Breastfeeding and intelligence: the problem with the newest research

Do I believe the end result?  Probably.  But I don't believe that this paper comes close to proving its case.  Fox News has this discussion of a recent study in JAMA Pediatrics.

. . . Belfort and her colleagues gathered data from 1,312 mothers and children in the United States, tracking everything from the mother’s frequency of breastfeeding to other factors including the mother’s intelligence, the mother and father’s education levels, measures of the home environment, the mother’s employment and the type of childcare the baby received.
While the link between breastfeeding and cognition had been previously explored, many earlier studies did not control for these additional factors.
“Many previous studies have been criticized because any link you might observe between breastfeeding and childhood intelligence could be explained by those other factors,” Belfort told FoxNews.com.
Belfort then performed a series of tests measuring the children’s cognitive development after infancy.  At age 3, the children underwent the higher Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test, a measure of receptive language, or how well a child understands language.
“A child’s receptive language is highly correlated with general intelligence as measured by more typical IQ tests,” Belfort said. . . . 

Unfortunately, the discussion at Fox News is really is too uncritical.  Of course, the bigger blame should be placed on JAMA Pediatrics   As with almost all medical studies, they ignore the issue of endogeniety when they can't do randomized experiments.  If I were do the experiment, I would control for family specific effects (that is a dummy variable for each family to pick up the average intelligence of children born into that family) and, after accounting for birth order, spacing between children, and the other controls included in the study, see if intelligence of children within the family varied with the amount of breastfeeding.  The problem with the current purely cross-sectional study is that the measurement error in how education and other factors are measured is large compared the differences they claim to find in intelligence.

Read More

Continued misinformation about the risks of having guns in the home

The Children's Defense Fund continues the push for taking guns away from people in their homes.  With 58 mentions of the word home and a picture of a young girl who is under 10 years of age, there is the push to make people afraid of guns in their homes.  The notion that gun control can stop gangs from getting guns and cause the vast majority of these deaths is never acknowledged in this in their 73 page report.  Nor is it easy to stop 18 and 19 year olds to commit suicide if they really want to do so.  It is a debate that I have recently address again here.  Here is some data from the CDC for 2010 here.

Suicides

Accidents

Read More

Democrats and gun control advocates going all in to defeat Colorado recalls

The New York Times is running major stories painting Democrat State Senate President John Morse as a hero.  

As he prepared to vote for some of the strictest gun control measures in the country earlier this year, John Morse, a former police chief and president of the State Senate, knew he would infuriate some constituents. 

“There may be a cost for me to pay, but I am more than happy to pay it,” he said in a recent interview.   

Now, after months of gathering signatures and skirmishing in court, gun activists in Colorado, with the support of the National Rifle Association, have forced Mr. Morse and a fellow Democrat, Senator Angela Giron, into recall elections. The recall effort is seen nationally as a test of whether politicians, largely Democrats, outside big cities and deep-blue coastal states can survive the political fallout of supporting stricter gun laws. . . .

What is left out of the story is that Morse never ran for election on the gun control issue.  Of course, the New York Times would never spin this story as one where a politician broke his promises to voters and is incurring their opposition.  The NY Times also tries to spin this as something run by the NRA, again to de-emphasize the anger of the constituents.

Gun control advocates such as Mark Kelly and Gabrielle Giffords are pushing hard to raise money to defend gun the two state senators up for recall.

Kelly and Giffords and other gun control advocates want to make this their stand.  It will be interesting to see how much inaccurate information they push out during this campaign (see here).

Meanwhile, Giffords' gun control Super PAC has brought in $6.6 million during just the first six months of 2013.  From Politico:

Former Rep. Gabby Giffords’ gun control super PAC brought in $6.6 million in the first six months of 2013, according to reports filed Wednesday with the Federal Election Commission.
Americans for Responsible Solutions PAC, which also has a tax-exempt nonprofit arm that is not required to disclose its fundraising, received $3.2 million of its total haul from small-dollar donors who gave less than $200.
Several six-figure donations, including a $250,000 check from the law firm owned by Steve and Amber Mostyn — who gave more about $5 million to Democrats in 2012 — also boosted the group. . . .

Read More

Mayors who belong to "Mayors Against Illegal Guns," represent virtually none of the mayors in the US

Given that there are over 35,000 cities and towns in the US, having 950 belonging to MAIG seems pretty small.  That comes to about 2.7 percent.  The cities that they have lost include: Rockford, Ill at 150,843, Nashua, N.H. at 86,933, and Sioux City 82,719.

Many of the members of MAIG come from small population towns.  I haven't checked through, but my impression is that the new members are also from relatively small places.

