by Bangalore 41 Replies latest social current
If an alien cannot tell the difference between someone shooting a carboard cutout and somebody shoot a human the alien do not know anything about humans so why should we care?
My dog might not know the difference between the nazi parties annual meeting and a gay parade what does that tell us anything?
Bemused......Oh no. Not aiming at you at all. Just throwing the knifes into the anti-gun debate.
Throwing knives?! .... now that is dangerous ;)
Is Sammie's number really that far out? US statistics from Factcheck.org:
Gun Murders in 2010 - 11,078
Gun Suicides in 2010 - 19,392
Non-fatal gun injuries in 2011 - 55,544
So about 86,000 gun victims in the US per year.
You are using the figures from two different years to arrive at an annual figure.
At least be honest.
Sammie also fails to differentiate what she's talking about. She goes from talking about children/ISIS/killing/murder with firearms directly to the "100,000 gun victims per year" argument. Well, in your figure above (albeit from two different years) it clearly says 55,544 NON-FATAL injuries in 2011. "NON-FATAL" means no one died, therefore it cannot be used in support of any argument alleging that all gun-related incidences lead to death. "non-fatal" also does not indicate deliberate, violent use of a firearm; it can mean a hunting accident or the all-too-familiar story of someone cleaning their loaded gun and accidentally shooting themself, which obviously only supports an argument about how stupid some people can be.
Again, I'm not arguing for or against guns, but it irritates me when people cherry-pick and misrepresent in order to "prove" their point. If you can't do it honestly then stay out of the discussion.
In 2011, the latest figure available from the Centers for Disease Control,
Accidental discharge 851
Suicide 19,766
Homicide 11,101
Undetermined Intent 222
Total: At least 31,940 people died from gun injuries in 2011.
Also 258 people were killed during legal intervention, most of them due to guns.
Guns were involved, but were not the primary cause of death:
-in 2 fatal accidents.
-in 6 homicides.
Previous years:
2010 31,328 people
2009 31,177 people
2007 31,224 people
2004 29,569 people
http://www.answers.com/Q/How_many_gun_deaths_are_in_the_US_every_year
bohm: If an alien cannot tell the difference between someone shooting a carboard cutout and somebody shoot a human the alien do not know anything about humans so why should we care?
The whole example is so filled with speculation and fantasy based on unknown "what ifs" it is absurd anyone would post it as a valid counter-point in a serious discussion.
Don't Call Me Shirley - thanks, yes I do know what 'non-fatal' means. The original phrase used was victims of guns I think, which can reasonably include aggressive non-fatal injuries although perhaps accidental injuries are slightly more questionable to categorise in this way.
I got the figures from this web-site http://www.factcheck.org/2012/12/gun-rhetoric-vs-gun-facts/.
Not sure why they use different years (perhaps most recent figures?) but in the spirit of honesty I pointed out that they were not all the same year. I shouldn't think it makes much difference though as I wouldn't imagine that the figures would vary hugely year on year, so it seems that there are typically of the order of 85,000 people a year injured or killed by guns in the US.
That's it really - I'm not commenting on gun control or how these statistics should or should not be used in an argument.
@ bemused. Thanks for your reply.
Look at the context of sammie's comment. The context is clearly involving violent, intentional killing with firearms within the topic of ISIS, then with a HUGE leap, fanatical Middle Eastern jihadi violence gets overlayed on Joe Average citizen living in the USA- as if there's a correlation. You posted figures which included accidental shootings to bolster sammie's claim, and added your own personal speculation to justify it:
The original phrase used was victims of guns I think, which can reasonably include aggressive non-fatal injuriesalthough perhaps accidental injuries are slightly more questionable to categorise in this way.
On what basis do you come to your conclusions? Actually, if you look at the statistics, there's no question about categorizing accidental injuries as accidental injuries.
Note also in my figures that 62% of total gun fatalities are comprised of suicides. Again, this undermines sammie's claim that when a shooting occurs it's people killing other people (murder).
So, in the 2010 figures I posted above (because you used that year as an example) of all gun-related incidences, 11,101 were actual murders. Of the 11,101 murders a large portion of those are the result of things like gang-related violence, which means it's not gun violence among the general population (i.e. law abiding, responsible gun owners) but among a sub-group of criminals. That number eviscerates sammies argument using a completely fictitious number of 100,000.
To your credit, at least you showed more interest in being accurate than sammie did.
@ bemused---
I read the article from the site you linked. You are correct:
"There were 55,544 non-fatal injuries in 2011 resulting from assaults involving guns — up from 53,738 in 2010 and 44,466 in 2009, the CDC’s database shows. Since 2001, the rate of gun injuries is the second highest in 11 years when adjusted for population."
but, interestingly enough, the article adds:
"However, Barber said gun violence has “dropped precipitously” from the early 1990s — a trend criminologists chalked up to “changes in the crack cocaine market.” Her observation is supported by crime data and surveys.
The CDC’s most current data show there were 11,078 homicides committed with guns in 2010 — or about 30 per day. The CDC data also show gun homicides have declined each year since 2007, falling from 12,791 in 2006 to 11,078 in 2010, even as the nation’s population grows. In fact, the homicide rate in 2010 (3.6 per 100,000 people) was the lowest since at least 1981 — which is as far back as the CDC’s online database goes."
ISIS make the JW religion look positively benign.. even though they use the 'indoctrinate kids while they're young' in the same way. At least the JWs don't kill anyone (at least not physically).
It's really quite frightening what ISIS are doing! Can you imagine in 10 years time these fully indoctrinated children will be doing the same as their mentors. Ruthlessly killing anyone who doesn't go along with them. If you do go along with them you have to do the killing too. It'll be a never ending vicious cycle.
To your credit, at least you showed more interest in being accurate than sammie did. |
It's always amazing to watch how people struggle to think outside the box. I never once said anything was right or wrong, nor did I ever quote a pile of facts - I posed an alternate viewpoint that as usual a few people just don't have the comprehension skills to engage. I realize people don't give a crap - that's okay - I simply like to look at all the outrage people have or situations around the globe but can't see how it would confuse people on another side of the world or to a person totally unfamiliar with how diferent parts of the world behave or form societies.
I'm not interested in a gun debate - it's been beat to death - it matters not - Americans are comfortable with gun violence inside their own country and for every statistic you pull out on one side, there are another one hundred on the other.
The LA Times wrote an article about how Ferguson has become an international story - it give a little insight on how people view that one incident in other parts of the world - you can read it or not if you want to google it - that was my only point - I could care less what stats you post about guns in the USA - that was never my point - I was simply pointing out how someone on the outside looking in could see similarities where you see nothing but differences. It's like trying to explain to someone unfamiliar with a system, how and why the system is complex, when the individual bases their understanding on what we say.
sw
