[Closed] More gun grief in the US

are we (in Britain) any different/better?

we let 2000 people die every year with our laws/attitudes to driving.

really? deliberately shot vs's killed in an accident and you think they are the same?

@pingu - agreed, however sadly I think they are past the point of no return as the are just too many weapons in circulation

@ahwhiles - the UK is one of the safest places in the world with respect to road safety

i struggle to see how the 2 are even remotely comparable.

Someone has had too much Merlot or is simply simple methinks.

If it wasn't guns it would be something eles.

in america-- the logic dictates that there will be pre school arms classes....

ahwhiles, I am not suggesting we are different however your analogy is flawed. You are talking about accidents that generally may be avoidable the news item is about someone killing several people deliberately with guns. It would be fundamentally more difficult for someone to get hold of the guns to do this in the UK.

I agree however it is far to late in the day do address the situation in the US.

are we (in Britain) any different/better?

we let 2000 people die every year with our laws/attitudes to driving.

33,000 road fatalities every year in the USA, so yes, we're different/better.

33,000 road fatalities every year in the USA, so yes, we're different/better.

Top Trumps 😉

If it wasn't guns it would be something eles

So I assume if we gave everyone in the world guns and bullets there would be no more deaths ...mmm Chinny reckon

your analogy is flawed. You are talking about accidents that generally may be avoidable the news item is about someone killing several people deliberately with guns

You'd prefer your loved one to be killed in an avoidable car accident than deliberately by somebody in a shooting? How about 40 of your your family and closest friends in a car accident instead of one killed deliberately with a gun?

So I assume if we gave everyone in the world guns and bullets there would be no more deaths ...mmm Chinny reckon

That's not the point. If you armed everybody with guns, I'm sure the number of killings with a knife would go down.

You'd prefer your loved one to be killed in an avoidable car accident than deliberately by somebody in a shooting?

If the answer is "deliberately by somebody in a shooting", would you recommend moving to the United States aracer ?

Obviously it's more likely that someone will die from a road traffic accident in the US, but deliberate shooting sprees seem so rare in the UK.

So hopefully they will get deliberately murdered by mass killer before someone has a chance to accidentally kill them in a RTA.

Dilemmas, eh ?

WTF has this thread turned into?

Don't start comparing mortality rates between UK and US in any respect.
We are one of the safest countries in the world for gun and road. Yes, any death is bad but we're near the lowest for miles driven for road deaths and pretty much on the top for least gun related deaths per capita.

The US is a crazy place for mortalities.

Edit: Blimey, yes. So If you live in Amercia, you are far more likely to get killed by an American in a car or with a gun that many other things

aracer - Member
You'd prefer your loved one to be killed in an avoidable car accident than deliberately by somebody in a shooting?

Why do you do this?

How about 40 of your your family and closest friends in a car accident instead of one killed deliberately with a gun?

🙄

If you armed everybody with guns, I'm sure the number of killings with a knife would go down.

I think my version is closer to "their point" but less amusing

[url= http://rt.com/usa/nra-texas-gun-day-bills-838/ ]NRA celebrates 'Gun Day' as Texas passes pro-gun legislation[/url]

This thread is piling stupidity upon stupidity.

This thread is piling stupidity upon stupidity.

Indeed, from Lifer's link :

[i]"the Republican-dominated house passed legislation permitting university students to carry handguns in the classroom"[/i]

The arguments offered to justify US gun laws are quite unbelievably stupid.

FFS some people just can't help themsleves can they! 😯

<just back from William Hill. Got a £20 bet on that the thread reaches 320 posts, £15 on 6 people falling out with each other and £50 on one getting banned.

Is the bookie open this late on a Sunday evening?

Daily Show comparing US gun control (could never happen) and Australian gun control (they thought it could never happen), worth a watch:

Why do you do this?

Just trying to give a little perspective. For every loved one killed by a gun in the US, 4 loved ones are killed by cars (sorry, got my figures mixed up before). I wonder how much time is spent debating how to reduce the number of deaths due to cars?

