5 ms·

Great. Even easier access to guns is just what America needs. http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/crime/2012/12/gun_death_tally_every_american_gun_

by flexie 14y ago

Great. Even easier access to guns is just what America needs. http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/crime/2012/12/gun_death_tally_every_american_gun_death_since_newtown_sandy_hook_shooting.html http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/crime/2012/1...

RobotCaleb 14y ago
Without comparing that to other causes of death it's a pretty useless page to look at.
- mfringel 14y ago
  It informed me that there are 1621 people dead since Newtown. That's useful to know in as much that there are continued gun-related deaths in the US. Now, we can relate those to per-capita deaths in order countries and compare, like-to-like. Can you clarify why it's useless to look at unless we include ostensibly unrelated statistics?
  - jack-r-abbit 14y ago
    The parent post said "comparing that to other causes of death" not "comparing gun deaths in other countries." Generally speaking, the point is this: more people die of several other things that could just as easily be banned and save more lives than banning guns.
    - mfringel 14y ago
      I'm aware of the point. I think it's more than a bit disingenuous. Let's take heart disease, for example. Can someone walk up to a healthy person and instantaneously give them heart disease? Method and execution counts. A gun is a man-portable device that allows someone to project lethal force at a distance. Looking at other causes of death that use similar methods is reasonable and good. Until someone can teleport arterial plaque into your veins at a distance without your consent, I don't find the "all other causes of death" argument to be persuasive.
      - jack-r-abbit 14y ago
        Drunk drivers drive up to healthy people and instantaneously give them death and disfigurement... all day, every day. Often times in multiples.
      - nirvana 14y ago
        Do you really believe that if all guns disappeared tomorow, those who want to kill themselves would not find another way? Because thats what most "gun related deaths" are-- suicides. But it pads the statistics to make people who aren't paying close attention more fearful to talk about "gun related deaths" than "murders with guns", and it also helps avoid the fact that the murder rate in countries where guns have been banned is much higher-- even if they have to use knives to do it. (how often have you seen the murder rate in Britain brought up vs. the number of "gun related deaths" brought up there in this debate?)
        mfringel 14y ago
        ''Do you really believe that if all guns disappeared tomorow, those who want to kill themselves would not find another way?'' Strawman. "Banning all the guns" was never mentioned or advocated. Please rephrase.
        DanBC 14y ago
        > Do you really believe that if all guns disappeared tomorow, those who want to kill themselves would not find another way? Yes, most people who would complete suicide by gun would not do so without a gun.
        aidenn0 14y ago
        They would use trains: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rail_transport_in_Japan#Suicide http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rail_transport_in_Japan#Suicide
        DanBC 14y ago
        No. Small changes to availability of a method of suicide can have big affects. (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-21370910 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-21370910)
  - TDL 14y ago
    There is no context to that number. Is 1621 gun deaths a lot, a little, are there seasonal effects, etc. It's not an entirely useless number, but it does little to clarify what the broader trends of gun violence are.
nirvana 14y ago
Compare that number to the 1,500,000 times a year, according to the DoJ, that guns are used defensively by intended victims to stop violent crime. Constantly talking about how many people have been killed while ignoring how many have been saved is profoundly dishonest. The rate of violent crime in the USA is around 640 per 100,000 while in the UK it is closer to 2,500 per 100k. Clearly banning guns doesn't lower violent crime. In fact, in the UK, after they banned guns, violent gun crime skyrocketed.... because the criminals knew that their victims were disarmed.
- showerst 14y ago
  Do you have a cite for that 1.5MM/year? The best numbers I could find from DOJ are from 2000, and suggest it's around 100,000. https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:419E8WPZxdkJ:home.uchicago.edu/~ludwigj/papers/Crime_and_Justice_gundefense_2000.pdf+&hl=en&gl=us&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESioVHArQ0x6EMy1Ey4s6iuI3bTm6sgM6bxwjdSPX1BEh2BLNIw59H5_H8Cduf4MsotZ-X7-32FxTqU9gHbMWymRBsi_T4ShmiqfuFkPJRQMK1f4hb5yVErz2fJD_bUGpZkp_UuV&sig=AHIEtbSyrvICxjDop3P-omDg5h-pRj-I0w https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:419E8WPZxdkJ:...
- astrodust 14y ago
  I'm calling bullshit on this. Violent crime in the UK peaked in 1995 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Violent-crime-rates-UK-1981-to-2007.png http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Violent-crime-rates-UK-198...). Various types of gun bans were passed in 1988 and an even stricter one in 1997 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firearms_(Amendment)_Act_1997 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firearms_(Amendment)_Act_1997).

