Missouri Compromised — 16 Comments

  1. There are Lies – Damned Lies – and Statistics
    I think Mark Twain that.

    If you can juggle numbers, you can “prove” anything …. even using the exact same data set.

    • The Australian crime data comes from the Australian Institute of Criminology. You can find all that data and more on their website.

      We have not (yet) reviewed the “Assessing the potential …” paper. Likely won’t since it is a review of literature and we would have to read each paper the main paper refers to. But we have tackled the “magazine capacity and mass public shooting” topic ourselves … see

      • Ok, so do you think you could go over each palate it references and see what critique you can make of it?

          • If you’d oblige email me or I could email you, I’d love to help debunk myths about gun control any way I can

      • Also according to your magazine capacity analysis how much higher are the deaths in percent from high capacity to low capacity? Also what about woundings?

        • We’d have to pry open the spreadsheet, and I’ll see if I can get to that soon.

          But for now, this chart (in the article) shows a big problem in doing such an analysis. The “cattlepen scenario” is the main driver of the body count. If you do not include the carefully planned cattlepen events (at least the five events on the right of the chart), the increased body count in events using higher capacity magazine is marginal at best.

          • Yes I think that is very true. However my question is controlling for variables such as cattle pen and other ouliters, how much higher are mass shootings with high capacity magazine over low capacity magazine? In terms of percentage using the 1098-2018 data set. This of course doesn’t automatically prove that that per range is attributable to magazine size but I’d just like to know

          • Here is a quick-n-dirty summary of the average number of people killed and wounded in mass public shootings that were not either (a) well planned events or cattle pen scenario events:

            Killed Woulded
            <10 Rounds 6.6 4.7
            10-14 Rounds 6.0 2.5
            >= 15 rounds 6.8 5.2

            Statistically, no real difference. As we noted in the report we supplied before, the body count is primarily dependent on the number of victims and their inability to escape or find cover.

      • How do you find the mass homicide statistics? I went to the Institutes webpage and searched “Mass Homicide” I only got a paper that covered 1989-1999. Can you help please?

  2. So using the new data on high capacity magazines I guess gun control advocates should now want to ban all magazines above 14 and below 10, as it has the lowest death and wound rate, and they love using pure correlations all the time to assert causation.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

HTML tags allowed in your comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

Copyright License

(Once-a-year notice mainly for folks in the E.U.)

The content on this web site is free to use by everyone under American-style "fair use" doctrine. This means you may copy/paste, link to and otherwise make use of all the content herein.

In particular, we encourage you to reuse all the graphics and short sections of text.

For those in the E.U., this is a pre-license. You are not required to seek a specific license from us before using or linking.

For our standard copyright disclaimer, see

From the Founder of the Gun Facts Project

Order Now!