Pre-Crime Tool: Soldier Social Experimentation. What Are Your Thoughts?

.... I think this is a purging tools ... but the question is who really do they want to purge?

There has been way too much social experimentation in the military in the current administration Cpl (Join to see)

Our Psychological profiling is about the same stage today as Fire was to us 300,000 years ago.

It seems to me SSgt Alex Robinson that it would be much more useful if the "scientists" were focusing on identifying characteristics which were highly correlated to violent behavior among junior high and high school students before they became violent.

Cpl (Join to see) It's a good idea to identify at risk soldiers and do what we can to help them. However as with any study, it all depends on what the numbers actually are. I need more data. The article states, "They found that the 5% identified as most at-risk were responsible for 51% of the violent crimes committed by those soldiers." This is from a sample of "all 975,057 soldiers who served during a six-year period", the article doesn't tell us how many of these soldiers were identified to be at risk, how many were were identified as being "most at risk", or how many crimes were committed as a whole. Data can be manipulated to support anyone's hypothesis, so I think we need to proceed with caution.

This article starts by talking about "at risk soldiers" Pre then states, "5% identified most at risk"
Let's pay attention to their words. OK so using the numbers listed in the article we can calculate that those identified as having committed specific crimes of (murder, manslaughter, kidnapping, robbery and other violent felonies not to include domestic violence and sex crimes) is a total of 5771. (ARE DOMESTIC VIOLENCE AND SEXUAL OFFENSES NOT VIOLENT CRIMES?) Right here they are determining who they are keeping in their calculations and who is not so a portion which do not fit their criteria for the study are being excluded. Next let's look at the numbers. What percentage of 975,057 is 5771. Well it is .005 percent or 5% so they have included all of those who committed a crime of their choice (not all crimes) in their study and there is not differential between soldiers who are at risk and soldiers most at risk.

"446 variables for each solider who served between 2004 and 2009. During that period, 5,771 soldiers committed murder, manslaughter, kidnapping, robbery or other violent felonies. (Domestic violence and sex crimes were not included in the study because research suggests that they follow risk patterns that are distinct from other types of offenses.)"

I think it's a good idea -
To test their model, researchers applied it to a sample of 43,248 soldiers who served between 2011 and 2013. They found that the 5% identified as most at-risk were responsible for 51% of the violent crimes committed by those soldiers.
That's more than half - and - if you can get them some counselling and perhaps thwart the violent activity, good - and for the 49% that didn't do anything, you would think they also would be fine with receiving FREE help! :-) If not, then that might indicate a problem!