There are seven mayors from Arizona.
Paradise Valley: 13,035
Tolleson: 6,655

There are four mayors from Arkansas
Forest City: 15,237
Helena: 12,106
Hughes: 1,422
Wrightsville: 2,114

Lots from California (I am not going to take the time to go through all the cities, but here are a few and not necessarily the smallest ones.)
Benicia, CA: 27,426
Blue Lake, CA: 1,253
Brisbane, CA: 4,282

Campbell, CA: 40,272 Claremont, CA: 35,457 Corte Madera, CA: 9,377 Emeryville, CA: 10,335 Fairfax, CA: 7,534 Gonzales, CA: 8,364 Gustine, CA: 5,625

Healdsburg, CA: 11,440
Malibu, CA: 12,832
Morgan Hill, CA: 39,420
Orange Cove, CA: 9,580
Patterson, CA: 20,659
Ridgecrest, CA: 28,325
San Anselmo, CA: 12,491
San Luis Obispo, CA: 45,878
Signal Hill, CA: 11,185
Tiburon, CA: 9,093
West Hollywood, CA: 34,781

There are thirteen mayors from Colorado
Boulder: 101,808
Englewood: 31,177
Golden: 18,867
Lafayette: 24,453
Lakewood: 145,516
Louisville: 19,074
Manitou Springs: 5,172
Nederland: 1,445
Northglenn: 36,891
Salida: 5,317
Superior: 12,782
Telluride: 2,325

There are four mayors in Delaware:
Blades, DE: 1,241
Dewey Beach, DE: 341
Middletown, DE: 19,483
Wilmington, DE: 71,292

Read More

Trayvon Martin's mom calls for repealing Stand Your Ground laws

From the Miami Herald:

The mother of Trayvon Martin said Monday that she believed Florida’s Stand Your Ground law played a role in her son’s shooting death, but she wasn’t ready to support a boycott of the state for not changing the self-defense law. 

“The thing about this law is I just think it assisted the person who killed my son to get away with murder,” Sybrina Fulton, the mother of the 17-year-old from Miami Gardens, said at a National Bar Association event in Miami Beach. 

“I think we have to change these laws so people don’t get away with murder,” she said, adding that her son was unarmed and peacefully walking back to his dad’s place when he was initially pursued by George Zimmerman. 

Zimmerman, however, successfully pleaded self defense by arguing he was ultimately and violently attacked by Trayvon. A Sanford jury acquitted Zimmerman July 13. 

The exact role of Stand Your Ground — which allows a person who is in fear for his life or grave harm to use deadly force without having to first retreat — isn’t clear in the Zimmerman acquittal. . . .

Much weight is put the claim by one juror that they relied on the "Stand Your Ground" law in making their decision.

Only two jurors have spoken up to CNN and ABC, and one indicated the jurors discussed the law, which appeared in the jury instructions. 

Zimmerman’s legal team, which approved of the jury instructions, didn’t focus on mounting a Stand Your Ground defense, however. They said a common self-defense justification was all the 29-year-old man needed because he reasonably feared that Trayvon was going to gravely injure him during a fistfight.

Zimmerman’s legal team, which approved of the jury instructions, didn’t focus on mounting a Stand Your Ground defense, however. They said a common self-defense justification was all the 29-year-old man needed because he reasonably feared that Trayvon was going to gravely injure him during a fistfight. . . .

The jury instructions were standard ones issued in all self defense cases.   To say that the law was discussed, doesn't mean much.  The Stand Your Ground law contains the old traditional self defense rules which apply when retreat was not possible.  Given that, it isn't clear that even if what part of the law is being referred to here. 

Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/2013/07/29/3529181/trayvons-mom-stand-your-ground.html#storylink=cp

 .
Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/2013/07/29/3529181/trayvons-mom-stand-your-ground.html#storylink=cp

Read More

"GPS flaw could let terrorists hijack ships, planes"

Technology here might make hijacking ships very easy.  From Fox News:

The world’s GPS system is vulnerable to hackers or terrorists who could use it to hijack ships -- even commercial airliners, according to a frightening new study that exposes a huge potential hole in national security. 

Using a laptop, a small antenna and an electronic GPS “spoofer” built for $3,000, GPS expert Todd Humphreys and his team at the University of Texas took control of the sophisticated navigation system aboard an $80 million, 210-foot super-yacht in the Mediterranean Sea. 

“We injected our spoofing signals into its GPS antennas and we’re basically able to control its navigation system with our spoofing signals,” Humphreys told Fox News. 

By feeding counterfeit radio signals to the yacht, the UT team was able to drive the ship far off course, steer it left and right, potentially take it into treacherous waters, even put it on a collision course with another ship. All the time, the ship’s GPS system reported the vessel was calmly moving in a straight line, along its intended course. No alarms, no indication that anything was amiss. . . .

