Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.

PWC: Gun violence in America, explained in 17 maps and charts

2»

Comments

  • Sledog
    Sledog Member Posts: 37,763 Standard Supporter
    Just for you Hondo a few numbers and how the lefty run cities skew the stats.

    There are 30,000 gun related deaths per year by firearms, and this number is not disputed. The U.S. population is 324,059,091 as of June 22, 2016. Do the math: 0.000000925% of the population dies from gun related actions each year. Statistically speaking, this is insignificant! What is never told, however, is a breakdown of those 30,000 deaths, to put them in perspective as compared to other causes of death:
    • 65% of those deaths are by suicide, which would never be prevented by gun laws.
    • 15% are by law enforcement in the line of duty and justified.
    • 17% are through criminal activity, gang and drug related or mentally ill persons – better known as gun violence.
    • 3% are accidental discharge deaths.
    So technically, "gun violence" is not 30,000 annually, but drops to 5,100. Still too many? Now lets look at how those deaths spanned across the nation.
    • 480 homicides (9.4%) were in Chicago
    • 344 homicides (6.7%) were in Baltimore
    • 333 homicides (6.5%) were in Detroit
    • 119 homicides (2.3%) were in Washington D.C. (a 54% increase over prior years)
    So basically, 25% of all gun crime happens in just 4 cities. All 4 of those cities have strict gun laws, so it is not the lack of law that is the root cause.
    This basically leaves 3,825 for the entire rest of the nation, or about 75 deaths per state. That is an average because some States have much higher rates than others. For example, California had 1,169 and Alabama had 1.
    Now, who has the strictest gun laws by far? California, of course, but understand, it is not guns causing this. It is a crime rate spawned by the number of criminal persons residing in those cities and states. So if all cities and states are not created equal, then there must be something other than the tool causing the gun deaths.
    Are 5,100 deaths per year horrific? How about in comparison to other deaths? All death is sad and especially so when it is in the commission of a crime but that is the nature of crime. Robbery, death, rape, assault are all done by criminals. It is ludicrous to think that criminals will obey laws. That is why they are called criminals.
    But what about other deaths each year?
    • 40,000+ die from a drug overdose–THERE IS NO EXCUSE FOR THAT!
    • 36,000 people die per year from the flu, far exceeding the criminal gun deaths.
    • 34,000 people die per year in traffic fatalities(exceeding gun deaths even if you include suicide).
    Now it gets good:
    • 200,000+ people die each year (and growing) from preventable medical errors. You are safer walking in the worst areas of Chicago than you are when you are in a hospital!
    • 710,000 people die per year from heart disease. It’s time to stop the double cheeseburgers! So what is the point? If the liberal loons and the anti-gun movement focused their attention on heart disease, even a 10% decrease in cardiac deaths would save twice the number of lives annually of all gun-related deaths (including suicide, law enforcement, etc.). A 10% reduction in medical errors would be 66% of the total number of gun deaths or 4 times the number of criminal homicides ................ Simple, easily preventable 10% reductions! So you have to ask yourself, in the grand scheme of things, why the focus on guns? It's pretty simple:
    Taking away guns gives control to governments. The founders of this nation knew that regardless of the form of government, those in power may become corrupt and seek to rule as the British did by trying to disarm the populace of the colonies. It is not difficult to understand that a disarmed populace is a controlled populace.
    Thus, the second amendment was proudly and boldly included in the U.S. Constitution. It must be preserved at all costs. So the next time someone tries to tell you that gun control is about saving lives, look at these facts and remember these words from Noah Webster: "Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed." We now know what they're trying to do".
  • 2001400ex
    2001400ex Member Posts: 29,457
    Sledog said:

    Just for you Hondo a few numbers and how the lefty run cities skew the stats.

    There are 30,000 gun related deaths per year by firearms, and this number is not disputed. The U.S. population is 324,059,091 as of June 22, 2016. Do the math: 0.000000925% of the population dies from gun related actions each year. Statistically speaking, this is insignificant! What is never told, however, is a breakdown of those 30,000 deaths, to put them in perspective as compared to other causes of death:
    • 65% of those deaths are by suicide, which would never be prevented by gun laws.
    • 15% are by law enforcement in the line of duty and justified.
    • 17% are through criminal activity, gang and drug related or mentally ill persons – better known as gun violence.
    • 3% are accidental discharge deaths.
    So technically, "gun violence" is not 30,000 annually, but drops to 5,100. Still too many? Now lets look at how those deaths spanned across the nation.
    • 480 homicides (9.4%) were in Chicago
    • 344 homicides (6.7%) were in Baltimore
    • 333 homicides (6.5%) were in Detroit
    • 119 homicides (2.3%) were in Washington D.C. (a 54% increase over prior years)
    So basically, 25% of all gun crime happens in just 4 cities. All 4 of those cities have strict gun laws, so it is not the lack of law that is the root cause.
    This basically leaves 3,825 for the entire rest of the nation, or about 75 deaths per state. That is an average because some States have much higher rates than others. For example, California had 1,169 and Alabama had 1.
    Now, who has the strictest gun laws by far? California, of course, but understand, it is not guns causing this. It is a crime rate spawned by the number of criminal persons residing in those cities and states. So if all cities and states are not created equal, then there must be something other than the tool causing the gun deaths.
    Are 5,100 deaths per year horrific? How about in comparison to other deaths? All death is sad and especially so when it is in the commission of a crime but that is the nature of crime. Robbery, death, rape, assault are all done by criminals. It is ludicrous to think that criminals will obey laws. That is why they are called criminals.
    But what about other deaths each year?
    • 40,000+ die from a drug overdose–THERE IS NO EXCUSE FOR THAT!
    • 36,000 people die per year from the flu, far exceeding the criminal gun deaths.
    • 34,000 people die per year in traffic fatalities(exceeding gun deaths even if you include suicide).
    Now it gets good:
    • 200,000+ people die each year (and growing) from preventable medical errors. You are safer walking in the worst areas of Chicago than you are when you are in a hospital!
    • 710,000 people die per year from heart disease. It’s time to stop the double cheeseburgers! So what is the point? If the liberal loons and the anti-gun movement focused their attention on heart disease, even a 10% decrease in cardiac deaths would save twice the number of lives annually of all gun-related deaths (including suicide, law enforcement, etc.). A 10% reduction in medical errors would be 66% of the total number of gun deaths or 4 times the number of criminal homicides ................ Simple, easily preventable 10% reductions! So you have to ask yourself, in the grand scheme of things, why the focus on guns? It's pretty simple:
    Taking away guns gives control to governments. The founders of this nation knew that regardless of the form of government, those in power may become corrupt and seek to rule as the British did by trying to disarm the populace of the colonies. It is not difficult to understand that a disarmed populace is a controlled populace.
    Thus, the second amendment was proudly and boldly included in the U.S. Constitution. It must be preserved at all costs. So the next time someone tries to tell you that gun control is about saving lives, look at these facts and remember these words from Noah Webster: "Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed." We now know what they're trying to do".

    It's insignificant yet you said you knew several people who died Monday.

    Dumbass.
  • UWhuskytskeet
    UWhuskytskeet Member Posts: 7,113
    Sledog said:

    Just for you Hondo a few numbers and how the lefty run cities skew the stats.

