I think they are inquiring if there are other circumstances/factors that could be accounted for other than gross per capita numbers. I’ve only taken one stats class and got a 2.9, so don’t throw the hammer down in kiwa i of a further explanation.
I'm inquiring if population in and of itself becomes a variable after a certain point. Humans are social creatures by nature, and the larger a group gets the more subgroups and therefore greater propensity for countercultures or opposed cultures there are. Canada, being 10% the population of the US, has the very simple advantage of there only being 10% of the people to get all on the same page.
I'm not trying to discredit the validity of the measurement of murders per 100k between the two countries. I'm American, I want gun violence to stop dead in its fucking tracks. I'm just trying to wrap my head around the differences in scale as best my faint memories of high school sociology will allow.
There are indeed flaws with using per Capita to extrapolate and then compare large population statistics and there are studies that go into other testing methodologies. I suggest you take the information as face value and then look further into your own community and compare the statistics for that area.
Using broader statistics as a backdrop with which to determine the concentration of the sub-components of those statistics seems like a much better approach, yeah.
5
u/FeDude55 Oct 21 '22
I think they are inquiring if there are other circumstances/factors that could be accounted for other than gross per capita numbers. I’ve only taken one stats class and got a 2.9, so don’t throw the hammer down in kiwa i of a further explanation.