Read More

Arkansas town arms teachers and staff at public schools

Finally, slowly, things are beginning to change over banning guns at school.  But as more places switch it will gradually get harder and harder for opponents to falsely claim about the risks of this policy.  From Fox News:

. . . Dougan is among more than 20 teachers, administrators and other school employees in this town who will carry concealed weapons throughout the school day, making use of a little-known Arkansas law that allows licensed, armed security guards on campus. After undergoing 53 hours of training, Dougan and other teachers at the school will be considered guards. 

"The plan we've been given in the past is `Well, lock your doors, turn off your lights and hope for the best,"' Superintendent David Hopkins said. But as deadly incidents continued to happen in schools, he explained, the district decided, "That's not a plan." . . . 

In strongly conservative Arkansas, where gun ownership is common and gun laws are permissive, no school district had ever used the law to arm teachers on the job, according to the state Department of Education. The closest was the Lake Hamilton School District in Garland County, which for years has kept several guns locked up in case of emergency. Only a handful of trained administrators -- not teachers -- have access to the weapons. 

Clarksville, a community of 9,200 people about 100 miles northwest of Little Rock, is going further. . . .

Read More

Audio of my interview on Dennis Miller's show on Monday: The state of the economy

We talked about the state of the economy and how the "recovery" has been going.  The audio of the interview is available here.

Read More

National Bar Association chief claims that Stand Your Ground law passed for financial motive

Why is it that gun control proponents keep questioning the motives of those with whom they disagree?  From the Miami Herald:

. . . “Their rhetoric doesn’t match the data,” said state Sen. Dennis Baxley who sponsored the original law and doesn’t want it changed. 

Baxley was singled out Monday by John Page, the National Bar Association chief who suggested the Ocala Republican, a funeral director, had a financial motive in supporting Stand Your Ground. 

“Rep. Baxley, I believe, his profession is a mortician,” Page said. “It’s not a way to draw up business.” 

Baxley called the comments “unfortunate and callous. For 43 years I’ve served grieving families.... In the end, this wasn’t really a Stand Your Ground case and what you’re seeing here is a political agenda for the upcoming elections.” 

When asked about the potentially small role Stand Your Ground might have played in the case, Page said the question answered itself. 

“Why do you need the law then? There is a common-law right to protect yourself,” he said. . . .

Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/2013/07/29/3529181/trayvons-mom-stand-your-ground.html#storylink=cpy 

Read More

Obama administration claims that they will veto any spending cuts

Over the weekend, I kept on hearing how it is important for Republicans to appear reasonable in the budget debate.  While the Republicans who want to help control budget costs by defunding Obamacare get attacked, how is this position by the Obama administration considered reasonable?  From Fox News:

The Obama administration dug in Sunday on its vow to reject proposed spending cuts by congressional Republicans in upcoming budget talks but declined to say whether the president would veto their proposals or allow a government shutdown.
Treasury Secretary Jack Lew told “Fox News Sunday” that President Obama will neither sign government funding bills that slash domestic spending nor negotiate with Republicans over spending cuts to reduce the federal debt limit.
However, he would not say whether the president would veto proposals and put the responsibility on Capitol Hill.
“Congress has to do its work," Lew said.
He also repeated what the administration has said in the weeks ahead of talks on short-term funding for federal agencies before a Sept. 30 deadline -- that Capitol Hill lawmakers must replace so-called sequester cuts with less drastic ones. . . .

The ultimate irony is that Treasury Secretary Jack Lew was the one warning Republicans about "false crises."  This is after the Obama administration has continually raised end of the world scenarios over the impact of budget cuts.

Treasury Secretary Jack Lew warned Republicans to avoid "false crises" over a government shutdown and the debt limit in the coming months. 

Appearing on ABC's "This Week with George Stephanopoulos," Lew continued to hammer the message President Obama has been touting this week, about renewing a focus on boosting the middle class and avoiding self-inflicted wounds on the economy. . . .

Here even the "self-inflicted wounds" claim is false.  See my past piece on Obama's end of the world claims during the 2011 budget battle available here.

Read More

How Detroit's bankruptcy could be solved and also lead to more freedom, but Democrats will fight strongly against this

So what would be a legitimate argument against selling off this property?  Why does the Financial Times think that this is so outlandish?  Don't people think that it would be nice to get a large amount of money to pay off some of the city's debts?  From the Financial Times:

Among all the helpful suggestions the Motor City has received during its slide into bankruptcy, selling off Belle Isle, a picturesque island park in the Detroit river, to a group of billionaires intent on creating a libertarian city-state ranks among the most outlandish. 