    There are 30,000 gun related deaths per year by firearms, and this number is not disputed. The U.S. population is 324,059,091 as of June 22, 2016. Do the math: 0.000000925% of the population dies from gun related actions each year. Statistically speaking, this is insignificant! What is never told, however, is a breakdown of those 30,000 deaths, to put them in perspective as compared to other causes of death:
    • 65% of those deaths are by suicide, which would never be prevented by gun laws.
    • 15% are by law enforcement in the line of duty and justified.
    • 17% are through criminal activity, gang and drug related or mentally ill persons – better known as gun violence.
    • 3% are accidental discharge deaths.
    So technically, "gun violence" is not 30,000 annually, but drops to 5,100. Still too many? Now lets look at how those deaths spanned across the nation.
    • 480 homicides (9.4%) were in Chicago
    • 344 homicides (6.7%) were in Baltimore
    • 333 homicides (6.5%) were in Detroit
    • 119 homicides (2.3%) were in Washington D.C. (a 54% increase over prior years)
    So basically, 25% of all gun crime happens in just 4 cities. All 4 of those cities have strict gun laws, so it is not the lack of law that is the root cause.
    This basically leaves 3,825 for the entire rest of the nation, or about 75 deaths per state. That is an average because some States have much higher rates than others. For example, California had 1,169 and Alabama had 1.
    Now, who has the strictest gun laws by far? California, of course, but understand, it is not guns causing this. It is a crime rate spawned by the number of criminal persons residing in those cities and states. So if all cities and states are not created equal, then there must be something other than the tool causing the gun deaths.
    Are 5,100 deaths per year horrific? How about in comparison to other deaths? All death is sad and especially so when it is in the commission of a crime but that is the nature of crime. Robbery, death, rape, assault are all done by criminals. It is ludicrous to think that criminals will obey laws. That is why they are called criminals.
    But what about other deaths each year?
    • 40,000+ die from a drug overdose–THERE IS NO EXCUSE FOR THAT!
    • 36,000 people die per year from the flu, far exceeding the criminal gun deaths.
    • 34,000 people die per year in traffic fatalities(exceeding gun deaths even if you include suicide).
    Now it gets good:
    • 200,000+ people die each year (and growing) from preventable medical errors. You are safer walking in the worst areas of Chicago than you are when you are in a hospital!
    • 710,000 people die per year from heart disease. It’s time to stop the double cheeseburgers! So what is the point? If the liberal loons and the anti-gun movement focused their attention on heart disease, even a 10% decrease in cardiac deaths would save twice the number of lives annually of all gun-related deaths (including suicide, law enforcement, etc.). A 10% reduction in medical errors would be 66% of the total number of gun deaths or 4 times the number of criminal homicides ................ Simple, easily preventable 10% reductions! So you have to ask yourself, in the grand scheme of things, why the focus on guns? It's pretty simple:
    Taking away guns gives control to governments. The founders of this nation knew that regardless of the form of government, those in power may become corrupt and seek to rule as the British did by trying to disarm the populace of the colonies. It is not difficult to understand that a disarmed populace is a controlled populace.
    Thus, the second amendment was proudly and boldly included in the U.S. Constitution. It must be preserved at all costs. So the next time someone tries to tell you that gun control is about saving lives, look at these facts and remember these words from Noah Webster: "Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed." We now know what they're trying to do".

    /ForwardsFromGrandma
  • Sledog
    Sledog Member Posts: 37,763 Standard Supporter
    2001400ex said:

    Sledog said:

    Just for you Hondo a few numbers and how the lefty run cities skew the stats.

    There are 30,000 gun related deaths per year by firearms, and this number is not disputed. The U.S. population is 324,059,091 as of June 22, 2016. Do the math: 0.000000925% of the population dies from gun related actions each year. Statistically speaking, this is insignificant! What is never told, however, is a breakdown of those 30,000 deaths, to put them in perspective as compared to other causes of death:
    • 65% of those deaths are by suicide, which would never be prevented by gun laws.
    • 15% are by law enforcement in the line of duty and justified.
    • 17% are through criminal activity, gang and drug related or mentally ill persons – better known as gun violence.
    • 3% are accidental discharge deaths.
    So technically, "gun violence" is not 30,000 annually, but drops to 5,100. Still too many? Now lets look at how those deaths spanned across the nation.
    • 480 homicides (9.4%) were in Chicago
    • 344 homicides (6.7%) were in Baltimore
    • 333 homicides (6.5%) were in Detroit
    • 119 homicides (2.3%) were in Washington D.C. (a 54% increase over prior years)
    So basically, 25% of all gun crime happens in just 4 cities. All 4 of those cities have strict gun laws, so it is not the lack of law that is the root cause.
    This basically leaves 3,825 for the entire rest of the nation, or about 75 deaths per state. That is an average because some States have much higher rates than others. For example, California had 1,169 and Alabama had 1.
    Now, who has the strictest gun laws by far? California, of course, but understand, it is not guns causing this. It is a crime rate spawned by the number of criminal persons residing in those cities and states. So if all cities and states are not created equal, then there must be something other than the tool causing the gun deaths.
    Are 5,100 deaths per year horrific? How about in comparison to other deaths? All death is sad and especially so when it is in the commission of a crime but that is the nature of crime. Robbery, death, rape, assault are all done by criminals. It is ludicrous to think that criminals will obey laws. That is why they are called criminals.
    But what about other deaths each year?
    • 40,000+ die from a drug overdose–THERE IS NO EXCUSE FOR THAT!
    • 36,000 people die per year from the flu, far exceeding the criminal gun deaths.
    • 34,000 people die per year in traffic fatalities(exceeding gun deaths even if you include suicide).
    Now it gets good:
    • 200,000+ people die each year (and growing) from preventable medical errors. You are safer walking in the worst areas of Chicago than you are when you are in a hospital!
    • 710,000 people die per year from heart disease. It’s time to stop the double cheeseburgers! So what is the point? If the liberal loons and the anti-gun movement focused their attention on heart disease, even a 10% decrease in cardiac deaths would save twice the number of lives annually of all gun-related deaths (including suicide, law enforcement, etc.). A 10% reduction in medical errors would be 66% of the total number of gun deaths or 4 times the number of criminal homicides ................ Simple, easily preventable 10% reductions! So you have to ask yourself, in the grand scheme of things, why the focus on guns? It's pretty simple:
    Taking away guns gives control to governments. The founders of this nation knew that regardless of the form of government, those in power may become corrupt and seek to rule as the British did by trying to disarm the populace of the colonies. It is not difficult to understand that a disarmed populace is a controlled populace.
    Thus, the second amendment was proudly and boldly included in the U.S. Constitution. It must be preserved at all costs. So the next time someone tries to tell you that gun control is about saving lives, look at these facts and remember these words from Noah Webster: "Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed." We now know what they're trying to do".

    It's insignificant yet you said you knew several people who died Monday.

    Dumbass.
    Yes I did. I wish I could have saved them but the BS of which you speak would not have done so.
  • AZDuck
    AZDuck Member Posts: 15,381




    AZDuck said:

    @HoustonHusky

    Your HuffPoAustralia article was unsourced garbage. The chart, which is from the Australian statistics department, is more trustworthy but a shitty chart. Why you posted a HuffPo article and a chart that contradicted it I don't know. In your mind I guess that makes sense.

    Even taking the unsourced 12.6 number, it is well below highest rates listed in the Aussie chart.

