Surely you will admit that the number of times a convenient store gets robbed doesn’t have to be evaluated based on the number of people who live in the town. Surely you will admit that the number of car bombings in Iraq doesn’t need to be evaluated in terms of how many cars there are in Bagdhad.
It often makes sense to look at data as a fraction. It often doesn’t. The purpose of the article is to evaluate the data that the MSM is reporting in a broader context. Since the MSM reports absolute numbers, the critique is based on absolute numbers. There is no single best way to evaluate all data, and the person who did this evaluation did it appropriately for the debate in which he was engaged. It certainly isn’t so far off the mark that it deserves the insults and abuse that you and a few others have heaped on the author.
If we were comparing numbers of robberies over time then we would want to know the base of stores in order to make a fair comparison. 3 robberies on 10 stores takes on a much different meaning than 3 robberies on a base of 1000 stores. That's also why there are murder rates
The article showed numbers of military deaths over time. So it is indeed relevant to consider the size of the military over time and compute the percentage of people who were killed. This provides an apples/apples comparison and indicates whether the death rate is going up or not.
I'm sorry you are so defensive and mad over this.