It's hard to know about sampling because it depends on what one means by attacks. It's one thing to talk about attacks on all police, but another to talk about attacks on forest service/BLM employees, many of whom have little to do with law enforcement per se.
:)
Lynn
DKeppner wrote:
As one who used to do analysis even with 4 years of data the article presents to small sample to make any conclusions other than random acts with the exception of those specifically pointed out as having an agenda ala PETA, free rangers etc. But...
As a future host I would be very much interested in the environmental contexts of the incidents ie; holiday, trafficking or manufacturing areas, how remote and how often patrolled, historical context between offender and employee. I could go on quite a bit more but again, the sampling as presented is too small and spread out to make any conclusion other than as others have noted - an alarmist article written for reaction rather than to accurately inform.
Can't wait to work as a host, counting down the months.