    HuffingtonPost is garbage, but even they aren't Vox-stupid and got a number correct:
    http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Lookup/by Subject/3303.0~2015~Main Features~Intentional self-harm: key characteristics~8

    One of the main points the Vox moron made was taking away guns saves lives because there will be fewer suicides, yet Australia govt data shows the death rate in 2015 (well after their gun laws were enacted) was above the average for the last 100 years and well within line of historical data (i.e. suicide rates in Australia are not statistically different now from historical averages before the gun laws, directly contradicting the 22 year old "Senior Writer" at Vox).

    You got caught being HondoFS and are just flailing now...
    fuck, your dense

    This is youre chart, fuckhead.

    image

    Aussie did their gun ban in 1996. The Vox article said that there was a big decrease in firearm homicides and a 74 percent drop in gun suicides. Initially, it appears that there was no increase in suicides by other means. Vox was looking at numbers that concluded in 2006. Those numbers were correct.

    The latest data (released like yesterday or something) shows a bump in the overall suicide rate from around 10.0 per 100,000 to 12.5 per 100,000. Is it a blip or a trend? Hard to say, but the guy from the Aussie suicide-prevention organization is freaking out, probably because he's trying to get money to deal with that bump.

    But back to those older numbers. The report issued after the gun ban stated:

    The age-standardised suicide rate (for persons) in 2003 was 6% lower than the corresponding rate for the previous year and 24% lower than the peak for the period 1993-2003, which occurred in 1997.

    Source: Australian Bureau of Statistics

    So in conclusion, Vox was right, suicides in Australia are still way down from the peak in the early-mid-90's. And no, your own chart does not show that the 2016 suicide rate of 12.5/100,000 is well above the suicide rate for 1921-2015.

    Apparently some right-wing channel is pushing the Aussie HuffPo story, since I notice that it is the first thing you see when you punch "Australia suicide rate" into the Google. But anyway.

    Fuck you for making me look this shit up.

  • dflea
    dflea Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 7,287 Swaye's Wigwam
    Sledog said:

    Just for you Hondo a few numbers and how the lefty run cities skew the stats.

    There are 30,000 gun related deaths per year by firearms, and this number is not disputed. The U.S. population is 324,059,091 as of June 22, 2016. Do the math: 0.000000925% of the population dies from gun related actions each year. Statistically speaking, this is insignificant! What is never told, however, is a breakdown of those 30,000 deaths, to put them in perspective as compared to other causes of death:
    • 65% of those deaths are by suicide, which would never be prevented by gun laws.
    • 15% are by law enforcement in the line of duty and justified.
    • 17% are through criminal activity, gang and drug related or mentally ill persons – better known as gun violence.
    • 3% are accidental discharge deaths.
    So technically, "gun violence" is not 30,000 annually, but drops to 5,100. Still too many? Now lets look at how those deaths spanned across the nation.
    • 480 homicides (9.4%) were in Chicago
    • 344 homicides (6.7%) were in Baltimore
    • 333 homicides (6.5%) were in Detroit
    • 119 homicides (2.3%) were in Washington D.C. (a 54% increase over prior years)
    So basically, 25% of all gun crime happens in just 4 cities. All 4 of those cities have strict gun laws, so it is not the lack of law that is the root cause.
    This basically leaves 3,825 for the entire rest of the nation, or about 75 deaths per state. That is an average because some States have much higher rates than others. For example, California had 1,169 and Alabama had 1.
    Now, who has the strictest gun laws by far? California, of course, but understand, it is not guns causing this. It is a crime rate spawned by the number of criminal persons residing in those cities and states. So if all cities and states are not created equal, then there must be something other than the tool causing the gun deaths.
    Are 5,100 deaths per year horrific? How about in comparison to other deaths? All death is sad and especially so when it is in the commission of a crime but that is the nature of crime. Robbery, death, rape, assault are all done by criminals. It is ludicrous to think that criminals will obey laws. That is why they are called criminals.
    But what about other deaths each year?
    • 40,000+ die from a drug overdose–THERE IS NO EXCUSE FOR THAT!
    • 36,000 people die per year from the flu, far exceeding the criminal gun deaths.
    • 34,000 people die per year in traffic fatalities(exceeding gun deaths even if you include suicide).
    Now it gets good:
    • 200,000+ people die each year (and growing) from preventable medical errors. You are safer walking in the worst areas of Chicago than you are when you are in a hospital!
    • 710,000 people die per year from heart disease. It’s time to stop the double cheeseburgers! So what is the point? If the liberal loons and the anti-gun movement focused their attention on heart disease, even a 10% decrease in cardiac deaths would save twice the number of lives annually of all gun-related deaths (including suicide, law enforcement, etc.). A 10% reduction in medical errors would be 66% of the total number of gun deaths or 4 times the number of criminal homicides ................ Simple, easily preventable 10% reductions! So you have to ask yourself, in the grand scheme of things, why the focus on guns? It's pretty simple:
    Taking away guns gives control to governments. The founders of this nation knew that regardless of the form of government, those in power may become corrupt and seek to rule as the British did by trying to disarm the populace of the colonies. It is not difficult to understand that a disarmed populace is a controlled populace.
    Thus, the second amendment was proudly and boldly included in the U.S. Constitution. It must be preserved at all costs. So the next time someone tries to tell you that gun control is about saving lives, look at these facts and remember these words from Noah Webster: "Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed." We now know what they're trying to do".

    How many die in terrorist attacks?

    An insignificant number there too?

    Amazing that sand pours out of your vag over one insignificant number but not the other.
  • HoustonHusky
    HoustonHusky Member Posts: 5,999
    edited October 2017
    AZDuck said:




    AZDuck said:

    @HoustonHusky

    Your HuffPoAustralia article was unsourced garbage. The chart, which is from the Australian statistics department, is more trustworthy but a shitty chart. Why you posted a HuffPo article and a chart that contradicted it I don't know. In your mind I guess that makes sense.

    Even taking the unsourced 12.6 number, it is well below highest rates listed in the Aussie chart.

    HuffingtonPost is garbage, but even they aren't Vox-stupid and got a number correct:
    http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Lookup/by Subject/3303.0~2015~Main Features~Intentional self-harm: key characteristics~8

    One of the main points the Vox moron made was taking away guns saves lives because there will be fewer suicides, yet Australia govt data shows the death rate in 2015 (well after their gun laws were enacted) was above the average for the last 100 years and well within line of historical data (i.e. suicide rates in Australia are not statistically different now from historical averages before the gun laws, directly contradicting the 22 year old "Senior Writer" at Vox).

    You got caught being HondoFS and are just flailing now...
    fuck, your dense

    This is youre chart, fuckhead.

    image

    Aussie did their gun ban in 1996. The Vox article said that there was a big decrease in firearm homicides and a 74 percent drop in gun suicides. Initially, it appears that there was no increase in suicides by other means. Vox was looking at numbers that concluded in 2006. Those numbers were correct.

    The latest data (released like yesterday or something) shows a bump in the overall suicide rate from around 10.0 per 100,000 to 12.5 per 100,000. Is it a blip or a trend? Hard to say, but the guy from the Aussie suicide-prevention organization is freaking out, probably because he's trying to get money to deal with that bump.

