Gun numbers to ponder

JerrySharrett

Senile Member
There are 30,000 gun related deaths per year by firearms, and this number is not disputed. U.S. population 324,059,091 as of Wednesday, 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 – gun violence
• 3% are accidental discharge deaths

So technically, "gun violence" is not 30,000 annually, but drops to 5,100. Still too many? Well, first, how are 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, so 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 equally, 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 all is done by criminals and thinking that criminals will obey laws is ludicrous. That's why they are 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 in Chicago than 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 Obama 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 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, as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe.

The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword, because the whole body of the people are armed and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretense, raised in the United States.

A military force at the command of Congress can execute no laws, but such as the people perceive to be just and constitutional; for they will possess the power."

Remember, when it comes to "gun control," the important word is “control," not “gun."

.
 
15% or 4500 deaths at the hand of LEOs seems awful high to me and I would argue that not all are justified. I can draw my own conclusions from some of the videos that have been released.

The anti-gun side would counter that deaths by suicide from a firearm would not be the same number if the individuals had no access to firearms. At least I've seen that used on other message boards that I visit. Of course there's no real way to verify that.

I don't want any more restrictions on my firearms than the next guy, but there has to be something more that can be done to keep kids like the Cruz kid from getting firearms.
 
My FAVORITE part??? "1169 in Californiaiay and1 in Alabama" Roll Tide!

My least favorite? "There has to be something more we can do....Cruz"
 
My FAVORITE part??? "1169 in Californiaiay and1 in Alabama" Roll Tide!

My least favorite? "There has to be something more we can do....Cruz"

Why? What if it was your kid he killed?

How can they charge a kid for improper display of a firearm just from seeing a video, yet nothing came of literally hundreds of reports about Cruz's behavior?

How can better background checks be a bad thing? Frankly, there's not much I'm willing to concede when it comes to more regs, but better vetting of purchasers doesn't seem that bad to me.
 
Why? What if it was your kid he killed?

How can they charge a kid for improper display of a firearm just from seeing a video, yet nothing came of literally hundreds of reports about Cruz's behavior?

How can better background checks be a bad thing? Frankly, there's not much I'm willing to concede when it comes to more regs, but better vetting of purchasers doesn't seem that bad to me.

Private sales are a BIG sticking point. It infringes on our sensibilities as responsible gun owners. And is the start of registering and confiscating firearms.
 
Why? What if it was your kid he killed?

How can they charge a kid for improper display of a firearm just from seeing a video, yet nothing came of literally hundreds of reports about Cruz's behavior?

How can better background checks be a bad thing? Frankly, there's not much I'm willing to concede when it comes to more regs, but better vetting of purchasers doesn't seem that bad to me.

Have you heard of the "Promise Programs"?
They are in every city. obama/holder DOJ gave out $Millions of USD to schools/police dept. to "not arrest/record crimes of minority students".....
Keep the numbers down and you git some.
Broward Sheriff got millions of USD....he has a cover up going on.....
http://dailycaller.com/2018/02/26/promise-agreement-parkland-shooting/
 
Why? What if it was your kid he killed?

How can they charge a kid for improper display of a firearm just from seeing a video, yet nothing came of literally hundreds of reports about Cruz's behavior?

How can better background checks be a bad thing? Frankly, there's not much I'm willing to concede when it comes to more regs, but better vetting of purchasers doesn't seem that bad to me.

https://www.realclearinvestigations...cipline_policy_and_the_parkland_shooting.html
 
Just in the news, Saline solutions are the IV of choice for U.S. doctors. They cause tens of thousands of needless deaths from kidney failure and other causes when inexpensive and safe alternatives are available and widely used in other parts of the world.

Where's the outrage?

We are being railroaded by a bunch of deceitful, autocratic fascists.

I just sent another $200 to the NRA.
 
Why? What if it was your kid he killed?

How can they charge a kid for improper display of a firearm just from seeing a video, yet nothing came of literally hundreds of reports about Cruz's behavior?

How can better background checks be a bad thing? Frankly, there's not much I'm willing to concede when it comes to more regs, but better vetting of purchasers doesn't seem that bad to me.

Using the rhetoric "Why? What if your kid was killed?" Is illogical and dangerous, both for your personal well being, and for the good of the nation. You have no idea whether or not I've lost people to tragedy and in any case "my kid" is worth no more than anyone else's....

and, point by point;

-How can they charge a kid for improper display of a firearm just from seeing a video,- has no relevence to Cruz. Kids have been being expelled for going "pew, pew" with their fingers and for chewing their sammitches into pistols.... DUMB, yes, but not relevant.