Yet Rodney Lockwood, the local property developer who has been pushing his idea for a “Commonwealth of Belle Isle”, is not alone in imagining there is value locked up in city-owned assets, which could be put up for sale to help pay creditors. . . .

Read More

Yet another attack in revenge of Trayvon Martin's death, this time in DC

I have compiled previous revenge cases here and here.  Most of these cases seem to involve blacks against whites, not Hispanics even though Zimmerman is Hispanic and 1/8th black.  Here is another case from Washington, DC in the Washington Times:

“This is for Trayvon Martin.” 

That’s what one of three black men told a white man as they approached him early Saturday in Washington before committing what police are saying may be a hate crime, according to Metropolitan Police Officer Anthony Clay. 

The men kicked the man, who was not identified, as they took his iPhone and wallet, the officer said Sunday, according to CNN. The victim suffered minor injuries and refused medical treatment. 

There have been no arrests, but police are investigating the incident as a hate crime, the officer said. 

“There is no pattern in these types of crimes. These attacks are outrageous; we are doing everything in our power to see that they certainly don’t occur. If they do occur, we are going to aggressively investigate them and bring people to justice,” Metropolitan Police Department spokesman Araz Alali said. . . .

Read More

Obama administration's double standard on background checks: They oppose voter IDs and criminal background checks by employers, but support criminal background checks for guns

The Obama administration has pushed to block voter ID requirements because they reportedly discriminate against minorities.

The Obama administration on Monday blocked a new law in Texas requiring voters to show photo identification before they can cast a ballot, citing a concern that it could harm Hispanic voters who lacked such documents. 

The law, which was approved in May 2011, required voters to show government-issued photo identification, such as a driver's license, military identification card, birth certificate with a photo, current U.S. passport, or concealed handgun permit. 

The Justice Department said that data from Texas showed that almost 11 percent of Hispanic voters, or more than 300,000, did not have a driver's license or state-issued identification card, and that plans to mitigate those concerns were incomplete. . . .

 The Obama administration also opposes companies engaging in criminal background checks for their employees.  A nice summary is available from Judicial Watch:

BMW and Dollar General are “very serious systematic race discrimination cases,” according to the EEOC’s general counsel. The agency found “statistical disparities” in the hiring rates of “blacks and nonblacks” after the companies ran criminal-background checks. Dollar General revoked conditional employment offers for 10% of its black applicants but only 7% of “nonblack” applicants during a three-year period, the EEOC revealed, calling it a “gross disparity” based on race. 

BMW’s offense was requiring that employees of a new logistics contractor undergo criminal background checks in 2008. Of the 645 employees who would work at the auto maker’s South Carolina plant, 88 were terminated based on their criminal record. The EEOC says because 80% of the terminated employees were black, BMW “disproportionately screened out African Americans from jobs.” 

Since Obama became president, the EEOC has pushed hard to deter companies from using criminal background checks to screen job applicants because the administration says it discriminates against blacks. Last year soft drink manufacturer Pepsi Co. paid $3.13 million to settle EEOC charges that its screening policy discriminates against blacks by improperly using criminal checks. . . . 

See also this:

Alert to Federal contractors:  The Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP) has added criminal background checks to its compliance checklist. 

On Jan. 29, 2013, OFCCP issued Directive 306, notifying federal contractors and subcontractors that use of criminal background checks to screen applicants for open positions may violate Title VII. OFCCP noted that because racial and ethnic minorities are arrested and convicted at a higher rate than whites, excluding job seekers based upon their criminal history may be discriminatory. 

OFCCP indicated its intent to follow the EEOC’s Enforcement Guidance on the use of arrest and conviction records issued on April 25, 2012. In that Guidance, EEOC noted that use of criminal background checks can lead to: (1) disparate treatment (e.g., intentionally treating a white job applicant with a criminal conviction differently than a minority job applicant); or (2) disparate impact (e.g., a neutral policy of excluding job applicants with criminal histories, but such policy disproportionately screens out certain racial or ethnic groups). To avoid claims of disparate impact, an employer’s policy or practice of excluding applicants based upon criminal history must be job-related and consistent with business necessity.  

OFCCP stated it is aware of contractors posting job announcements that categorically exclude applicants with arrest or conviction records or require applicants to have a “clean” criminal record.  OFCCP believes these practices likely violate federal discrimination laws. . . . 

Yet, surely these same problems exist for background checks for people buying guns.  But Democrats don't seem to care that their rules are preventing poor blacks or Hispanics from getting guns for self defense. 

Note that this inconsistency doesn't go the other way.  I don't oppose background checks for guns because of the fact that people don't have IDs.  I oppose them because virtually every one who is denied is a false positive. 

