Jump to content
SASS Wire Forum
Wolfgang, SASS #53480

Death by gun statistics

Recommended Posts

Interesting statistics.  This jibes with the research of Prof. Lott at the University of Chicago, who is a noted expert on gun laws and stats. 
Here are some facts. 
There are 30,000 gun related death s 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: 0.00925% 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, assaults 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."
 
 
 
 
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another thing to consider is the number of deaths and injuries compared to the number of gun owners .

 

This gets a bit speculative.   A couple of years ago both Pew Research and Gallup published studies that showed about 42% of households had at least one firearm.   Looking at US Census figures that would work out to about 132,000,000 people in households with firearms. 

 

There are about 120,000 deaths and injuries by means of firearms,  all causes, every year.  That comes out to roughly 0.09% of people in households with firearms use them to injure or kill themselves or others. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just found this posted as a comment to The Gav.

FB_IMG_1564945844246.jpg

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I looked and found that every year now, we have more than 40,000 dead from vehicle accidents.
A single year of this is more than all mass shootings combined.

But... the agenda of the Democrat has nothing to do with safety.
It is entirely about securing power for their agenda by disarming American citizens.

The Democrat knows full well that what he is planning will otherwise get him shot.

Edited by bgavin
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, bgavin said:

But... the agenda of the Democrat has nothing to do with safety.
It is entirely about securing power for their agenda by disarming American citizens.

The Democrat knows full well that what he is planning will otherwise get him shot.

The Democrat POLITICIANS know what they are planning, the rest of the democrats are merely sheeple, feeling, not thinking, as Dr. Tyson has said.

As WE all know, gun control isn't about guns, it's about control!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I get bashed by lesbians and Democrats because I am NRA.

These people claim that angry white men are mass murderers.


The facts tell a different story.
The real mass murderers are women.
The largest victim numbers come from women, not from men.


I compiled a list of women who were tried, convicted and sentenced for 2,103 murders.
Some were lesbian thrill-killers.. others were sadists operating with their husbands... most were just plain murderous.

They used a different weapon than a firearm, but they were every bit as murderous.
 

These women intentionally poisoned, raped, mutilated, strangled, stabbed and bludgeoned their victims.

Hundreds of the dead were babies and newborns killed by nurses and care givers.

This goes to show that murder is indeed in the heart, and not an inanimate object used to commit murder.


Women as mass murderers does not fit the political narrative, but facts are still facts.

Edited by bgavin
edited for structure
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After one of the recent mass shootings (possibly Las Vegas) I received a text from a concerned friend telling me and everyone else on the thread that we are simply not safe in this country anymore. I reminded her that there are on average about 500 deaths each year from the types of spectacular mass shootings that make the evening news. The fact is that car accidents, workplace mishaps, and even slipping in one's own shower or bathtub claims more lives than that. We react to what scares us... that's why everyone has a fear of spiders and snakes when domestic dogs kill far more people every year.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And let's not forget another cause of death in the U.S.

 

1887617968_LightniingStrikes.png.545ee3d8e666b1f182df98050b7309a1.png

(1989-2018) 1,247 reported lightning fatalities. (43 per yr)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a good post but FYI - Detroit's gun laws are no stricter than the rest of Michigan. 

We are a shall-issue state, and that includes the city of Detroit. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Rooster Cognizant said:

@bgavin Is your compiled list available online to read?

I think the whole thing is ridiculous.

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Rooster Cognizant said:

@bgavin Is your compiled list available online to read?


It's an Excel spread sheet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Subdeacon Joe said:

I just found this posted as a comment to The Gav.

FB_IMG_1564945844246.jpg

 

Yeah, and now he's being publicly grilled for daring to report facts and has now backtracked. :angry:

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Subdeacon Joe said:

I just found this posted as a comment to The Gav.

FB_IMG_1564945844246.jpg

Well what does he know. It's not like he's a rocket scientist or anything.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, Sixgun Sheridan said:

 

Yeah, and now he's being publicly grilled for daring to report facts and has now backtracked. :angry:

Logic has no place in the gun debate unfortunately.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sixgun Sheridan said:

 

Yeah, and now he's being publicly grilled for daring to report facts and has now backtracked. :angry:

 

24 minutes ago, Utah Bob #35998 said:

Logic has no place in the gun debate unfortunately.

 

And it is forbidden to bring up defensive gun uses. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, J. Mark Flint #31954 LIFE said:

Excuse me if this is a repeat, I didn't have time to read the posts, but this is the first I have heard of anyone dying from gun statistics

 

:lol:

That was my first thought.   Then I mentally tried to rewrite it and couldn't come up with anything that wasn't cumbersome. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, J. Mark Flint #31954 LIFE said:

Excuse me if this is a repeat, I didn't have time to read the posts, but this is the first I have heard of anyone dying from gun statistics

 

I am sure that if you made a room full of snowflakes sit through the above including researching the references, it would result in at least 1 death. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/4/2019 at 12:23 PM, Subdeacon Joe said:

I just found this posted as a comment to The Gav.

FB_IMG_1564945844246.jpg

During that same period how many died from abortion?  And it's not only legal, it's expanding, but there are those who support abortion and want my guns..

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Assuming there is a “solution” to prevent mass shooting incidents, (I’m not sure there is one, but just assuming), why is the Federal government involved?

 

What would Thomas Jefferson say and do?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, J-BAR #18287 said:

Assuming there is a “solution” to prevent mass shooting incidents, (I’m not sure there is one, but just assuming), why is the Federal government involved?

 

What would Thomas Jefferson say and do?

