/1/05 4:47:54 PM ---