Read More

A note on Zimmerman juror B29

Much is made about juror B29 in the Zimmerman trial.  In particular, her claim that Zimmerman "got away with murder."  Much has also been made about her having to do this because of Florida law: "Maddy said she realized there wasn't enough proof to convict Zimmerman of murder or manslaughter under Florida law."

But there was nothing unique about the part of Florida's law that was relevant to this case, but phrasing things this way feeds into the whole attack on Stand Your Ground laws.  The key point is that juror B29 ultimately followed the law.  From ABC News:

"That's where I felt confused, where if a person kills someone, then you get charged for it," Maddy said. "But as the law was read to me, if you have no proof that he killed him intentionally, you can't say he's guilty." . . .

One thing is interesting is that the media had to show B29's picture, revealing that she is black.  But that is not something that the media discussions what to explicitly mention.

Read More

This is pretty scary: "Neuroscientists plant false memories in the brain"

This is one future that I would like to avoid.  From MIT's news office:

. . . In a step toward understanding how these faulty memories arise, MIT neuroscientists have shown that they can plant false memories in the brains of mice. They also found that many of the neurological traces of these memories are identical in nature to those of authentic memories. 

“Whether it’s a false or genuine memory, the brain’s neural mechanism underlying the recall of the memory is the same,” says Susumu Tonegawa, the Picower Professor of Biology and Neuroscience and senior author of a paper describing the findings in the July 25 edition of Science. . . .

Read More

Why even professional athletes need protection from violent crime

It is so easy to attack professional athletes who are found to be carrying handguns with them (e.g., Tampa Bay Buccaneers defensive end Da`Quan Bowers who ran afoul of New York's gun control laws).  From Yahoo Sports:

Life on the road can be dangerous for professional athletes. Unfortunately for Texas Rangers relieverTanner Scheppers, he found that out the hard way after the team arrived in Cleveland on Thursday night for their weekend series against the Indians. 

According to Drew Davison of the Ft. Worth Star-Telegram, Scheppers was attacked by a group of young males in downtown Cleveland after going out for a food run. The assault took place about two blocks away from the team's hotel, and as a result Scheppers was unavailable to pitch on Friday night after suffering a laceration near his left eye and experiencing headaches. 

He was, however, cleared for action on Saturday, so it appears the attack won't have any lasting effects. That's good news for everybody, but especially for the Rangers. In 46 appearances this season, Scheppers has posted a 1.74 ERA and a 1.88 K/BB ratio. Those outstanding numbers helped earn him a spot in the American League's Final Vote for the All-Star game. . . .

Read More

Are Stand Your Ground Laws in Florida Racist?: Some regression evidence

I have previously posted here a long discussion on the simple averages regarding the characteristics of those involved in "Stand Your Ground" cases in Florida.  The data from the Tampa Bay Tribune is available here (also here).  Yet, there are real limits to using just simple means because that approach assumes that the cases involving blacks and whites are the same.  The Tribune has collected a lot of information on everything from the race and gender of the person shot and the shooter to the following questions:

Did the victim initiate the confrontation? 

Was the victim armed? 

Was the victim committing a crime that led to the confrontation? 

Did the defendant pursue the victim? 

Could the defendant have retreated to avoid the conflict? 

Was the defendant on his or her property? 

Did someone witness the attack? 

Was there physical evidence?  

Case type 

Alleged Home Invasion
Alleged sexual assault
Argument over love interest
Argument turned violent
Attempted car theft
Attempted home invasion
Attempted robbery
Burglary
Citizen enforcing the law
Dispute over money/property
Domestic argument
Domestic dispute
Drug deal gone bad
Fight at bar/party
Home invasion
Neighborhood dispute
Retaliation
Road Rage
Robbery
Roommate Dispute
Teenage bullying
Trespassing
Unknown
Unprovoked attack 

Case year

Before I lose people by reporting the regressions below, let me provide a brief verbal discussion.  There is a simple problem with comparing the mean conviction rates as I have done earlier.  Just because two people are charged with murder doesn't mean the two cases are identical.  Using the Tribune data, blacks killed in these confrontations were 13 percentage points more likely to be armed than the whites who were killed, thus making it more plausible that their killers reasonably believed that they had little choice but to kill their attacker.  By a 43 to 16 percent margin, the blacks killed were also more often committing a crime.  Further, there were also more cases with a witness around when a black was killed (69 to 62 percent).

Everything else equal, in cases with only one person killed, killing a black rather than a white increases the defendant's odds of being convicted doubles, though the result is not statistically significant.  If you also include multiple murder cases, killing a black increases the chances of conviction even more.