    But back to those older numbers. The report issued after the gun ban stated:

    The age-standardised suicide rate (for persons) in 2003 was 6% lower than the corresponding rate for the previous year and 24% lower than the peak for the period 1993-2003, which occurred in 1997.
    Source: Australian Bureau of Statistics

    So in conclusion, Vox was right, suicides in Australia are still way down from the peak in the early-mid-90's. And no, your own chart does not show that the 2016 suicide rate of 12.5/100,000 is well above the suicide rate for 1921-2015.

    Apparently some right-wing channel is pushing the Aussie HuffPo story, since I notice that it is the first thing you see when you punch "Australia suicide rate" into the Google. But anyway.

    Fuck you for making me look this shit up.



    image

    My original post had:
    1) The article pointing out the suicide rate in 2015 (12.6 per 100,000 after the gun law)
    2) The graph to show that number in context i.e. a ton of data before the gun laws (average for the last 80+ years is < 12.6).

    The Vox guy is a moron. A non-moron would realize from the above two points the overall suicide rate was not statistically impacted by whatever law they passed in the late 90s since it is currently at/above the ~100 year historical average.

    Apparently a duck and a HondoFS not so much...

    Keep yapping...
  • Kaepsknee
    Kaepsknee Member Posts: 14,913
    AZDuck said:




    AZDuck said:

    @HoustonHusky

    Your HuffPoAustralia article was unsourced garbage. The chart, which is from the Australian statistics department, is more trustworthy but a shitty chart. Why you posted a HuffPo article and a chart that contradicted it I don't know. In your mind I guess that makes sense.

    Even taking the unsourced 12.6 number, it is well below highest rates listed in the Aussie chart.

    HuffingtonPost is garbage, but even they aren't Vox-stupid and got a number correct:
    http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Lookup/by Subject/3303.0~2015~Main Features~Intentional self-harm: key characteristics~8

    One of the main points the Vox moron made was taking away guns saves lives because there will be fewer suicides, yet Australia govt data shows the death rate in 2015 (well after their gun laws were enacted) was above the average for the last 100 years and well within line of historical data (i.e. suicide rates in Australia are not statistically different now from historical averages before the gun laws, directly contradicting the 22 year old "Senior Writer" at Vox).

    You got caught being HondoFS and are just flailing now...
    fuck, your dense

    This is youre chart, fuckhead.

    image

    Aussie did their gun ban in 1996. The Vox article said that there was a big decrease in firearm homicides and a 74 percent drop in gun suicides. Initially, it appears that there was no increase in suicides by other means. Vox was looking at numbers that concluded in 2006. Those numbers were correct.

    The latest data (released like yesterday or something) shows a bump in the overall suicide rate from around 10.0 per 100,000 to 12.5 per 100,000. Is it a blip or a trend? Hard to say, but the guy from the Aussie suicide-prevention organization is freaking out, probably because he's trying to get money to deal with that bump.

    But back to those older numbers. The report issued after the gun ban stated:

    The age-standardised suicide rate (for persons) in 2003 was 6% lower than the corresponding rate for the previous year and 24% lower than the peak for the period 1993-2003, which occurred in 1997.
    Source: Australian Bureau of Statistics

    So in conclusion, Vox was right, suicides in Australia are still way down from the peak in the early-mid-90's. And no, your own chart does not show that the 2016 suicide rate of 12.5/100,000 is well above the suicide rate for 1921-2015.

    Apparently some right-wing channel is pushing the Aussie HuffPo story, since I notice that it is the first thing you see when you punch "Australia suicide rate" into the Google. But anyway.

    Fuck you for making me look this shit up.



    It's still more than national average of death per 100,000 by guns here.
  • RaceBannon
    RaceBannon Member, Moderator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 113,884 Founders Club
    Massive TL,DR in this thread
  • Kaepsknee
    Kaepsknee Member Posts: 14,913

    Massive TL,DR in this thread

    It's almost as if the gun control hard liners are muddying the water to further their argument.
  • Sledog
    Sledog Member Posts: 37,763 Standard Supporter
    2001400ex said:

    Sledog said:

    Just for you Hondo a few numbers and how the lefty run cities skew the stats.

    There are 30,000 gun related deaths per year by firearms, and this number is not disputed. The U.S. population is 324,059,091 as of June 22, 2016. Do the math: 0.000000925% of the population dies from gun related actions each year. Statistically speaking, this is insignificant! What is never told, however, is a breakdown of those 30,000 deaths, to put them in perspective as compared to other causes of death:
    • 65% of those deaths are by suicide, which would never be prevented by gun laws.
    • 15% are by law enforcement in the line of duty and justified.
    • 17% are through criminal activity, gang and drug related or mentally ill persons – better known as gun violence.
    • 3% are accidental discharge deaths.
    So technically, "gun violence" is not 30,000 annually, but drops to 5,100. Still too many? Now lets look at how those deaths spanned across the nation.
    • 480 homicides (9.4%) were in Chicago
    • 344 homicides (6.7%) were in Baltimore
    • 333 homicides (6.5%) were in Detroit
    • 119 homicides (2.3%) were in Washington D.C. (a 54% increase over prior years)
    So basically, 25% of all gun crime happens in just 4 cities. All 4 of those cities have strict gun laws, so it is not the lack of law that is the root cause.
    This basically leaves 3,825 for the entire rest of the nation, or about 75 deaths per state. That is an average because some States have much higher rates than others. For example, California had 1,169 and Alabama had 1.
    Now, who has the strictest gun laws by far? California, of course, but understand, it is not guns causing this. It is a crime rate spawned by the number of criminal persons residing in those cities and states. So if all cities and states are not created equal, then there must be something other than the tool causing the gun deaths.
    Are 5,100 deaths per year horrific? How about in comparison to other deaths? All death is sad and especially so when it is in the commission of a crime but that is the nature of crime. Robbery, death, rape, assault are all done by criminals. It is ludicrous to think that criminals will obey laws. That is why they are called criminals.
    But what about other deaths each year?
    • 40,000+ die from a drug overdose–THERE IS NO EXCUSE FOR THAT!
    • 36,000 people die per year from the flu, far exceeding the criminal gun deaths.
    • 34,000 people die per year in traffic fatalities(exceeding gun deaths even if you include suicide).
    Now it gets good:
    • 200,000+ people die each year (and growing) from preventable medical errors. You are safer walking in the worst areas of Chicago than you are when you are in a hospital!
    • 710,000 people die per year from heart disease. It’s time to stop the double cheeseburgers! So what is the point? If the liberal loons and the anti-gun movement focused their attention on heart disease, even a 10% decrease in cardiac deaths would save twice the number of lives annually of all gun-related deaths (including suicide, law enforcement, etc.). A 10% reduction in medical errors would be 66% of the total number of gun deaths or 4 times the number of criminal homicides ................ Simple, easily preventable 10% reductions! So you have to ask yourself, in the grand scheme of things, why the focus on guns? It's pretty simple:
    Taking away guns gives control to governments. The founders of this nation knew that regardless of the form of government, those in power may become corrupt and seek to rule as the British did by trying to disarm the populace of the colonies. It is not difficult to understand that a disarmed populace is a controlled populace.
    Thus, the second amendment was proudly and boldly included in the U.S. Constitution. It must be preserved at all costs. So the next time someone tries to tell you that gun control is about saving lives, look at these facts and remember these words from Noah Webster: "Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed." We now know what they're trying to do".

    It's insignificant yet you said you knew several people who died Monday.