-"hundreds of reports about Cruz' behavior"- relevant to the CASE, and a telling point about another aspect of society that needs be addressed, but does not lead me to "pass another law to keep Cruz from getting the firearm in the first place." To me this is just feel-good-ism, how'sabout we just pass a law making shooting schoolkids illegal!! Guns are less regulated than cars, uninsured drivers cost hundreds of times the lives and thousands of times the money as gun crimes......do you think you could "pass a law making it harder for uninsured drivers to get cars"? I mean sure... you could pass the law, but really? Drop me nekkid and blindfolded anywhere in the USA and if I've got a drive to get a job done I will HAVE a car soon.... or a gun.

You ask "How Can Better Background Checks Be A Bad Thing?"

Logistics man. We're a FREE country. I know 30 people, full grown adults with NO RECORD. 30 people who don't even have a Social Security # by their own choice.

I know some PI's who track people for a living. Just FINDING a human being in this country is hard, let alone backtracking his life.

As a dealer and as an employer I do lots of "vetting" enough to absolutely KNOW that at least in the three areas of the country I deal, 99.9% of all latinos are illegal. Enough to know that unless one is "in the database" there ain't no cursory background check gonna' get it done. A real background check take about a month and 3 trips thru the hoops and STILL criminals get hired into sensitive positions every day....What do I do about it??? We don't hire latinos. Costs me a lot of money and I have to be careful of discrimination suits but it's safer than hiring people with no history.

And about 4 million new 16yr-olds are born each day.... That's 4,000,000,000 new slates, NOT IN THE DATABASE.

And exactly who dictates "mentally ill?" Are you old enough to know what a frontal lobotomy is? To know exactly what the Kennedy family did to their embarrassing daughter/sister?

No, this is a dangerous road.

IMO the idea that we can "find and control the mentally deficient" or "catch those dudes before they commit the bloody crime eh!!!" Is pure hogwash.....

I read thousands of books in 3 genres that a lot of non-readers and boring people lump together. The genres are "Science Fiction", "Speculative Fiction", and "Fantasy."

This falls into the "Fantasy" category..... I'm sorry but 'Minority Report' is a fantasy....



jeepers creepers this is really hard without the ability to "quote" or "bold" or otherwise highlight stuff. I'm sorry that this is a mess, but I hope I've made myself clear in that I believe restriction is more dangerous societally than freedom.
 
Using the rhetoric "Why? What if your kid was killed?" Is illogical and dangerous, both for your personal well being, and for the good of the nation. You have no idea whether or not I've lost people to tragedy and in any case "my kid" is worth no more than anyone else's....

and, point by point;

-How can they charge a kid for improper display of a firearm just from seeing a video,- has no relevence to Cruz. Kids have been being expelled for going "pew, pew" with their fingers and for chewing their sammitches into pistols.... DUMB, yes, but not relevant.

-"hundreds of reports about Cruz' behavior"- relevant to the CASE, and a telling point about another aspect of society that needs be addressed, but does not lead me to "pass another law to keep Cruz from getting the firearm in the first place." To me this is just feel-good-ism, how'sabout we just pass a law making shooting schoolkids illegal!! Guns are less regulated than cars, uninsured drivers cost hundreds of times the lives and thousands of times the money as gun crimes......do you think you could "pass a law making it harder for uninsured drivers to get cars"? I mean sure... you could pass the law, but really? Drop me nekkid and blindfolded anywhere in the USA and if I've got a drive to get a job done I will HAVE a car soon.... or a gun.

You ask "How Can Better Background Checks Be A Bad Thing?"

Logistics man. We're a FREE country. I know 30 people, full grown adults with NO RECORD. 30 people who don't even have a Social Security # by their own choice.

I know some PI's who track people for a living. Just FINDING a human being in this country is hard, let alone backtracking his life.

As a dealer and as an employer I do lots of "vetting" enough to absolutely KNOW that at least in the three areas of the country I deal, 99.9% of all latinos are illegal. Enough to know that unless one is "in the database" there ain't no cursory background check gonna' get it done. A real background check take about a month and 3 trips thru the hoops and STILL criminals get hired into sensitive positions every day....What do I do about it??? We don't hire latinos. Costs me a lot of money and I have to be careful of discrimination suits but it's safer than hiring people with no history.