Regression looking at the odds of someone being convicted of murder for those who have killed one person.

xi: logit convicted VictimHispanic VictimWhite VictimBlack VictimMale DefendantHispanic DefendantWhite DefendantBlack DefendantMale DidVictimInitiateConfrontation WastheVictimArmed WasVictimCommittingCrime DidDefendantPursueVictim CouldDefendantRetreat WasDefendantonHisProperty DidSomeoneWitnessAttack WasTherePhysicalEvidence othermurdered  casetype_2-casetype_25 year_2006-year_2012 if pending=="Decided" & MurderVictim2sRace =="NA", or robust

Logistic regression                Number of obs =    66

                                   Wald chi2(29) =     .

                                   Prob > chi2=     .

Log pseudolikelihood =   -20.7842  Pseudo R2     =0.5408

-------------------------------------------------------

             |               Robust

   convicted | Odds Ratio   Std. Err.      z    P>|z|

-------------+-----------------------------------------

VictimHisp~c |   .0009022    .002332    -2.71   0.007

 VictimWhite |   .4247123   .9166847    -0.40   0.692

 VictimBlack |   1.174415   4.496167     0.04   0.967

DefendantW~e |    34.6601   89.92937     1.37   0.172

DefendantB~k |   4.915077   12.41981     0.63   0.529

DefendantM~e |    .340511   .5529446    -0.66   0.507

DidVictimI~n |   .0137108   .0348234    -1.69   0.091

WastheVict~d |   .0721759   .2389135    -0.79   0.427

WasVictimC~e |   3.043378   12.33578     0.27   0.784

DidDefenda~m |   1.635232   3.278233     0.25   0.806

CouldDefen~t |   1.475613   2.438766     0.24   0.814

WasDefenda~y |   4.778653   5.087016     1.47   0.142

DidSomeone~k |   22.62614   40.55751     1.74   0.082

WasTherePh~e |   .2503723   .2216539    -1.56   0.118

  casetype_3 |   7.49e+08   1.75e+09     8.77   0.000

  casetype_4 |   8.24e+08   2.21e+09     7.63   0.000

  casetype_8 |   1.74e+10   3.81e+10    10.76   0.000

  casetype_9 |   2.10e+09   5.48e+09     8.22   0.000

 casetype_10 |   1.60e+09   2.58e+09    13.13   0.000

 casetype_12 |   1.84e+09   5.58e+09     7.04   0.000

 casetype_13 |   1.08e+12   3.20e+12     9.37   0.000

 casetype_14 |   1.46e+09   4.26e+09     7.24   0.000

 casetype_15 |   4.84e+08   1.89e+09     5.12   0.000

 casetype_17 |   1.11e+08   3.26e+08     6.34   0.000

 casetype_25 |   2.62e+08          .        .       .

   year_2006 |   .6355305   1.720501    -0.17   0.867

   year_2007 |   .0931599   .4768633    -0.46   0.643

   year_2008 |   .0573326   .2092783    -0.78   0.434

   year_2009 |   1.008875   2.457142     0.00   0.997

   year_2010 |   63.62403   200.2368     1.32   0.187

------------------------------------------------------

Note: 1 failure and 0 successes completely determined.


. test VictimWhite=VictimBlack

 ( 1)  VictimWhite - VictimBlack = 0
           chi2(  1) =    0.04
         Prob > chi2 = 0.8386

. test VictimHispanic=VictimBlack

 ( 1)  VictimHispanic - VictimBlack = 0
           chi2(  1) =    2.55
         Prob > chi2 = 0.1100

. test VictimHispanic=VictimWhite

 ( 1)  VictimHispanic - VictimWhite = 0
           chi2(  1) =    4.91
         Prob > chi2 = 0.0267

. test DefendantWhite=DefendantBlack

 ( 1)  DefendantWhite - DefendantBlack = 0
           chi2(  1) =    0.23
         Prob > chi2 = 0.6316

Regression looking at the odds of someone being convicted of murder for those who have killed one or more people.

. xi: logit convicted VictimHispanic VictimWhite VictimBlack VictimMale DefendantHispanic DefendantWhite DefendantBlack DefendantMale DidVictimInitiateConfrontation WastheVictimArmed WasVictimCommittingCrime DidDefendantPursueVictim CouldDefendantRetreat WasDefendantonHisProperty DidSomeoneWitnessAttack WasTherePhysicalEvidence othermurdered  casetype_2-casetype_25 year_2006-year_2012 if pending=="Decided", or robust

Logistic regression                Number of obs =    78

                                   Wald chi2(32) =     .

                                   Prob > chi2=     .