    Dumbass.
    It's an article about numbers. Deaths are not insignificant.
  • 2001400ex
    2001400ex Member Posts: 29,457
    Sledog said:

    2001400ex said:

    Sledog said:

    Just for you Hondo a few numbers and how the lefty run cities skew the stats.

    There are 30,000 gun related deaths per year by firearms, and this number is not disputed. The U.S. population is 324,059,091 as of June 22, 2016. Do the math: 0.000000925% of the population dies from gun related actions each year. Statistically speaking, this is insignificant! What is never told, however, is a breakdown of those 30,000 deaths, to put them in perspective as compared to other causes of death:
    • 65% of those deaths are by suicide, which would never be prevented by gun laws.
    • 15% are by law enforcement in the line of duty and justified.
    • 17% are through criminal activity, gang and drug related or mentally ill persons – better known as gun violence.
    • 3% are accidental discharge deaths.
    So technically, "gun violence" is not 30,000 annually, but drops to 5,100. Still too many? Now lets look at how those deaths spanned across the nation.
    • 480 homicides (9.4%) were in Chicago
    • 344 homicides (6.7%) were in Baltimore
    • 333 homicides (6.5%) were in Detroit
    • 119 homicides (2.3%) were in Washington D.C. (a 54% increase over prior years)
    So basically, 25% of all gun crime happens in just 4 cities. All 4 of those cities have strict gun laws, so it is not the lack of law that is the root cause.
    This basically leaves 3,825 for the entire rest of the nation, or about 75 deaths per state. That is an average because some States have much higher rates than others. For example, California had 1,169 and Alabama had 1.
    Now, who has the strictest gun laws by far? California, of course, but understand, it is not guns causing this. It is a crime rate spawned by the number of criminal persons residing in those cities and states. So if all cities and states are not created equal, then there must be something other than the tool causing the gun deaths.
    Are 5,100 deaths per year horrific? How about in comparison to other deaths? All death is sad and especially so when it is in the commission of a crime but that is the nature of crime. Robbery, death, rape, assault are all done by criminals. It is ludicrous to think that criminals will obey laws. That is why they are called criminals.
    But what about other deaths each year?
    • 40,000+ die from a drug overdose–THERE IS NO EXCUSE FOR THAT!
    • 36,000 people die per year from the flu, far exceeding the criminal gun deaths.
    • 34,000 people die per year in traffic fatalities(exceeding gun deaths even if you include suicide).
    Now it gets good:
    • 200,000+ people die each year (and growing) from preventable medical errors. You are safer walking in the worst areas of Chicago than you are when you are in a hospital!
    • 710,000 people die per year from heart disease. It’s time to stop the double cheeseburgers! So what is the point? If the liberal loons and the anti-gun movement focused their attention on heart disease, even a 10% decrease in cardiac deaths would save twice the number of lives annually of all gun-related deaths (including suicide, law enforcement, etc.). A 10% reduction in medical errors would be 66% of the total number of gun deaths or 4 times the number of criminal homicides ................ Simple, easily preventable 10% reductions! So you have to ask yourself, in the grand scheme of things, why the focus on guns? It's pretty simple:
    Taking away guns gives control to governments. The founders of this nation knew that regardless of the form of government, those in power may become corrupt and seek to rule as the British did by trying to disarm the populace of the colonies. It is not difficult to understand that a disarmed populace is a controlled populace.
    Thus, the second amendment was proudly and boldly included in the U.S. Constitution. It must be preserved at all costs. So the next time someone tries to tell you that gun control is about saving lives, look at these facts and remember these words from Noah Webster: "Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed." We now know what they're trying to do".

    It's insignificant yet you said you knew several people who died Monday.

    Dumbass.
    It's an article about numbers. Deaths are not insignificant.
    Muslims who kill Americans are insignificant but you freak out about it.
  • RaceBannon
    RaceBannon Member, Moderator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 113,884 Founders Club
    2001400ex said:

    Sledog said:

    2001400ex said:

    Sledog said:

    Just for you Hondo a few numbers and how the lefty run cities skew the stats.

    There are 30,000 gun related deaths per year by firearms, and this number is not disputed. The U.S. population is 324,059,091 as of June 22, 2016. Do the math: 0.000000925% of the population dies from gun related actions each year. Statistically speaking, this is insignificant! What is never told, however, is a breakdown of those 30,000 deaths, to put them in perspective as compared to other causes of death:
    • 65% of those deaths are by suicide, which would never be prevented by gun laws.
    • 15% are by law enforcement in the line of duty and justified.
    • 17% are through criminal activity, gang and drug related or mentally ill persons – better known as gun violence.
    • 3% are accidental discharge deaths.
    So technically, "gun violence" is not 30,000 annually, but drops to 5,100. Still too many? Now lets look at how those deaths spanned across the nation.
    • 480 homicides (9.4%) were in Chicago
    • 344 homicides (6.7%) were in Baltimore
    • 333 homicides (6.5%) were in Detroit
    • 119 homicides (2.3%) were in Washington D.C. (a 54% increase over prior years)
    So basically, 25% of all gun crime happens in just 4 cities. All 4 of those cities have strict gun laws, so it is not the lack of law that is the root cause.
    This basically leaves 3,825 for the entire rest of the nation, or about 75 deaths per state. That is an average because some States have much higher rates than others. For example, California had 1,169 and Alabama had 1.
    Now, who has the strictest gun laws by far? California, of course, but understand, it is not guns causing this. It is a crime rate spawned by the number of criminal persons residing in those cities and states. So if all cities and states are not created equal, then there must be something other than the tool causing the gun deaths.
    Are 5,100 deaths per year horrific? How about in comparison to other deaths? All death is sad and especially so when it is in the commission of a crime but that is the nature of crime. Robbery, death, rape, assault are all done by criminals. It is ludicrous to think that criminals will obey laws. That is why they are called criminals.
    But what about other deaths each year?
    • 40,000+ die from a drug overdose–THERE IS NO EXCUSE FOR THAT!
    • 36,000 people die per year from the flu, far exceeding the criminal gun deaths.
    • 34,000 people die per year in traffic fatalities(exceeding gun deaths even if you include suicide).
    Now it gets good:
    • 200,000+ people die each year (and growing) from preventable medical errors. You are safer walking in the worst areas of Chicago than you are when you are in a hospital!
    • 710,000 people die per year from heart disease. It’s time to stop the double cheeseburgers! So what is the point? If the liberal loons and the anti-gun movement focused their attention on heart disease, even a 10% decrease in cardiac deaths would save twice the number of lives annually of all gun-related deaths (including suicide, law enforcement, etc.). A 10% reduction in medical errors would be 66% of the total number of gun deaths or 4 times the number of criminal homicides ................ Simple, easily preventable 10% reductions! So you have to ask yourself, in the grand scheme of things, why the focus on guns? It's pretty simple:
    Taking away guns gives control to governments. The founders of this nation knew that regardless of the form of government, those in power may become corrupt and seek to rule as the British did by trying to disarm the populace of the colonies. It is not difficult to understand that a disarmed populace is a controlled populace.
    Thus, the second amendment was proudly and boldly included in the U.S. Constitution. It must be preserved at all costs. So the next time someone tries to tell you that gun control is about saving lives, look at these facts and remember these words from Noah Webster: "Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed." We now know what they're trying to do".