Perspective you say?

[img] [/img]

Where's the road deaths on that chart?

aracer - Member
Just trying to give a little perspective.

How is:

You'd prefer your loved one to be killed in an avoidable car accident than deliberately by somebody in a shooting?

Giving a little perspective?

For every loved one killed by a gun in the US, 4 loved ones are killed by cars (sorry, got my figures mixed up before).

Source?

Because it might be out of date:

[url= http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/gun-deaths-in-america-projected-to-soon-top-car-fatalities-8426644.html ]Gun deaths projected to overtake road deaths in 2015[/url]

aracer - Member
Where's the road deaths on that chart?

I was just providing perspective.

Um its not a debate about road death v gun death so not really any perspective. Or shall we do another comparison whereby statstically British roads are more dangerous than US roads because we have a higher percentage of road deaths in relation to gun deaths than the US.

You can manipulate statistics however you like but at the end of the day its gun deaths we are talking about. OK so they need to focus on road safety, however you need to focus on topic! We could spend all week analysing statistical data on road deaths etc. However do you not think that if there was more gun control then some of those deaths may not have occurred.

If you want to discuss road deaths start a thread.

From the Daily Show gun control thing; in Australia in the 18 years leading up to the enactment of gun control legislation there were 13 mass shootings. Zero since. Gun homicides down 59%!!! Gun suicides down 65%. It took 12 weeks from the Port Arthur massacre for the bulk of the gun control legislation to be drawn, debated and passed.

The data you're providing there is not only disingenuous, it's also proof of "If it wasn't guns it would be something eles." I presume you missed that more than 2/3 of gun related deaths were suicides? Here's the source of my data which seems fairly up to date http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2011/jan/10/gun-crime-us-state

Far from providing perspective, by including suicides in that graph, it's distorting the perspective. Oh, and before you wring your hands about all the gun related suicides, the suicide rate in the US is virtually identical to that in the UK.

However do you not think that if there was more gun control then some of those deaths may not have occurred.

I think that it's likely you could save more lives by focusing on road safety than gun control. Of course if you're more upset at your loved one being killed by a gun, then it is of course correct to focus on that.

We have lots of threads about gun control in the US, I'm not sure I've ever seen one about the incredibly high rate of road deaths there.

aracer - Member
I think that it's likely you could save more lives by focusing on road safety than gun control. Of course if you're more upset at your loved one being killed by a gun, then it is of course correct to focus on that.

We have lots of threads about gun control in the US, I'm not sure I've ever seen one about the incredibly high rate of road deaths there.

How many road deaths are homicides?

What else should be made completely safe before limiting people's access to weapons?

I think that it's likely you could save more lives by focusing on road safety than gun control

That's not the point. It's not either/or situation.

Lets not do anything about child abuse - incorrectly fitted car seats harm FAR more children each year.

How many road deaths are homicides?

You're more bothered about your loved one being killed in a homicide than an accident?

What else should be made completely safe before limiting people's access to weapons?

[img] [/img]

However do you not think that if there was more gun control then some of those deaths may not have occurred.

Any chance that you could try and stay on topic, in the story I posted did it say anything about road accidents?

So lets try again, do you not thing that with gun control some of those deaths may not have occurred? Its not a trick question, it doesn't need qualifying against drug deaths, road deaths, heart disease or anything else just if there was gun control there would be fewer gun deaths?

No body is saying they are more worried about accidents than homicide we happen to be be talking about gun crime not accidents?

I think there's a good chance with gun control (of the sort which is being suggested) that some of those deaths may not have occurred. Maybe as many as a few hundred.

Well done you answered a question, wasn't difficult now was it! I think maybe as many as several thousand though would be the case. Not wanting to get the Australia statistics before and after their gun control.

aracer - Member
"How many road deaths are homicides?"
You're more bothered about your loved one being killed in a homicide than an accident?

Please stop doing that.

