Business and science are different fields with different standards. In most social science studies employing inferential statistics, p < 0.05 is the cutoff for statistical significance, meaning the result is very unlikely to occur if the null hypothesis were true, the null hypothesis in this case being that gun…

For those of you not statistically inclined, 95% confidence is the standard cutoff for results to be considered statistically significant, meaning having a likelihood greater than chance of occurring.

I'm sorry to hear that. My father killed himself with his hunting rifle he was given as a teenager. However, my stance on guns is based on factual information based on research studies showing that they are public health threat. Suicides are more likely to happen if you have access to a firearm. Yes, there are other…

You know what's even sadder is that this MRA troll dismissed my posts, probably because they made too much sense and women aren't supposed to make sense. I'll repost one of them here:

I find it infuriating that people crutch on personal testimony and discount research studies to prove their points.

I wanna light things on fire because it's fun!

Yes, but those "ways" are FAR FAR less likely to kill you instantly! If you look up the statistics on the percentages of people who survive suicides, you'll see that it's kind of hard to survive a self-inflicted bullet to the head.

Gotcha - dick jokes are pretty low, so I should've put more thought into what I said.

"When people want to off themselves, they find a way." —> Yes, but it's a hell of a lot easier when that "way" is sitting in a box in your house.

If you click the links I provided earlier in the thread, you will see abstracts of studies demonstrating that gun ownership is detrimental to public safety. There are plenty of hobbies to choose from that don't involve owning something that poses a threat to your and your family's safety.

I was just making a joke, but if that Bushmaster ad is any indication of the marketing tactics employed by gun manufacturers, it sounds like they prey on insecure men in order to sell assault weapons.

Please cease the ad hominems.

If by "faux-intellectual liberal," you mean a Ph.D. candidate who knows how to conduct a literature search on scientific databases, then you are correct!

Does this ad campaign ring a bell?

Please click the links I provided earlier in this thread. These links lead you to research studies demonstrating the detrimental effects of gun ownership. I'm glad that shooting guns provided you with great memories with your dad, but there are other ways for children to bond with their parents that don't involve…

Perhaps you should stop resorting to ad hominem arguments.

That's an article about "Sales reps in the US [that were] encouraged to mis-sell antidepressants Paxil and Wellbutrin and asthma treatment Advair."

We rid our homes of harmful plastics, lead paint, and asbestos, yet when it comes to gun ownership, our national love affair with the 2nd Amendment prevents us from having an honest, unbiased discussion about the public health threats posed by having guns in the home. The scientific community has shown us study after…

Show me the research studies demonstrating the positive effects of gun ownership besides compensating for a small penis.

GUNS.