    It's insignificant yet you said you knew several people who died Monday.

    Dumbass.
    It's an article about numbers. Deaths are not insignificant.
    Muslims who kill Americans are insignificant but you freak out about it.
    And you don't so what the fuck is your point?
  • Sledog
    Sledog Member Posts: 37,763 Standard Supporter
    2001400ex said:

    Sledog said:

    2001400ex said:

    Sledog said:

    Just for you Hondo a few numbers and how the lefty run cities skew the stats.

    There are 30,000 gun related deaths per year by firearms, and this number is not disputed. The U.S. population is 324,059,091 as of June 22, 2016. Do the math: 0.000000925% of the population dies from gun related actions each year. Statistically speaking, this is insignificant! What is never told, however, is a breakdown of those 30,000 deaths, to put them in perspective as compared to other causes of death:
    • 65% of those deaths are by suicide, which would never be prevented by gun laws.
    • 15% are by law enforcement in the line of duty and justified.
    • 17% are through criminal activity, gang and drug related or mentally ill persons – better known as gun violence.
    • 3% are accidental discharge deaths.
    So technically, "gun violence" is not 30,000 annually, but drops to 5,100. Still too many? Now lets look at how those deaths spanned across the nation.
    • 480 homicides (9.4%) were in Chicago
    • 344 homicides (6.7%) were in Baltimore
    • 333 homicides (6.5%) were in Detroit
    • 119 homicides (2.3%) were in Washington D.C. (a 54% increase over prior years)
    So basically, 25% of all gun crime happens in just 4 cities. All 4 of those cities have strict gun laws, so it is not the lack of law that is the root cause.
    This basically leaves 3,825 for the entire rest of the nation, or about 75 deaths per state. That is an average because some States have much higher rates than others. For example, California had 1,169 and Alabama had 1.
    Now, who has the strictest gun laws by far? California, of course, but understand, it is not guns causing this. It is a crime rate spawned by the number of criminal persons residing in those cities and states. So if all cities and states are not created equal, then there must be something other than the tool causing the gun deaths.
    Are 5,100 deaths per year horrific? How about in comparison to other deaths? All death is sad and especially so when it is in the commission of a crime but that is the nature of crime. Robbery, death, rape, assault are all done by criminals. It is ludicrous to think that criminals will obey laws. That is why they are called criminals.
    But what about other deaths each year?
    • 40,000+ die from a drug overdose–THERE IS NO EXCUSE FOR THAT!
    • 36,000 people die per year from the flu, far exceeding the criminal gun deaths.
    • 34,000 people die per year in traffic fatalities(exceeding gun deaths even if you include suicide).
    Now it gets good:
    • 200,000+ people die each year (and growing) from preventable medical errors. You are safer walking in the worst areas of Chicago than you are when you are in a hospital!
    • 710,000 people die per year from heart disease. It’s time to stop the double cheeseburgers! So what is the point? If the liberal loons and the anti-gun movement focused their attention on heart disease, even a 10% decrease in cardiac deaths would save twice the number of lives annually of all gun-related deaths (including suicide, law enforcement, etc.). A 10% reduction in medical errors would be 66% of the total number of gun deaths or 4 times the number of criminal homicides ................ Simple, easily preventable 10% reductions! So you have to ask yourself, in the grand scheme of things, why the focus on guns? It's pretty simple:
    Taking away guns gives control to governments. The founders of this nation knew that regardless of the form of government, those in power may become corrupt and seek to rule as the British did by trying to disarm the populace of the colonies. It is not difficult to understand that a disarmed populace is a controlled populace.
    Thus, the second amendment was proudly and boldly included in the U.S. Constitution. It must be preserved at all costs. So the next time someone tries to tell you that gun control is about saving lives, look at these facts and remember these words from Noah Webster: "Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed." We now know what they're trying to do".

    It's insignificant yet you said you knew several people who died Monday.

    Dumbass.
    It's an article about numbers. Deaths are not insignificant.
    Muslims who kill Americans are insignificant but you freak out about it.
    That's an easy one. We know they want to kill us so don't let them in. If Charles Manson wanted in your house are you opening the door? Suicide bombing are insignificant too.
  • UWhuskytskeet
    UWhuskytskeet Member Posts: 7,113
    Sledog said:

    2001400ex said:

    Sledog said:

    2001400ex said:

    Sledog said:

    Just for you Hondo a few numbers and how the lefty run cities skew the stats.

    There are 30,000 gun related deaths per year by firearms, and this number is not disputed. The U.S. population is 324,059,091 as of June 22, 2016. Do the math: 0.000000925% of the population dies from gun related actions each year. Statistically speaking, this is insignificant! What is never told, however, is a breakdown of those 30,000 deaths, to put them in perspective as compared to other causes of death:
    • 65% of those deaths are by suicide, which would never be prevented by gun laws.
    • 15% are by law enforcement in the line of duty and justified.
    • 17% are through criminal activity, gang and drug related or mentally ill persons – better known as gun violence.
    • 3% are accidental discharge deaths.
    So technically, "gun violence" is not 30,000 annually, but drops to 5,100. Still too many? Now lets look at how those deaths spanned across the nation.
    • 480 homicides (9.4%) were in Chicago
    • 344 homicides (6.7%) were in Baltimore
    • 333 homicides (6.5%) were in Detroit
    • 119 homicides (2.3%) were in Washington D.C. (a 54% increase over prior years)
    So basically, 25% of all gun crime happens in just 4 cities. All 4 of those cities have strict gun laws, so it is not the lack of law that is the root cause.
    This basically leaves 3,825 for the entire rest of the nation, or about 75 deaths per state. That is an average because some States have much higher rates than others. For example, California had 1,169 and Alabama had 1.
    Now, who has the strictest gun laws by far? California, of course, but understand, it is not guns causing this. It is a crime rate spawned by the number of criminal persons residing in those cities and states. So if all cities and states are not created equal, then there must be something other than the tool causing the gun deaths.
    Are 5,100 deaths per year horrific? How about in comparison to other deaths? All death is sad and especially so when it is in the commission of a crime but that is the nature of crime. Robbery, death, rape, assault are all done by criminals. It is ludicrous to think that criminals will obey laws. That is why they are called criminals.
    But what about other deaths each year?
    • 40,000+ die from a drug overdose–THERE IS NO EXCUSE FOR THAT!
    • 36,000 people die per year from the flu, far exceeding the criminal gun deaths.
    • 34,000 people die per year in traffic fatalities(exceeding gun deaths even if you include suicide).
    Now it gets good:
    • 200,000+ people die each year (and growing) from preventable medical errors. You are safer walking in the worst areas of Chicago than you are when you are in a hospital!
    • 710,000 people die per year from heart disease. It’s time to stop the double cheeseburgers! So what is the point? If the liberal loons and the anti-gun movement focused their attention on heart disease, even a 10% decrease in cardiac deaths would save twice the number of lives annually of all gun-related deaths (including suicide, law enforcement, etc.). A 10% reduction in medical errors would be 66% of the total number of gun deaths or 4 times the number of criminal homicides ................ Simple, easily preventable 10% reductions! So you have to ask yourself, in the grand scheme of things, why the focus on guns? It's pretty simple:
    Taking away guns gives control to governments. The founders of this nation knew that regardless of the form of government, those in power may become corrupt and seek to rule as the British did by trying to disarm the populace of the colonies. It is not difficult to understand that a disarmed populace is a controlled populace.
    Thus, the second amendment was proudly and boldly included in the U.S. Constitution. It must be preserved at all costs. So the next time someone tries to tell you that gun control is about saving lives, look at these facts and remember these words from Noah Webster: "Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed." We now know what they're trying to do".