 

 

 

I believe there is a solution.

 

1. Eliminate gun free zones.

2. NO MEDIA COVERAGE.

3. If not killed during the event, immediate PRIVATE execution. Killers name, nor photograph should ever be released.

4. Armed security at all schools.

 

 

In addition to the above repeal all of the anti constitutional gun laws that are on the books and hang the traitors that keep trying to pass them; SHALL NOT INFRINGE, means just that.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Everyone knows there's no emotion in real statistics............just truth.

 

Now, if you ever figure out how to make statistics sexy, let me know. Because I want in, on the ground floor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Tyrel Cody said:

 

I believe there is a solution.

 

1. Eliminate gun free zones.

2. NO MEDIA COVERAGE.

3. If not killed during the event, immediate PRIVATE execution. Killers name, nor photograph should ever be released.

4. Armed security at all schools.

 

 

In addition to the above repeal all of the anti constitutional gun laws that are on the books and hang the traitors that keep trying to pass them; SHALL NOT INFRINGE, means just that.

 

 

Unfortunately, I don’t think there is a solution for mass killings.  They occur in countries that have virtual bans on guns and are done with different tools.  A gun is simply a tool used by someone who wants to do harm to a large group of people. It does happen to be effective as that what guns were designed to do.   No one ever addresses the root cause of why the person wanted to do it.   Until that happens mass killings won’t stop.  

 

Here is an example of a mass killing done without guns,  In one of the town I visited in China (Xiamen) a passenger simply walked on a bus with a plastic bag filled with gasoline, dumped it in the bus and lit it.  Burned it to the ground killing 30-40 people.  It wasn’t a one off incident.  Proving removing tools simply leads people to use other tools that are available.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Tyrel Cody said:

 

I believe there is a solution.

 

1. Eliminate gun free zones.

2. NO MEDIA COVERAGE.

3. If not killed during the event, immediate PRIVATE execution. Killers name, nor photograph should ever be released.

4. Armed security at all schools.

 

 

In addition to the above repeal all of the anti constitutional gun laws that are on the books and hang the traitors that keep trying to pass them; SHALL NOT INFRINGE, means just that.

 

 

My point was a bit more philosophical:  why does everyone think that it is a problem appropriate for the Federal government to address?

 

I agree that gun free zones are a bad idea.  Perhaps a Supreme Court challenge will get the amended law declared unconstitutional.  I don't see much likelihood of Congress rescinding it in the foreseeable future.

 

As far as no media coverage, I agree that the reporting of such incidents spurs a lot of copycats.  But I would prefer the media to voluntarily stop the reporting; a Federal law censoring or outlawing such reportage is not a good way to go.  The media abuses its free press rights, but a free press is still preferable to government control of the media.  At least in my opinion.

 

Immediate private execution?  That violates all our rights under the Fifth and Sixth Amendments.  I like all 10 amendments in the Bill of Rights, not just the Second.  Public trial for mass murderers is still ok by me.

 

I agree that there are unconstitutional gun laws on the books.  But hanging legislators doesn't sound like a good solution to me.  Term limits would be nice.

 

I admire your passion, but  I think your proposals create other problems.

 

 

 

Edited by J-BAR #18287
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, J-BAR #18287 said:

 

My point was a bit more philosophical:  why does everyone think that it is a problem appropriate for the Federal government to address?

 

I agree that gun free zones are a bad idea.  Perhaps a Supreme Court challenge will get the amended law declared unconstitutional.  I don't see much likelihood of Congress rescinding it in the foreseeable future.

 

As far as no media coverage, I agree that the reporting of such incidents spurs a lot of copycats.  But I would prefer the media to voluntarily stop the reporting; a Federal law censoring or outlawing such reportage is not a good way to go.  The media abuses its free press rights, but a free press is still preferable to government control of the media.  At least in my opinion.

 

Immediate private execution?  That violates all our rights under the Fifth and Sixth Amendments.  I like all 10 amendments in the Bill of Rights, not just the Second.  Public trial for mass murderers is still ok by me.

 

I agree that there are unconstitutional gun laws on the books.  But hanging legislators doesn't sound like a good solution to me.  Term limits would be nice.

 

I admire your passion, but  I think your proposals create other problems.

 

 

 

 

 

Fair enough. I agree the Federal government really shouldn't be involved in most of this. They should have never wrote a bill for gun free zones in the first place(I can understand no firearms in some government and court establishments for anyone other than military/law enforcement).

 

As to the media, if they'd report facts, and figure out they area big part of the blame then I'd agree leave them alone; but they won't.

 

When I said immediate private execution I didn't really mean without trial. Yes, give them a trial, when found guilty, take them off and execute them immediately without any coverage; in other words no public spectacle, just do it, burn the body, and forget it. I do believe in due process.

 

Term limits, absolutely. I might have to soften up on the hanging of legislature; but I consider some of the stuff they talk about implementing treasonous and the penalty for that is hanging. Someone needs to hold them to there oath of office, if they can't uphold all of the amendments they shouldn't be there and I'm not talking about any party in particular.

 

We need far less government. They should not be involved with, schools, health care, social services, etc. leave it to the states.

 

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Memes, Control, and Evil: We will never create  enough laws to control  evil... Evil does not obey  aws...

 

Those screaming for more gun laws don't want to stop mass shootings. They want to remove your ability to stop them from imposing their will upon you. Anyone that believes different is delusional 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The reason they want universal background checks is that it gets the camels nose under the tent flap when it comes to a national firearm registration database. Without the data base they have no way to prove that a person didn't transfer a firearm without doing the required background check. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.