--- In [email protected], "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In [email protected], new.morning <no_reply@> > wrote: > > > > --- In [email protected], "sparaig" <sparaig@> wrote: > > > > > > > And the comment, "this is precisely the type of sporadic > fluctuation > > > > one must account for when total numbers are small." Exlusion is > a > > > > major way of "account[ing] for" such outliers. > > > > > > > > > It was NOT excluded from the data. The weekly AVERAGE was the > > > weekly average with no data excluded. The SIGNIFICANCE of the > > > outlier was dismissed because it was only one data point > > > amongst many and wasn't repeated and in fact was reversed > > > the next week (20 one week and 4 the next). > > > > See footnote 3. > > > > 3. After removing the outlier of June 22, Poisson regression > > analysis indicated there was no significant difference in the > > level of homicides in June and July 1993 from the remainder of > > the year. > > > > This implies that WITH the outlier included, there WAS a significant > > difference [higher] in the level of homicides in June and July 1993 > > from the remainder of the year. > > I don't think anybody has suggested otherwise. > > This was a separate analysis, BTW. It doesn't > contradict what Lawson is saying. > > > And at best, the ME had no effect on murders. At worst, it > > increases them -- assuming ME is causal. So it would appear, > > ME is "crime-stopper light". Works best, thjough modestly, on > > lighter-weight crimes I guess. And even then, its not a huge > > decrease. > > Gee whiz, it's a substantial decrease. Any police > department that could bring about that big a > reduction would be elevated to hero status.
Well, for what cost, is the issue. This stuff is not free -- at least in scalable quantities. From the graph II, it looks to me like about 250 assualts may have been "avoided". (Lets focus on assualts for simplicity, since that is the bulk of the suggested effect.) Thats 125 assaults/mo. Regardless of DC costs, in which particpants may have payed to play, recent FF experience indicates that even paying R&B for free course does not draw that many. And in urbane setings R&B/incidentals would be at least more towards $1000 than $600. And if there was a desire to scale it up, a salary would be necessary to attract 2000-5000+ YF to various urbane centers. Maybe $2000/mo min, plus $1000 R&B. Plus transportation, health insurance, vacation, retirement and other benefits. And administration, monitoring, research costs. But lets skip all those for now. How many YF in DC? I will assume 1000, but I think it was more (clarifications). So scalable project costs would be $3 million/month. $36 millon / year. So the cost per avoided assualt would be in the range of $24,000 / assault. Do you think there may be more cost-effective ways of reducing assualts? With more "certainty" -- (tried and true)? With less controversy?