+ Hilarious that you call strawman on me.

So when counting gun deaths it's only homicides that you count, but with road deaths it's every death. I'm guessing because that gives the figure you want.

You also seem to think that road safety isn't thought about, or is not a priority, but declining road deaths show that's not true.

with road deaths it's every death. I'm guessing because that gives the figure you want.

I'm happy to remove suicides if you could give me the stats for that.

No, just count the homicides.

I'll do that when you've explained to me why it's worse having a loved one killed in a homicide than an accident. Can you really not see why suicides are a completely different issue? It doesn't appear that a lack of guns has done anything to improve the suicide rate here compared to the US.

Why do you think an accident is worse that a homicide?

I think maybe as many as several thousand though would be the case.

More than the total number of deaths for the guns they're considering banning? Interesting.

Not wanting to get the Australia statistics before and after their gun control.

Is that because they don't support your argument?
http://bjc.oxfordjournals.org/content/47/3/455.abstract

Oh dear!

From the data posted previously 330 "thousand deaths from firearms from 2000 to 2010, therefore not much of a stretch that it may be "several thousand".

Is that because they don't support your argument?

Sorry the fact being I couldn't be arsed but here you go, I notice your link does not include any statistical data there is a lot of may, could etc.

My "argument" being that gun control in the US would reduce the number of gun tragedies, how difficult is that for you to actually get your head around but you want to bang on about road deaths. Yes they are tragic but not what the post was about. Are you actually Philip Van Greave you seem to be wanting to argue with totally irrelevant data. The fact remains and by your own admission gun control would reduce deaths, whether by hundreds or thousands is it not worth persuing to save some lives. Equally I do not even undertand your statement

More than the total number of deaths for the guns they're considering banning? Interesting.

However it appears that gun deaths in Australia have approximately halved since 1996. So if we use that as a rough model and refer to the earlier statement of "several thousand" it may have actually saved 150 thousand lives in the 10 years from 2000 to 2010 in the US.

http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/region/australia

In Australia, annual deaths resulting from firearms total

2010: 236
2009: 227
2008: 232
2007: 237
2006: 246
2005: 212
2004: 234
2003: 287
2002: 292
2001: 326
2000: 324
1999: 347
1998: 312
1997: 428
1996: 516
1995: 470
1994: 516
1993: 513
1992: 608
1991: 618
1990: 595
1989: 549
1988: 674
1987: 694
1986: 677
1985: 682
1984: 675
1983: 644
1982: 689
1981: 618
1980: 687
1979: 685

Good lord, are we really debating which is worse.

Being murdered or involved in a fatal car accident.

The Australiens have also been successful in reducing cyclists deaths. They cut the number of cyclists by enforcing helmet use.

As for US shoot-em-up killings it gives me the excuse to post a song I like:

aracer - Member

Just trying to give a little perspective.

No you're not. You tried, very successfully, to derail the thread by discussing road deaths, despite the fact that there is no relationship between gun crime and road traffic accidents.

You then engaged in one of your favourite ploys on here and posted a picture of a "straw man".

I bet you're pleased with yourself. Or perhaps not.

Not sure what you think you're doing here aracer but it certainly isn't constructing logical arguments.

Introducing something off topic and then accusing others of committing a straw man falacy when they take that up is not on and makes me think you don't really understand what a straw man is.

If you really want to reap the benefits of understanding logical falacies you need to be able to see them in your own arguments. For example your whole point is a red herring that moves the goal posts of the debate. It is also I feel an argumentum ad passiones despite your repeated requests for figures.

Just sayin'

This thread should be stickied and locked as an example of the cock and bull arse about bollocks arguing that taints STW,..

a straw man falacy

I've got a cheek criticising you when I can't even spell fallacy.

...ahem.

my (not well expanded) point was/is:

America: could save thousands of lives per year if they changed/enforced a few laws. They don't do this as lots of people would whine about their freedoms and rights.

