3 ms·
Your source is only for the year 1995, and even there it was the second most common cause. It was the most common cause on average over the last ten years (traf
by bildung 5y ago
Your source is only for the year 1995, and even there it was the second most common cause. It was the most common cause on average over the last ten years (traffic fatalities are split, you have to add them together): https://nleomf.org/facts-figures/causes-of-law-enforcement-deaths https://nleomf.org/facts-figures/causes-of-law-enforcement-d...
- jjcon 5y agoEven on your source they aren’t the majority
- 9wzYQbTYsAIc 5y agoDid you sum the numbers for all types of moving vehicle sources of hazard? If you do the math, it does appear to exceed the number of incidences of being shot on the job.
- jjcon 5y agoYes and even then it doesn’t Additionally the claim wasn’t, ‘exceed the number of incidences of being shot on the job’ it was, ‘majority of [deaths] are traffic accidents’
- 9wzYQbTYsAIc 5y agoDepending on your perspective, the claim is not entirely incorrect. The most neutral reading of the presented data is that police are equally likely to be shot, have a moving-vehicle accident, and have a job related illness. The remainder of job related hazards are extremely marginal in comparison to those three. Guns, vehicles, and illness compose the near totality of incidents and those incidents are distributed nearly equally between the three hazards.
- bildung 5y agoThe sum of traffic accidents is 335+4+1+2+58+4+130=534 vs. 528 who were shot. Edit: Even better: the chance of being shot is way lower for an LEO than the average US citizen: Its .000122 for the average person vs. .000066 for an LEO. (2017 numbers: 1/32510000039773=.000122 for the average vs. 1/80000053=.000066 for LEOs, gun deaths from here https://time.com/5476998/risk-of-guns-america/ https://time.com/5476998/risk-of-guns-america/ and LEO deaths from the source above)