    It's insignificant yet you said you knew several people who died Monday.

    Dumbass.
    It's an article about numbers. Deaths are not insignificant.
    Muslims who kill Americans are insignificant but you freak out about it.
    That's an easy one. We know they want to kill us so don't let them in. If Charles Manson wanted in your house are you opening the door? Suicide bombing are insignificant too.
    Insignificant or nonexistent?
  • 2001400ex
    2001400ex Member Posts: 29,457
    Sledog said:

    2001400ex said:

    Sledog said:

    2001400ex said:

    Sledog said:

    Just for you Hondo a few numbers and how the lefty run cities skew the stats.

    There are 30,000 gun related deaths per year by firearms, and this number is not disputed. The U.S. population is 324,059,091 as of June 22, 2016. Do the math: 0.000000925% of the population dies from gun related actions each year. Statistically speaking, this is insignificant! What is never told, however, is a breakdown of those 30,000 deaths, to put them in perspective as compared to other causes of death:
    • 65% of those deaths are by suicide, which would never be prevented by gun laws.
    • 15% are by law enforcement in the line of duty and justified.
    • 17% are through criminal activity, gang and drug related or mentally ill persons – better known as gun violence.
    • 3% are accidental discharge deaths.
    So technically, "gun violence" is not 30,000 annually, but drops to 5,100. Still too many? Now lets look at how those deaths spanned across the nation.
    • 480 homicides (9.4%) were in Chicago
    • 344 homicides (6.7%) were in Baltimore
    • 333 homicides (6.5%) were in Detroit
    • 119 homicides (2.3%) were in Washington D.C. (a 54% increase over prior years)
    So basically, 25% of all gun crime happens in just 4 cities. All 4 of those cities have strict gun laws, so it is not the lack of law that is the root cause.
    This basically leaves 3,825 for the entire rest of the nation, or about 75 deaths per state. That is an average because some States have much higher rates than others. For example, California had 1,169 and Alabama had 1.
    Now, who has the strictest gun laws by far? California, of course, but understand, it is not guns causing this. It is a crime rate spawned by the number of criminal persons residing in those cities and states. So if all cities and states are not created equal, then there must be something other than the tool causing the gun deaths.
    Are 5,100 deaths per year horrific? How about in comparison to other deaths? All death is sad and especially so when it is in the commission of a crime but that is the nature of crime. Robbery, death, rape, assault are all done by criminals. It is ludicrous to think that criminals will obey laws. That is why they are called criminals.
    But what about other deaths each year?
    • 40,000+ die from a drug overdose–THERE IS NO EXCUSE FOR THAT!
    • 36,000 people die per year from the flu, far exceeding the criminal gun deaths.
    • 34,000 people die per year in traffic fatalities(exceeding gun deaths even if you include suicide).
    Now it gets good:
    • 200,000+ people die each year (and growing) from preventable medical errors. You are safer walking in the worst areas of Chicago than you are when you are in a hospital!
    • 710,000 people die per year from heart disease. It’s time to stop the double cheeseburgers! So what is the point? If the liberal loons and the anti-gun movement focused their attention on heart disease, even a 10% decrease in cardiac deaths would save twice the number of lives annually of all gun-related deaths (including suicide, law enforcement, etc.). A 10% reduction in medical errors would be 66% of the total number of gun deaths or 4 times the number of criminal homicides ................ Simple, easily preventable 10% reductions! So you have to ask yourself, in the grand scheme of things, why the focus on guns? It's pretty simple:
    Taking away guns gives control to governments. The founders of this nation knew that regardless of the form of government, those in power may become corrupt and seek to rule as the British did by trying to disarm the populace of the colonies. It is not difficult to understand that a disarmed populace is a controlled populace.
    Thus, the second amendment was proudly and boldly included in the U.S. Constitution. It must be preserved at all costs. So the next time someone tries to tell you that gun control is about saving lives, look at these facts and remember these words from Noah Webster: "Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed." We now know what they're trying to do".

    It's insignificant yet you said you knew several people who died Monday.

    Dumbass.
    It's an article about numbers. Deaths are not insignificant.
    Muslims who kill Americans are insignificant but you freak out about it.
    That's an easy one. We know they want to kill us so don't let them in. If Charles Manson wanted in your house are you opening the door? Suicide bombing are insignificant too.
    I feel like border control has been working as well as the war on drugs.
  • TurdBomber
    TurdBomber Member Posts: 20,039 Standard Supporter
    2001400ex said:

    Sledog said:

    2001400ex said:

    Sledog said:

    Just for you Hondo a few numbers and how the lefty run cities skew the stats.

    There are 30,000 gun related deaths per year by firearms, and this number is not disputed. The U.S. population is 324,059,091 as of June 22, 2016. Do the math: 0.000000925% of the population dies from gun related actions each year. Statistically speaking, this is insignificant! What is never told, however, is a breakdown of those 30,000 deaths, to put them in perspective as compared to other causes of death:
    • 65% of those deaths are by suicide, which would never be prevented by gun laws.
    • 15% are by law enforcement in the line of duty and justified.
    • 17% are through criminal activity, gang and drug related or mentally ill persons – better known as gun violence.
    • 3% are accidental discharge deaths.
    So technically, "gun violence" is not 30,000 annually, but drops to 5,100. Still too many? Now lets look at how those deaths spanned across the nation.
    • 480 homicides (9.4%) were in Chicago
    • 344 homicides (6.7%) were in Baltimore
    • 333 homicides (6.5%) were in Detroit
    • 119 homicides (2.3%) were in Washington D.C. (a 54% increase over prior years)
    So basically, 25% of all gun crime happens in just 4 cities. All 4 of those cities have strict gun laws, so it is not the lack of law that is the root cause.
    This basically leaves 3,825 for the entire rest of the nation, or about 75 deaths per state. That is an average because some States have much higher rates than others. For example, California had 1,169 and Alabama had 1.
    Now, who has the strictest gun laws by far? California, of course, but understand, it is not guns causing this. It is a crime rate spawned by the number of criminal persons residing in those cities and states. So if all cities and states are not created equal, then there must be something other than the tool causing the gun deaths.
    Are 5,100 deaths per year horrific? How about in comparison to other deaths? All death is sad and especially so when it is in the commission of a crime but that is the nature of crime. Robbery, death, rape, assault are all done by criminals. It is ludicrous to think that criminals will obey laws. That is why they are called criminals.
    But what about other deaths each year?
    • 40,000+ die from a drug overdose–THERE IS NO EXCUSE FOR THAT!
    • 36,000 people die per year from the flu, far exceeding the criminal gun deaths.
    • 34,000 people die per year in traffic fatalities(exceeding gun deaths even if you include suicide).
    Now it gets good:
    • 200,000+ people die each year (and growing) from preventable medical errors. You are safer walking in the worst areas of Chicago than you are when you are in a hospital!
    • 710,000 people die per year from heart disease. It’s time to stop the double cheeseburgers! So what is the point? If the liberal loons and the anti-gun movement focused their attention on heart disease, even a 10% decrease in cardiac deaths would save twice the number of lives annually of all gun-related deaths (including suicide, law enforcement, etc.). A 10% reduction in medical errors would be 66% of the total number of gun deaths or 4 times the number of criminal homicides ................ Simple, easily preventable 10% reductions! So you have to ask yourself, in the grand scheme of things, why the focus on guns? It's pretty simple:
    Taking away guns gives control to governments. The founders of this nation knew that regardless of the form of government, those in power may become corrupt and seek to rule as the British did by trying to disarm the populace of the colonies. It is not difficult to understand that a disarmed populace is a controlled populace.
    Thus, the second amendment was proudly and boldly included in the U.S. Constitution. It must be preserved at all costs. So the next time someone tries to tell you that gun control is about saving lives, look at these facts and remember these words from Noah Webster: "Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed." We now know what they're trying to do".