UK: see above.

i was responding to the opening post:

...I simply cannot understand how they can carry on justifying the right to bear arms

rather than the tragic event in America.

jambalaya - Member

@ahwhiles - the UK is one of the safest places in the world with respect to road safety

exactly, we kill thousands, and we think it's fine.

(it isn't)

Love these threads, it's like a game of "who can Google the fastest"

Unless this site is actually called statistiontrackworld?

This 'debate' highlights a common feature of the pro-gun lobby...they start talking total bollocks right from the start to detract from the fact they arguing for something totally nonsensical.

Good job we have gun control in this country, as judging by this thread there are definitely a few deranged nutters around 😆

how about combined gun and motoring incidents-- do most gun assailants use cars in their felony-- or do cycles play a part ? depends on social class i would imagine......

Does anyone have any stats for people killed by falling grand piano's?

I've been watching a lot of old, black and white silent movies of late, and it appears it used to be a quite prevalent cause of death. Though purely anecdotal evidence would suggest its much less so nowadays

Or so I assume. I don't really know. Not having seen any stats. Does anyone know if the apparently horrific figures were reduced as some form of grand piano control? As it looked like carnage out there! Maybe involving regulating the use of winches over crowded streets?

makes me think you don't really understand what a straw man is.

Well do you? Because the point I posted the picture to is a text book example of one.

If we're discussing how to avoid people being killed, then I don't see how it's off topic to suggest how to avoid more people being killed, or indeed to query how effective the measures people are suggesting are. Do remember that US citizens have a constitutional right to bear arms - I don't think anybody is suggesting changing their constitution.

Good lord, are we really debating which is worse.

Well I'm trying not to, but some others seem to think that road deaths aren't the same because they're not homicide - possibly in reaction to my suggestion that suicide figures shouldn't really be included in the stats. See all the complaints about going off topic by introducing them.

From the data posted previously 330 "thousand deaths from firearms from 2000 to 2010, therefore not much of a stretch that it may be "several thousand".

However it appears that gun deaths in Australia have approximately halved since 1996. So if we use that as a rough model and refer to the earlier statement of "several thousand" it may have actually saved 150 thousand lives in the 10 years from 2000 to 2010 in the US.

Ah, so you're looking to reduce the number of people using a gun when they decide to commit suicide ? Maybe you should check which gun deaths have decreased in Australia...

What about anvils? Deadly!

[img] [/img]

we kill thousands, and we think it's fine

Well done.

Kill should be murder as guns are used to murder so people may be killed by cars but very few are murdered but you know this as using the correct word shows your stat.ent to be the nonsense it is.
People do not think it is fine- do we have the right to drive in a way that endangers others , do we not have many driving laws to reduce risk and enforcement etc. We dk care to claim otherwise is a lie. It is hard to ban accidents.
to compare road deaths which are largely accidetal with gun deaths which are largely murder is silly.

to compare road deaths which are largely accidetal with gun deaths which are largely murder is silly.

I'm still struggling to see the difference in the impact on the victim and their family. Or is there some point I'm missing to the calls for gun control other than to reduce that?

is it a silly comparison? - thousands are dying, we could do something about it, we don't seem to want to.

here you go: 20mph on all residential roads, 40mph on all rural roads.

easy, effective, sensible, it'll never happen.

my (silly) comparison is this: we* seem to accept the current trade off between lives and 'freedom'...

(*America + UK)

I see they still have the right to arm bears.

[img] [/img]

I'm still struggling to see the difference in the impact on the victim and their family.

Are you really strugglng to see the difference between losing a relative to an RTC and losing a relative to murder? 😯

er, i am...

care to explain?

(i'm only a silly person with a head full of nonsense. I'm keen to be corrected but you'll have to use short words)

[i]care to explain?[/i]

Blimey. Go to top of thread and start again. It's been explained.
Gun law and road traffic accidents are not related just because there is death involved. Otherwise [i]all[/i] causes of death should be discussed..