Log pseudolikelihood = -22.785937  Pseudo R2     =0.5735

-------------------------------------------------------

             |               Robust

   convicted | Odds Ratio   Std. Err.      z    P>|z|

-------------+-----------------------------------------

VictimHisp~c |   .0000949   .0003103    -2.83   0.005

 VictimWhite |    .238639   .4879525    -0.70   0.483

 VictimBlack |   3.390464   9.382387     0.44   0.659

DefendantH~c |   5.55e-13   1.35e-12   -11.61   0.000

DefendantW~e |   7.55e-11   2.26e-10    -7.78   0.000

DefendantB~k |   1.91e-12          .        .       . 

DefendantM~e |   .2819811   .5277879    -0.68   0.499

DidVictimI~n |   .0078562   .0144318    -2.64   0.008

WastheVict~d |   .0895871   .2060086    -1.05   0.294

WasVictimC~e |   2.951656   9.628308     0.33   0.740

DidDefenda~m |   1.935009   3.692359     0.35   0.729

CouldDefen~t |   1.207219    1.75638     0.13   0.897

WasDefenda~y |    3.68262   2.776331     1.73   0.084

DidSomeone~k |   34.60143   52.71921     2.33   0.020

WasTherePh~e |    .236634   .2656798    -1.28   0.199

othermurde~d |   54.95588   119.1862     1.85   0.065

  casetype_3 |   240.5917   643.6653     2.05   0.040

  casetype_4 |   71.61738   152.6067     2.00   0.045

  casetype_8 |   4369.197   16026.35     2.29   0.022

  casetype_9 |   1132.737   3854.253     2.07   0.039

 casetype_10 |   183.0676   402.9866     2.37   0.018

 casetype_12 |   468.6694   1215.575     2.37   0.018

 casetype_13 |   553160.6    2506482     2.92   0.004

 casetype_14 |   1170.289   3029.217     2.73   0.006

 casetype_15 |    84.6564   416.3267     0.90   0.367

 casetype_17 |   24.15446   60.33759     1.27   0.202

 casetype_25 |   37.81938   87.88588     1.56   0.118

   year_2006 |   .1661872   .3844092    -0.78   0.438

   year_2007 |   .0113472   .0417041    -1.22   0.223

   year_2008 |   .0095219   .0326906    -1.36   0.175

   year_2009 |   .3936484   .9631961    -0.38   0.703

   year_2010 |   44.73127    123.881     1.37   0.170

   year_2011 |   .0005799    .001551    -2.79   0.005

-----------------------------------------------------

Note: 0 failures and 1 success completely determined.

. test VictimWhite=VictimBlack

 ( 1)  VictimWhite - VictimBlack = 0

           chi2(  1) =    0.57

         Prob > chi2 = 0.4505

. test VictimHispanic=VictimBlack

 ( 1)  VictimHispanic - VictimBlack = 0

           chi2(  1) =    6.13

         Prob > chi2 = 0.0133

. test VictimHispanic=VictimWhite

 ( 1)  VictimHispanic - VictimWhite = 0

           chi2(  1) =    6.41

         Prob > chi2 = 0.0113

. test DefendantWhite=DefendantBlack

 ( 1)  DefendantWhite - DefendantBlack = 0

           chi2(  1) =    1.51

         Prob > chi2 = 0.2198

. test DefendantWhite=DefendantHispanic

 ( 1) - DefendantHispanic + DefendantWhite = 0

           chi2(  1) =    6.22

         Prob > chi2 = 0.0127

. test DefendantBlack=DefendantHispanic

 ( 1) - DefendantHispanic + DefendantBlack = 0

           chi2(  1) =    0.26

         Prob > chi2 = 0.6105

I have tried other specifications, but there is no evidence that black and white defendants or black and white victims are treated differently.  For example, here is the simplest specification with just the victim's race and gender and defendant's race and gender as well as the number of people murdered.


. xi: logit convicted VictimHispanic VictimWhite VictimBlack VictimMale DefendantHispanic DefendantWhite DefendantBlack DefendantMale othermurdered   if pending=="Decided", or robust

Iteration 0:   log pseudolikelihood = -71.958988
Iteration 1:   log pseudolikelihood = -65.974128
Iteration 2:   log pseudolikelihood = -65.940597
Iteration 3:   log pseudolikelihood = -65.940546
Iteration 4:   log pseudolikelihood = -65.940546

Logistic regression                Number of obs = 111
                                   Wald chi2(9)  = 8.59
                                   Prob > chi2   = 0.4762
Log pseudolikelihood = -65.940546  Pseudo R2     = 0.0836