    It's insignificant yet you said you knew several people who died Monday.

    Dumbass.
    It's an article about numbers. Deaths are not insignificant.
    Muslims who kill Americans are insignificant but you freak out about it.
    image
    But not for lack of want.
  • Sledog
    Sledog Member Posts: 37,763 Standard Supporter
    2001400ex said:

    Sledog said:

    2001400ex said:

    Sledog said:

    2001400ex said:

    Sledog said:

    Just for you Hondo a few numbers and how the lefty run cities skew the stats.

    There are 30,000 gun related deaths per year by firearms, and this number is not disputed. The U.S. population is 324,059,091 as of June 22, 2016. Do the math: 0.000000925% of the population dies from gun related actions each year. Statistically speaking, this is insignificant! What is never told, however, is a breakdown of those 30,000 deaths, to put them in perspective as compared to other causes of death:
    • 65% of those deaths are by suicide, which would never be prevented by gun laws.
    • 15% are by law enforcement in the line of duty and justified.
    • 17% are through criminal activity, gang and drug related or mentally ill persons – better known as gun violence.
    • 3% are accidental discharge deaths.
    So technically, "gun violence" is not 30,000 annually, but drops to 5,100. Still too many? Now lets look at how those deaths spanned across the nation.
    • 480 homicides (9.4%) were in Chicago
    • 344 homicides (6.7%) were in Baltimore
    • 333 homicides (6.5%) were in Detroit
    • 119 homicides (2.3%) were in Washington D.C. (a 54% increase over prior years)
    So basically, 25% of all gun crime happens in just 4 cities. All 4 of those cities have strict gun laws, so it is not the lack of law that is the root cause.
    This basically leaves 3,825 for the entire rest of the nation, or about 75 deaths per state. That is an average because some States have much higher rates than others. For example, California had 1,169 and Alabama had 1.
    Now, who has the strictest gun laws by far? California, of course, but understand, it is not guns causing this. It is a crime rate spawned by the number of criminal persons residing in those cities and states. So if all cities and states are not created equal, then there must be something other than the tool causing the gun deaths.
    Are 5,100 deaths per year horrific? How about in comparison to other deaths? All death is sad and especially so when it is in the commission of a crime but that is the nature of crime. Robbery, death, rape, assault are all done by criminals. It is ludicrous to think that criminals will obey laws. That is why they are called criminals.
    But what about other deaths each year?
    • 40,000+ die from a drug overdose–THERE IS NO EXCUSE FOR THAT!
    • 36,000 people die per year from the flu, far exceeding the criminal gun deaths.
    • 34,000 people die per year in traffic fatalities(exceeding gun deaths even if you include suicide).
    Now it gets good:
    • 200,000+ people die each year (and growing) from preventable medical errors. You are safer walking in the worst areas of Chicago than you are when you are in a hospital!
    • 710,000 people die per year from heart disease. It’s time to stop the double cheeseburgers! So what is the point? If the liberal loons and the anti-gun movement focused their attention on heart disease, even a 10% decrease in cardiac deaths would save twice the number of lives annually of all gun-related deaths (including suicide, law enforcement, etc.). A 10% reduction in medical errors would be 66% of the total number of gun deaths or 4 times the number of criminal homicides ................ Simple, easily preventable 10% reductions! So you have to ask yourself, in the grand scheme of things, why the focus on guns? It's pretty simple:
    Taking away guns gives control to governments. The founders of this nation knew that regardless of the form of government, those in power may become corrupt and seek to rule as the British did by trying to disarm the populace of the colonies. It is not difficult to understand that a disarmed populace is a controlled populace.
    Thus, the second amendment was proudly and boldly included in the U.S. Constitution. It must be preserved at all costs. So the next time someone tries to tell you that gun control is about saving lives, look at these facts and remember these words from Noah Webster: "Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed." We now know what they're trying to do".

    It's insignificant yet you said you knew several people who died Monday.

    Dumbass.
    It's an article about numbers. Deaths are not insignificant.
    Muslims who kill Americans are insignificant but you freak out about it.
    That's an easy one. We know they want to kill us so don't let them in. If Charles Manson wanted in your house are you opening the door? Suicide bombing are insignificant too.
    I feel like border control has been working as well as the war on drugs.
    Yes your hero Obozo invited them all in and told the border patrol not to arrest illegals. So for once you are right!
  • LebamDawg
    LebamDawg Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 8,787 Swaye's Wigwam

    Vox aren't the sharpest tools in the shed...

    If you are going to site Australia's gun suicide rate dropping as a leading example of why you should limit guns shouldn't you do a bit more background research on that (i.e. is it really changing anything)?

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com.au/2016/09/27/australias-suicide-crisis-has-peaked-to-a-terrifying-new-height_a_21480647/

    image

    What I got out of this was to lower the suicide rate we should have world wars
  • Mosster47
    Mosster47 Member Posts: 6,246
    edited October 2017
    2001400ex said:

    Paws, I'm curious why you are linking a liberal website. That being said, this chart is telling. I'm curious if anyone knows when the Brady bill was signed and then lapsed correlated with this chart.

    photo firearm_homicide_deaths_zpsu34sgndb.jpeg

    The Brady Bill was signed into law in 1993. There were almost no actual Brady Bill violations and it stopped a pretty small amount of gun sales on the aggregate, but it did bring on magazine control.

    All of the Cletus types rushed out and paid 400% above the normal price for all of the high capacity magazines and that was it, they were gone until it expired.

    I'd have to really dive into it, but the only really publicized mass shooting I can remember during the time of the Brady Bill was the black guy that shot up the subway/train. I believe it was in Philadelphia.

    The simple numbers are from 1904 to 2004 there was an average of 1.13 mass shooting per year. From 2005 to present there are 3.5 mass shooting per year. Those are just the numbers, take them however you want.
  • AZDuck
    AZDuck Member Posts: 15,381
    Kip Kinkel would like a word
  • Mosster47
    Mosster47 Member Posts: 6,246
    AZDuck said:

    Kip Kinkel would like a word

    I don't count school shootings. I obviously remember Kip. It was 50 miles away and we were the same grade.

    Shitty kids that get bullied always do stupid shit. Adults taking something out on adult strangers are the thing I was talking about, like UCC, which was 12 miles away.
  • AZDuck
    AZDuck Member Posts: 15,381
    didn't know where your line is. Figured you knew about Kip.
  • pawz
    pawz Member, Moderator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 22,462 Founders Club
    Swaye said:

    This thread is Asshole Injected Death Syndrome

    FREE PUB !!