So you know this NYT op-ed? Everyone's talking about it. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/16/opinion/the-other-terror-threat.html … 1/n
@A_P_Mason 254/3370 = 0.075, which is close to the fatality rate for the 'unaffiliated' category in the table, which is ~80% of the total.
-
-
@A_P_Mason But that's the 'random nut' category. "in most cases...spontaneous beatings of minorities or vandalism of facilities." -
@A_P_Mason So the takeaway is you get 254 deaths if you count every freak who shoots someone and carves a swastika into their forehead? -
@A_P_Mason Actually it's totally unclear where 254 is coming from. '254' only appears in the report as a footnote tag. -
@A_P_Mason 3354 unaffiliated x 0.08 = 268 fatalities! None of this makes any sense. -
@St_Rev That table seems to be including the 1990s? So maybe 254 is the post-2001 portion of that. -
@A_P_Mason It doesn't say! So frustrating! -
@St_Rev@A_P_Mason Table 4 column 9 is for whole dataset. Using time ratio in column 3 can separate decades, but dunno if fatality rate vary -
@gattsuru@A_P_Mason Good point, but yeah, it doesn't get you anywhere. It's seriously a mess.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
. Banned in Sweden. SubGenius, Zhuangist, white-hat troll. Defrocked mathematician. Brain problems.