Quantcast
  1. Sign up now and join over 35,000 northwest gun owners. It's quick, easy, and 100% free!

Homicide no longer a leading cause of US deaths

Discussion in 'Legal & Political Archive' started by Dave Workman, Jan 12, 2012.

  1. Dave Workman

    Dave Workman Western Washington Bronze Supporter Bronze Supporter

    Messages:
    3,224
    Likes Received:
    2,390
  2. VW_Factor

    VW_Factor Woodburn Oregon Active Member

    Messages:
    649
    Likes Received:
    101
    Was homicide ever the leading cause?
     
  3. Dave Workman

    Dave Workman Western Washington Bronze Supporter Bronze Supporter

    Messages:
    3,224
    Likes Received:
    2,390
    Yeah, for many years it was either in the Top 10 or 15 causes of death. Read the story (linked in the column). This is the first time in I think about 50 years that homicide was not up there somewhere. It has never been THE leading cause of death, IIRC, but somewhere in the mix.

    But funny how it drops off the screen during a year when gun sales were spiking.
     
  4. rolandson

    rolandson Oregon Active Member

    Messages:
    164
    Likes Received:
    98
    Homicide has never been the leading cause of death in this country. The highest it's been in the last 10 years is #13, in 2001, as a result of the 911 attacks.
     
  5. Dave Workman

    Dave Workman Western Washington Bronze Supporter Bronze Supporter

    Messages:
    3,224
    Likes Received:
    2,390
    Thanks for clarifying that. I didn't have the long-term data in front of me and apparently you do.

    The trick that anti-gunners play with stats is that they always consider suicide and genuine accidents (hunting, in the home etc) as "gun violence."
     
  6. deen_ad

    deen_ad Vancouver, WA Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    5,089
    Likes Received:
    1,310
  7. fuhr52

    fuhr52 Lane County. Oregon Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    320
    Likes Received:
    222
    More people die from traffic accidents then homicide. Don't recall any special interest group calling for cars to be band. I also believe more people die because of doctor mistakes than homicide. Don't recall any outrage there either.
     
  8. fd15k

    fd15k Tigard,OR Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,440
    Likes Received:
    491
    Cars have a legitimate purpose that doesn't involve killing and/or destroying things.
     
  9. pchewn

    pchewn Beaverton Oregon USA Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    543
    Likes Received:
    289
    As do firearms .... for example, I'll bet over 95% of all shots from a firearm do not kill, injure, or destroy anything.
     
  10. fd15k

    fd15k Tigard,OR Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,440
    Likes Received:
    491
    I doesn't matter that 95% (or likely more) shots fired are to punch paper. Primary function of a firearm is to kill. Primary function of a car is to transport. One just needs to be careful when using such arguments with anti-gun people, it's a self-made trap :)
     
  11. BSG 75

    BSG 75 Oregon Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    590
    Likes Received:
    271
    I usually see that fallacy expressed by anti-gunners on Huffington Post. It underlies their philosophy that guns are bad and and should be eliminated from society because "they have only one purpose, to kill". I'm surprised and disappointed to see a gun owner who agrees with those anti-gunners.

    While it could be argued that military firearms are designed specifically to kill, firearms in general have one primary function: to shoot projectiles where the shooter aims them. The shooter determines what they hit. To dismiss and ignore the fact that the most common use of firearms in the US is to shoot paper, steel, or clay targets, while instead saying their "primary function of a firearm is to kill", when that represents a minority of their use (including hunting) is absurd.

    I have never killed anything with my firearms even though I have fired them many times. Are they malfunctioning? Are they defective? Should I have them repaired? Should I get rid of them because they are not performing their "primary function" as you see it?

    It is not the "primary function" of guns or knives to kill, although both are sometimes used for that purpose. It is as fallacious to say "the primary function of a firearm is to kill" as it would be to say "the primary function of a knife is to kill".

    The most common use - not the minority use - defines the "primary function". In the United States, that "primary function" is target shooting, not killing.
     
  12. VW_Factor

    VW_Factor Woodburn Oregon Active Member

    Messages:
    649
    Likes Received:
    101
    I don't think it matters that it has another function. So what? Car accidents are MUCH more likely to kill and/or cause loss of limbs. Isn't that pretty bad for something that ISN'T meant or designed to hurt or kill? That bubblegum is dangerous yo.
     
  13. VW_Factor

    VW_Factor Woodburn Oregon Active Member

    Messages:
    649
    Likes Received:
    101
    Also, don't want to sound like I'm just pulling statistics out of my *** or anything..

    I remember reading something about doctors and physicians being the cause of 100k or more accidental deaths per year.

    How many more times dangerous is a doctor than "gun violence"?
     
  14. fd15k

    fd15k Tigard,OR Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,440
    Likes Received:
    491
    I guess then atomic bomb's primary function is to split atoms :) In any case, you seem to be confusing philosophical position with the factual reality.
     
  15. fd15k

    fd15k Tigard,OR Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,440
    Likes Received:
    491
    A lot of things are more dangerous than "gun violence". But this one has it in the name - no modern civilized society can accept violence (gun or not) as a valid phenomenon. We (gun people) don't accept it either, but our solution to it is through the threat of similar violence.
     
  16. dmancornell

    dmancornell Portland, OR New Member

    Messages:
    2,225
    Likes Received:
    1,589
    Sure it does, but only when violence is perpetrated by the state.
     
    Bazooka Joe and (deleted member) like this.
  17. BSG 75

    BSG 75 Oregon Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    590
    Likes Received:
    271
    Sophistry. I wasn't talking about the mechanics of operation, I was talking applications and most common usage. I didn't say the primary function of a firearm is to strike a primer, setting off a chemical reaction that resulted in ignition of smokeless propellant, creating high pressure gas.

    If atomic bombs were used most commonly for something other than warfare, then your analogy would have some relevance. As it is, it is an apples and watermelons comparison. So you seem to be the one who is confused. :):)
     
    Bazooka Joe and (deleted member) like this.
  18. BSG 75

    BSG 75 Oregon Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    590
    Likes Received:
    271
  19. fd15k

    fd15k Tigard,OR Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,440
    Likes Received:
    491
    Actually the example of atomic bomb stands - hundreds of them have been used to "punch paper", while only two have been used for warfare...
     
  20. fd15k

    fd15k Tigard,OR Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,440
    Likes Received:
    491