Guns? Hey, what about electric bar fires?
Guns? Hey, what about pianos?
Guns? Hey, what about stairs?
[url= http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2012/nov/06/deaths-mortality-rates-cause-death-2011#zoomed-picture ]etc etc [/url]

@awhiles - we obviously are doing something right as the uk is one of the safest countries in the world with regard to road safety. Fwiw I am in favour of 20/25 mph in towns, you have that in the US and in France now.

On another note thankfully and miraculously it looks like there were no deaths in New Orleans

Wow.. aracer's managed to make the stupidest thread ever out of nowhere.

We know people die in cars. People die of lots of things.

This was supposed to be a thread about gun control not preventable death in general.

awhiles: google bereavment+counselling+murder and have a click around.

Many links will go into quite some detail about complications of losing relatives/loved ones through murder, whether the murder is known to the victim/family or not, in fact the first link I found also sub-categorised into bombings, stabbings, blunt instruments and firearms.

HTH

my (silly) comparison is this: we* seem to accept the current trade off between lives and 'freedom'

ahwiles - Member
here you go: 20mph on all residential roads, 40mph on all rural roads.

20mph limit on all roads in Cambridge is happening fairly soon. I suggest you have a word with your council.

Back on topic: there was a programme about ****stan on Radio4 the other day. Apparently most people are actually not that concerned about the Taliban (corruption is the big concern). In the last ten years about ten thousand people have been killed by them, which was compared to the numbers killed in the US by gun violence in the same period of about 5 times that.

😯 So gun violence in the US kills more people than the Taliban in ****stan?

Will someone please think of the puppies

[img] [/img]

The taliban do more than just kill people though.

So gun violence in the US kills more people than the Taliban in ****stan?

Official death toll for US dead in Vietnam is 58,151 - or less than 6000 a year (the "policing action" lasted at least ten years)

Compared to over 300,000 deaths a year from 2000-2010 from US domestic gun violence

I'm still struggling to see the difference in the impact on the victim and their family.

If you really can't see the difference in the emotional impact on a family that have been the victim of a homicide vs an accident then I really don't think you should be commenting on a thread like this as you'd have to have the emotional and empathic qualities of a used teabag not to understand.

Not to mention the ridiculousness of families/friends of accident victims going out looking for revenge creating lots of other 'accidents' for those they feel responsible for the original death and then causing a ghetto turf war of 'accidents' perpetuating the 'accident-culture' and inherent dangers that brings...

They are not the same, and not mutually exclusive, just because there are still big steps to be taken in road safety it does not negate the OPs point of the validity of gun controls in reducing the number of preventable deaths through firearms (homicide/suicide/accident whatever)

Lets not do anything about child abuse - incorrectly fitted car seats harm FAR more children each year

I see aracer's point about suicides in gun death statistics as it isn't possible to infer anything if the presented statistics do not represent the rate of suicide in general. This is as, although gun death statistics may have gone down resultant of a ban on arms, other suicide rates may have gone up? e.g. hangings, overdose etc. Thus, the impact of banning guns on mortality may not be as large as those statistics suggest

However, this argument is nullified as the topic of 'road accidents requiring more attention than gun deaths'; which brought about the suicide statistics debate, was completely off topic and isn't in the same sport, let alone ball park, as gun deaths. The reason being that banning guns would present an immediate solution to a large problem (don't throw road accidents being a larger problem back at me because any ammount of avoidable death is a large problem...including gun related). I think the point is that all deaths that can be stopped should be, and regardless of what is required to stop RTC related deaths, banning guns is an immediate and direct solution to the gun related death issue, whereas reducing RTCs would be intrinsically more difficult due to the accidental nature of many of the deaths within these RTC statistics.

Official death toll for US dead in Vietnam is 58,151 - or less than 6000 a year (the "policing action" lasted at least ten years)

Compared to over 300,000 deaths a year from 2000-2010 from US domestic gun violence

I'm guessing there weren't that many deaths due to suicide in those Vietnam figures.