by flexie 14y ago

RobotCaleb 14y ago

Without comparing that to other causes of death it's a pretty useless page to look at.

mfringel 14y ago
It informed me that there are 1621 people dead since Newtown. That's useful to know in as much that there are continued gun-related deaths in the US. Now, we can relate those to per-capita deaths in order countries and compare, like-to-like. Can you clarify why it's useless to look at unless we include ostensibly unrelated statistics?
- jack-r-abbit 14y ago
  The parent post said "comparing that to other causes of death" not "comparing gun deaths in other countries." Generally speaking, the point is this: more people die of several other things that could just as easily be banned and save more lives than banning guns.
  - mfringel 14y ago
    I'm aware of the point. I think it's more than a bit disingenuous. Let's take heart disease, for example. Can someone walk up to a healthy person and instantaneously give them heart disease? Method and execution counts. A gun is a man-portable device that allows someone to project lethal force at a distance. Looking at other causes of death that use similar methods is reasonable and good. Until someone can teleport arterial plaque into your veins at a distance without your consent, I don't find the "all other causes of death" argument to be persuasive.
    - jack-r-abbit 14y ago
      Drunk drivers drive up to healthy people and instantaneously give them death and disfigurement... all day, every day. Often times in multiples.
    - nirvana 14y ago
      Do you really believe that if all guns disappeared tomorow, those who want to kill themselves would not find another way? Because thats what most "gun related deaths" are-- suicides. But it pads the statistics to make people who aren't paying close attention more fearful to talk about "gun related deaths" than "murders with guns", and it also helps avoid the fact that the murder rate in countries where guns have been banned is much higher-- even if they have to use knives to do it. (how often have you seen the murder rate in Britain brought up vs. the number of "gun related deaths" brought up there in this debate?)
      - mfringel 14y ago
        ''Do you really believe that if all guns disappeared tomorow, those who want to kill themselves would not find another way?'' Strawman. "Banning all the guns" was never mentioned or advocated. Please rephrase.
      - DanBC 14y ago
        > Do you really believe that if all guns disappeared tomorow, those who want to kill themselves would not find another way? Yes, most people who would complete suicide by gun would not do so without a gun.
        aidenn0 14y ago
        They would use trains: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rail_transport_in_Japan#Suicide http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rail_transport_in_Japan#Suicide
        DanBC 14y ago
        No. Small changes to availability of a method of suicide can have big affects. (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-21370910 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-21370910)
- TDL 14y ago
  There is no context to that number. Is 1621 gun deaths a lot, a little, are there seasonal effects, etc. It's not an entirely useless number, but it does little to clarify what the broader trends of gun violence are.

nirvana 14y ago

Compare that number to the 1,500,000 times a year, according to the DoJ, that guns are used defensively by intended victims to stop violent crime. Constantly talking about how many people have been killed while ignoring how many have been saved is profoundly dishonest. The rate of violent crime in the USA is around 640 per 100,000 while in the UK it is closer to 2,500 per 100k. Clearly banning guns doesn't lower violent crime. In fact, in the UK, after they banned guns, violent gun crime skyrocketed.... because the criminals knew that their victims were disarmed.

showerst 14y ago
Do you have a cite for that 1.5MM/year? The best numbers I could find from DOJ are from 2000, and suggest it's around 100,000. https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:419E8WPZxdkJ:home.uchicago.edu/~ludwigj/papers/Crime_and_Justice_gundefense_2000.pdf+&hl=en&gl=us&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESioVHArQ0x6EMy1Ey4s6iuI3bTm6sgM6bxwjdSPX1BEh2BLNIw59H5_H8Cduf4MsotZ-X7-32FxTqU9gHbMWymRBsi_T4ShmiqfuFkPJRQMK1f4hb5yVErz2fJD_bUGpZkp_UuV&sig=AHIEtbSyrvICxjDop3P-omDg5h-pRj-I0w https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:419E8WPZxdkJ:...
astrodust 14y ago
I'm calling bullshit on this. Violent crime in the UK peaked in 1995 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Violent-crime-rates-UK-1981-to-2007.png http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Violent-crime-rates-UK-198...). Various types of gun bans were passed in 1988 and an even stricter one in 1997 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firearms_(Amendment)_Act_1997 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firearms_(Amendment)_Act_1997).