And about 4 million new 16yr-olds are born each day.... That's 4,000,000,000 new slates, NOT IN THE DATABASE.

And exactly who dictates "mentally ill?" Are you old enough to know what a frontal lobotomy is? To know exactly what the Kennedy family did to their embarrassing daughter/sister?

No, this is a dangerous road.

IMO the idea that we can "find and control the mentally deficient" or "catch those dudes before they commit the bloody crime eh!!!" Is pure hogwash.....

I read thousands of books in 3 genres that a lot of non-readers and boring people lump together. The genres are "Science Fiction", "Speculative Fiction", and "Fantasy."

This falls into the "Fantasy" category..... I'm sorry but 'Minority Report' is a fantasy....



jeepers creepers this is really hard without the ability to "quote" or "bold" or otherwise highlight stuff. I'm sorry that this is a mess, but I hope I've made myself clear in that I believe restriction is more dangerous societally than freedom.

Why would a newborn be in the NICS database? You only get put there if you're a felon or criminal [the C in NICS stands for criminal] not simply because you exist or are alive. Just because you're an illegal doesn't automatically put you in the database. My last background checks took about 5 seconds each because I'm not in the NICS databse.

Just when you think things have cooled off a bit, another massacre rears its ugly head. Each one gets harder and harder to pass off as a cost of freedom. IMO, it's only a matter of when the worm will turn and not if. FWIW, I can't ever see myself writing to my Congresspeople asking for stricter laws.
 
write your congress person and request getting rid of gun free zones-



Do you know the difference between a gun free zone and a not gun free zone? A sign. You need way more help than getting rid of a sign. I see nothing changing concerning school shootings. You are preaching to the choir on this forum.
 
Last edited:
Do you know the difference between a gun free zone and a not gun free zone? A sign. You need way more help than getting rid of a sign. I see nothing changing concerning school shootings. You are preaching to the choir on this forum.

I believe it was Rush who said the next one is just waiting to happen. I suppose that the shooter/s are in part retaliating for something that happened at the school. Also it seems like they want to make some sort final statement. Schools tend to offer an abundance of subjects who can be found in a small space with limited means to escape. Hopefully at least school staff and administrators are doing extra diligence.
 
I believe it was Rush who said the next one is just waiting to happen. I suppose that the shooter/s are in part retaliating for something that happened at the school. Also it seems like they want to make some sort final statement. Schools tend to offer an abundance of subjects who can be found in a small space with limited means to escape. Hopefully at least school staff and administrators are doing extra diligence.

Really??? Unless & until the idea of "gun free zones" is eliminated and schools become at least as secure as government building and Oscar awards I see little that school staff and administrators can do. Exactly what did you have in mind?

Rick
 
Really??? Unless & until the idea of "gun free zones" is eliminated and schools become at least as secure as government building and Oscar awards I see little that school staff and administrators can do. Exactly what did you have in mind?


You didn't just take the sign down you added security. Two different things.
 
I'm constantly amazed......

First of all what I SAID was, 4 Million 16 Year Old's are born each day..... where "infants" came from isn't in my post.

And who said anything about NIC'S?

"Difference is a sign"

Huhh? Again, weird.

Lemme' make it more personal. My property is a school. It's a school open to both the public, and other areas private. Point is, School......classes.....The police tried to make my property a "Gun Free Zone."

I balked.

Actually I refused, and offered to shut down the classes, close the classroom and discontinue my services.

We were offered an "exemption from the law"

I refused.

The WA Attorney General offered us a verbal exception.

I refused.

So in the end jurisdiction was reassigned, written documentation, statewide policy statements etc.....my public classroom IS NOT a "Gunfree Zone."

But back to "it's just a sign"...... I find this whole outlook detestable. It reminds me of the 70's hippiethink...... "sign, sign, everywhere a sign blockin' out the scenery, breakin' my mind....." ending up with invasion of private property by scumbags grunting "who gives you the right?" Reminds me of folks who hunt private property because "it's just a sign".....

I live in a country governed by laws which I ABIDE BY..... if I don't like a law, I work to get it changed but in the meantime, it's not "just a sign" it's a Symbol Of Law.

Sign says "don't carry"..... I don't carry. Sign says "No Trapessing"..... I indeed DO NOT TRAPESS!

