More and more I think that I will get some sort of invasive treatment for my nerve root impingement. I am progressing …well..sort of stuck.
It started ok; faint symptoms early but at about 1.35 I knew it would be rough so I turned for home.
Then it became a “rock in the shoe” day: university gym was closed sans announcement, I parked at the Riverplex alone but a big blue truck right next to me…Stanley Steemers in my neighborhood…(noise), someone in the locker right next to mine.
BUT the train in the parking lot did stop…and I got a swim lane and a decent 1500 yard swim:
800 of side/back, side/free
200 of kicking without fins
200 in 3:38 (pedestrian but easy)
200 of fin kick drills
2 x 25 free
50 in 49 seconds
Weight: 205, but that was after lunch.
Chiefs lost 3-2 even though…in the bottom of the 9’th, it was 3-2, and the Chiefs got runners on first and second with no outs! Then:
runner trying to steal third was thrown out.
The Chiefs have lost a lot of games like this…right on the verge.
In 2009, a total of 1,314 children age 14 and younger were killed in motor vehicle traffic crashes. Of those 1,314 fatalities, 181 (14%) occurred in alcohol-impaired driving crashes. Out of those 181 deaths, 92 (51%) were occupants of a vehicle with a driver who had a BAC level of .08 or higher, and another 27 children (15%) were pedestrians or pedalcyclists struck by drivers with a BAC of .08 or higher.
In short, drunk driving crackdowns can save more kids than, say, potential measures to prevent such massacres.
So what are the factors that are associated with firearm deaths at the state level?
Poverty is one. The correlation between death by gun and poverty at the state level is .59.
An economy dominated by working class jobs is another. Having a high percentage of working class jobs is closely associated with firearm deaths (.55).
And, not surprisingly, firearm-related deaths are positively correlated with the rates of high school students that carry weapons on school property (.54).
What about politics? It’s hard to quantify political rhetoric, but we can distinguish blue from red states. Taking the voting patterns from the 2008 presidential election, we found a striking pattern: Firearm-related deaths were positively associated with states that voted for McCain (.66) and negatively associated with states that voted for Obama (-.66). Though this association is likely to infuriate many people, the statistics are unmistakable. Partisan affiliations alone cannot explain them; most likely they stem from two broader, underlying factors – the economic and employment makeup of the states and their policies toward guns and gun ownership.
Firearm deaths were far less likely to occur in states with higher levels of college graduates (-.64) and more creative class jobs (-.52).
Gun deaths were also less likely in states with higher levels of economic development (with a correlation of -.32 to economic output) and higher levels of happiness and well-being (-.41).
And for all the terrifying talk about violence-prone immigrants, states with more immigrants have lower levels of gun-related deaths (the correlation between the two being -.34).
Of course, these are STATISTICAL findings (e. g., Connecticut is a blue state); and yes, we have gun deaths in Illinois…a LOT of them, especially in Chicago.
Data on Religiosity Vs. Homicide rate (reposted from an earlier blogpost about theater shootings)
WASHINGTON — Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) said Friday that the shootings that took place in an Aurora, Colo. movie theater hours earlier were a result of “ongoing attacks on Judeo-Christian beliefs” and questioned why nobody else in the theater had a gun to take down the shooter.
I suppose that if I had a different upbringing, I’d laugh at such absurd statements. Unfortunately, I grew up among superstitious people who think EXACTLY like that. Whereas I am grateful I no longer have to associate with that crowd, I feel the need to point to, well, statistical evidence. Let’s look at homicide rates by country: (rates: per 100,000 population; the US rate is 4.8 per 100,000; we rank 27’th:
What do you notice? That’s right; the less religious countries are also LESS violent.
I decided to run a regression on the religiosity versus homicide rate; here “x” is “percent saying that religion is UNIMPORTANT” and “y” is homicides per 100,000 population.
The regression formula is y = 23.4 – 29.8 x which means that the the higher percentage of the population saying that religion is unimportant, the lower the homicide rate.
The plot is a bit of a mess:
Vertical axis: homicide rates per 100,000 population. Horizontal axis: percentage of population saying that “religion is unimportant” That is about as clear as it gets, though the relation is non-linear (and really shouldn’t be either).
and of course, this is highly non-linear; r^2 = .153.