I like statistics. When properly used, they can tell you what has actually happened in the past. Statistics can provide valuable information to help you run your company or for the government to run the country. Statistics can tell you how closely two sets of data are related, their correlation. You might notice, for example, that since you introduced pastel colored widgets, your sales to teenage girls have significantly increased. You might jump to the conclusion that teenage girls prefer pastel colored widgets, and you might be right. On the other hand, the increase in sales to teenage girls could be due to your increased marketing of widgets in women-only high schools and colleges.
When statistics tell you that two quantities vary together, most people will believe that they are related in some way. You should always beware of jumping to conclusions. Correlation does not equal causation. Here are three very high correlation examples from Tyler Vigen’s book Spurious Corrections.” I suspect there really is no relationship between the two quantities in each case.
Your company collects more and more data about its operation, products and customers. Additionally, thousands of data sets are available from public and private sources about behavior, health, poverty rates, driving accidents and just about anything you can think of. Given enough processor power, you can search for correlations among these data sets. Sometimes these “strange” correlations can prove valuable. A dozen years ago, an almost random check of the correlation between auto accidents involving personal injury or death across the counties of one state had a very high correlation with the number of people over 55 who were taking a specific medicine. The resulting investigation by the pharmacy company that manufactured the drug led to increased warnings to doctors and patients about a previously unsuspected age-dependent side effect.
When someone brings you one of these correlations, pay attention, but apply reason. Correlation is not causality
The last word:
President Obama and many other politicians on the left want to make it illegal for law abiding citizens to own a gun. In their view, only the government should have any weapons. They want to eliminate the Second Amendment to the US Constitution. The primary reason the first session of the US Congress included that amendment in the Bill of Rights was the recent experience with their prior government. The British Government severely limited gun possession in towns and cities; they could not police the rest of the colonies. They feared, rightly it turned out, that the colonists could use those weapons against the British government. The US Founding Fathers wanted to make sure that a future government could not take away citizens rights without the citizens having a last resort to deal with a run amok government.
President Obama will tell you that eliminating all legal guns is the solution to these tragic mass-shooting events. But we know that is a false argument. Almost every one of the mass shooting events in the past two decades has been in a “gun-free zone.” We have been steadily increasing the number of these zones, so it includes virtually every school, sporting event, shopping area, government facility, and even most portions of our military bases. We actually put signs up to indicate to potential terrorists of where they will have five to thirty minutes of unbothered time to kill as many unarmed victims as they can.
Consider the recent Oregon tragedy. Chris Mintz is student at Umpqua Community College. As a decorated Army veteran, he tried to stop the gunman before he entered the classroom where the gunman killed nine students. Mr. Mintz was shot seven times for his bravery. If Mr. Mintz had a weapon with him, the results could have been vastly different.
Oregon state law actually requires that colleges allow guns on campus in some circumstances. At a minimum, a college must allow a visitor with a carry permit to bring a gun on campus, but not necessarily a student. Until police arrived, the gunman was the only person with a weapon on the campus.
Gun control laws do not keep guns out of the hands of criminals and terrorists; they only keep them out of the hands of law-abiding citizens. Chicago, with restrictive gun control laws, had over 400 murders in 2014. That is the equivalent of an Umpqua Community College event every 8 days.
We are painting a target on the back of our children.
Keep your sense of humor.