----------------------------------------------------
             |               Robust
   convicted | Odds Ratio   Std. Err.      z    P>|z| 
-------------+----------------------------------------
VictimHisp~c |   .3791321    .580078    -0.63   0.526
 VictimWhite |   1.009958   1.446379     0.01   0.994
 VictimBlack |   .4897925   .7041905    -0.50   0.620
  VictimMale |   .1134137   .1374925    -1.80   0.073
DefendantH~c |   1.415624   2.026775     0.24   0.808
DefendantW~e |   1.587212   1.956111     0.37   0.708
DefendantB~k |   2.120857   2.711162     0.59   0.556
DefendantM~e |   .7934841   .4977044    -0.37   0.712
othermurde~d |   6.797993   7.429584     1.75   0.079
-----------------------------------------------------


. test VictimWhite=VictimBlack

 ( 1)  VictimWhite - VictimBlack = 0
           chi2(  1) =    1.93
         Prob > chi2 =    0.1650

. test VictimHispanic=VictimBlack

 ( 1)  VictimHispanic - VictimBlack = 0
           chi2(  1) =    0.10
         Prob > chi2 =    0.7566

. test VictimHispanic=VictimWhite

 ( 1)  VictimHispanic - VictimWhite = 0
           chi2(  1) =    1.41
         Prob > chi2 =    0.2353

. test DefendantWhite=DefendantBlack

 ( 1)  DefendantWhite - DefendantBlack = 0
           chi2(  1) =    0.28
         Prob > chi2 =    0.5939

. test DefendantWhite=DefendantHispanic

 ( 1) - DefendantHispanic + DefendantWhite = 0
           chi2(  1) =    0.02
         Prob > chi2 =    0.8918

. test DefendantBlack=DefendantHispanic

 ( 1) - DefendantHispanic + DefendantBlack = 0
           chi2(  1) =    0.23
         Prob > chi2 =    0.6324

I suspect that there are real biases in how this data is collected.  An obvious example is how the Tampa Bay Tribune classified the Zimmerman case.

For example, many would strongly disagree with the newspaper's contention that Martin did not initiate the confrontation, that Zimmerman was pursuing Martin at the time of their confrontation, and that Zimmerman could have retreated to avoid the conflict.  The point here is that even using the data with the obvious liberal bias in terms of how this data was entered, the results do not support the claims of bias against blacks.

Read More

Bill to ban Stand Your Ground laws introduced in House

Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee reintroduced the so-called Justice Exists for Us All Act to Congress this past Wednesday. The Daily Caller has this:

Under the Justice Exists proposal, states that didn’t amend their stand-your-ground laws and require a “duty to retreat” would face a 20 percent cut to previously allocated funds. 

Additionally, to avoid the cut in funds, states would have to require local neighborhood watch programs to register with local law enforcement. . . .

Meanwhile the Congressional Black Caucus has launched a general campaign for more gun control.  It is too bad that they miss out on what motivates the gangs to begin with.

Gathered in Chicago on Friday, the lawmakers hosted an emergency summit to examine strategies for reining in urban shootings, with an eye well beyond the gun control measures that have lost all steam on Capitol Hill. . . . . 

The issue of gun violence was ubiquitous earlier in the year, as President Obama urged Congress to confront the problem with a long list of proposals addressing everything from gun access to mental health. The push was a direct response to December's shooting massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn., where a lone gunman killed 26 people, including 20 children. . . . .

The issue of gun violence was ubiquitous earlier in the year, as President Obama urged Congress to confront the problem with a long list of proposals addressing everything from gun access to mental health. The push was a direct response to December's shooting massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn., where a lone gunman killed 26 people, including 20 children. . . .

Meanwhile the Jay Z claims the Zimmerman verdict shows: "I was really angry about it. We all still knew it was still a bit of racism in America but to be so blatant?"   One has to wonder whether people actually listen to the trial.

"If you ask yourself the question, Didn't Trayvon have a right to stand his ground?" he said. "He was being chased. He fought back. He may have won. That doesn't mean he was a criminal." . . .

Read More

The IRS employees who are responsible for enforcing Obamacare don't want to be in the program

Might the agency responsible for enforcing Obamacare know something about the problems with the program?  From the Washington Examiner:

National Taxpayer Employee Union officials are urging members to write their congressional representatives in opposition to receiving coverage through President Obama’s health care law.
The union leaders are providing members with a form letter to send to the congressmen that says “I am very concerned about legislation that has been introduced by Congressman Dave Camp to push federal employees out of the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program and into the insurance exchanges established under the Affordable Care Act.”
The NTEU represents 150,000 federal employees overall, including most of the nearly 100,000 IRS workers.
Like most other federal workers, IRS employees currently get their health insurance through the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program, which also covers members of Congress. . . .

Read More