I grew up in schools where teachers and school personnel sometimes carried..... it wasn't "required," they weren't "there to protect the school," it was simply a choice. Very few carried but that's the point, you just don't know. And THAT is the deterrent. One of the first thing burglars do on casing a home is try establish what sort of people live in the home. Duckboats and dog dishes are at least as effective a deterrent as a sign saying "Home Security System".

"Gun Free Zone" means exactly one thing. And it sure ain't "just a sign" to law-abiding people.
 
Last edited:
Not my point Al. All I mean is just because a school is not gun free in my opinion does not solve anything. I don't think all of a sudden there will be people in schools armed to protect themselves. Or could you help me understand what would making a school a not a gun free zone do to help matters. I hate the fact that I am detestable.
I missed the part about when you were in school. I think that does not apply to the majority of schools today. I am not quite sure of the mindset of a person the would shoot up a school to guess what would be a deterrent. Then with your analogy wouldn't the presence of some security make a difference?
 
Last edited:
Not my point Al. All I mean is just because a school is not gun free in my opinion does not solve anything. I don't think all of a sudden there will be people in schools armed to protect themselves. Or could you help me understand what would making a school a not a gun free zone do to help matters. I hate the fact that I am detestable.
I missed the part about when you were in school. I think that does not apply to the majority of schools today. I am not quite sure of the mindset of a person the would shoot up a school to guess what would be a deterrent. Then with your analogy wouldn't the presence of some security make a difference?

In My Opinion the whole idea of "hardening" and "training teachers to be SWAT-ready" and "responding to the threat" is playing right into the bad guys hands...... this makes "the gun problem" real.

In reality THERE IS NO "GUN PROBLEM!" Gun people don't hurt people.

The problem IS the gun-free areas......it's like an overt invitation to crazies. Pedophiles operate the same way, seeking "safe" areas and occupations. Pedos have always existed, hanging around parks and schools like a malignant fungus, but always KNOWING that if they come out in the open, if they act and if they get caught, they're gonna' LOSE. They're gonna' get the snot beat out of them or worse. You advertise an "adult-free zone" where gradeschool kiddies can "be free to act and play with no supervision, free to be cute liddle tykes" and you're opening a door to abuse. You're welcoming the weirdos.....begging for them to come in. And saying "the only difference is THE SIGN is just not credible reasoning.



Norway doesn't have a "gun problem" but a few yrs back a wackjob named Anders Breivik, after scouring 4 countries to procure his weapons, snuck onto an island of unarmed kids and massacred people for an hour and a half. WHY?..... Because their was nobody to stop him. He planned for months and the only reason was able to plan and implement as he did is because he KNEW of a safe, gun-free zone. He picked the spot BECAUSE he could safely murder kids...

No, the difference is one place is a killing field, the other is normal ground.

The sign advertising the one as a killing field is a crime. If the sign were gone, the school becomes normal ground.

The United States Of America is not "a place where gun deaths are commonplace", quite the contrary. It's a beautiful SAFE place to live. Except in "gun free areas" like NYC, Chicago, DC....... and now, our schools.

All the "catch 'em before they commit a crime" ideas and "locate and control the mentally deficient or unstable people" are just silly.

I say, just don't provide safe places for criminals, don't advertise that "Hey, we're completely defenseless over here! Come On In!"

The killing field is only a killing field BECAUSE OF the sign. It doesn't need to be made into a fortess, just take the sign down!



edited for clarity....

Take the sign down, AND change the rule, eliminate the "gun free zone" in fact.

Implicit in my phrase "just take the sign down" is of course "and the restriction, the BAN on firearms." There doesn't have to actually BE firearms present, just the implicit threat is a huge deterrent. The fact that there COULD be a gun there. Legally.

LEGALLY....... we had guns in school, legally. And no-one EVER shot up a school.

It might be a shotgun or a deer rifle in someone's car in the parking lot. It could be a delivery guy who chooses to carry, it could be a custodian or a coach. It could be a parent, a dude walking by on the street, a neighbor.... the point is, just a few short yrs ago a school was just normal ground. ANYone, including teachers could have a gun. Just like down the street at the supermarket.
 
Last edited:
My sister lives in Kennesaw, GA. Back in the 80's they passed a law requiring every household to have a gun in it. Rifle, shotgun, pistol, or cannon, it didn't matter what. This was in response to the Morton Grove, IL ban at the time of guns in the city limits. Today Kennesaw is one of the safest suburbs of Atlanta. Not everyone has a gun in the house, but no one knows who does.
 
Back
Top