Seattle Times laments that you can't fix carelessness with legislation

[Sun195]

Shooting accidents soar; state gun laws remain unchanged

<broken link removed>

In 2012, more Washington state residents were seriously hurt in accidental shootings than in any year since 1995. Yet despite a public outcry and promises by lawmakers to take action, no gun-safety laws have changed.

Read More

 

[cookie]

You can't fix stupid.

 

[Kevinkris]

sure you can. pass budgets to fund public training and safety courses and you will dramatically reduce the number of accidental and negligent firearm injuries. training is key, its ridiculous that you have to pay so much to learn more than just the basics.

 

[Brutus57]

Hmmmm, same year pot was legalized in the state? Coincidence? I think not.


Brutus Out

 

[Kevinkris]

actually yes, they werent allowed the pot until after the stats had amassed. none the less, it would be just as irresponsible as drinking before handling your weapons. where drinking has been legal for much longer.

 

[Stomper]

sure you can. pass budgets to fund public training and safety courses and you will dramatically reduce the number of accidental and negligent firearm injuries. training is key, its ridiculous that you have to pay so much to learn more than just the basics.

Hmmm... Not disputing that training and safety instruction is not a bad thing, BUT having read the article, it stated that those who are the most familiar with firearms made up the bulk of incidents of "negligent" discharges and "accidental shootings".

It ALWAYS comes down to the basics (even "common sense") that you handle ALL firearms as if they're loaded, NEVER point a firearm at anything/anyone you don't intend to kill/destroy, be aware of your backstop, keep your booger-hook off the bang-switch until ready to shoot, and SECURE your damned firearm(s) from unauthorized use!

Of course, they don't compare the injury rate involving automobiles...

 

[Kevinkris]

well i dont know how accurate it can be when they say it was those who are most familiar with them. its tough to say what they even mean by "familiar", when you consider the complexity of the language we speak.

maybe you could write it up as those who took classes made up the predominant number of incidents due to over confidence. ive seen many things end badly when people thought they were better than they were, not just in respect to firearms of course. then it would make more sense when people who have not trained or handled their weapons as much would certainly be less likely to injure themselves.

a self taught basement warrior with no actual training can be described as "familiar" with firearms but it doesnt mean he knows what he is doing wrong. sure the four basic rules you referred to are great but telling them to someone and teaching them to someone are two very different things and a 20 minute video is not teaching them anything. which is sadly all some people get in the form of "firearm training".

 

[GunRightsCoalition]

If you read between the lines what it amounts to is that people are safer with firearms now than they were 20 years ago. The more cars you put on the road the more automobile accidents you will have. The more pools you have in backyards the more accidental drowning's that will occur, the more bicyclist on the road, the more bicycle accidents. The same is true of firearms. The tell here is that while firearm ownership has soared the number of accidents has not increased proportionately to that number. This does not mean we should not encourage people to get gun safety training though. Even those that are familiar with firearms can benefit from time to time if they get a refresher. And it doesn't need to cost a lot to do this training. We taught a basic home firearm safety class last weekend and only charged $30. Our time was voluntary but now there are 12 people that know how to be safe with firearms so it was well worth it. We don't need the government to dictate this down to us, we just need people in the firearms community to step forward to make it happen.

 

[Kevinkris]

i agree with you but i wasnt trying to make the point of requiring training. it has been judged on it in the past if im not mistaken, that it cannot be a requirement for ownership. i just think it would make sense to have public funds invested in making training more available if it is something like this that can clearly be solved with better information which benefits everyone, not just those who take the class or who decide not to own a firearm but everyone.

i myself have only taken a handful of training courses through my entire life and none were free or extensive. all have cost $50 or more and have been as hands on as youtube and maybe 2 hours at the longest. i think its great you offer courses that are very affordable but it really doesnt do enough to help with such a problem. i could be wrong on this point but while reading (from articles, not source stats) i learned that more people are harmed accidentally with firearms that all intentional shooting both justified and unjustified. i find that a bit disturbing when it is so easy to fix with training.

i mean how hard or costly would it be to open our military base ranges once a month and have the same guy that teaches the soldiers about weapons instruct those who want to learn. sure a private group can help as you were talking about but it just wont be able to reach enough people for more than just a small difference. not to bash honest effort because its still a move in a good direction just not the right direction.

 

[GunRightsCoalition]

I would contend that regardless of how many are accidental vs. intentional it is not the problem that the media and gun control crowd would lead everyone to believe. Firearms owners have already shown that they are much safer than say pool owners and way safer than automobile drivers. If we really want to save lives (especially those of children) then we should be pushing pool safety awareness training instead. Or look at any of the many other causes of accidental deaths where carelessness and ignorance are a greater problem. This is not to say it is not important but lets be realistic. Guns are targeted because of an irrational stigma about them and in the process greater problems get ignored. Let's go after those problems with the same veracity if we really want to save lives.

 

[freestoneangler]

Objective, unbiased news is gone in our life times. Not likely a news story one would see from Anchorage Alaska, Montgomery Alabama, or Lincoln Nebraska... simply consider the source... Seattle, The Land of Oz.

According to the CDC stats, ladders and step stools, cars, and home cleaning products are equally responsible.... oh, the horror of it all.

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/acc-inj.htm

 

[RicInOR]

Problems is getting statistics to lie.
Set expectations "Soar"
The hospitalization Chart says in '04 there were 119
in '12 122

That is 3.

Three.

How many people have moved to the state in those years? A Lot.

How many more firearms are there - a lot - double in sales from that included chart. (and those are background checks not "sales", but it is a good indicator)

I'll bet there were 122 injuries in Washington from slipping by your car - while getting in or out.

 

[ZigZagZeke]

Yes, if you take into account the state population at 7 million, and the average number of injuries at 93 per year, then 122 is 30% higher than the average. But the author is careful never to put the numbers in perspective.

93 injuries per 7 million is 1.328 per 100,000, which is the way this kind of statistic is reported in reputable research papers. 122 injuries per 7 million is 1.743 per 100,000. So that extra .4 persons injured per 100,000 population is 30% higher, but it's an insignificant variation.

Reputable research uses a term called "alpha" to express the reliability of the data. An "alpha" of <.05 (5%) is considered the absolute maximum for a result to be valid. It means that the chances of the observed difference occurring due to random chance is less than 5%. In this case, it means that the chances are almost 100% that the observed difference is due to random chance. This is junk science.

 

[Caveman Jim]

Hmmm... Not disputing that training and safety instruction is not a bad thing, BUT having read the article, it stated that those who are the most familiar with firearms made up the bulk of incidents of "negligent" discharges and "accidental shootings".

It ALWAYS comes down to the basics (even "common sense") that you handle ALL firearms as if they're loaded, NEVER point a firearm at anything/anyone you don't intend to kill/destroy, be aware of your backstop, keep your booger-hook off the bang-switch until ready to shoot, and SECURE your damned firearm(s) from unauthorized use!

Of course, they don't compare the injury rate involving automobiles...

Or to the number of deaths due to prescription drugs....

 

[GunRightsCoalition]

Or to the number of deaths due to prescription drugs....

And doctors.

 

[ZigZagZeke]

Odds of bowling a 300 game: 11,500 to 1
Odds of getting a hole in one: 5,000 to 1
Odds of an American speaking Cherokee: 15,000 to 1
Odds of injury from fireworks: 19,556 to 1
Odds of injury from using a chain saw: 4,464 to 1
Odds of injury from mowing the lawn: 3,623 to 1
Odds of fatally slipping in bath or shower: 2,232 to 1
Odds of being killed sometime in the next year in any sort of transportation accident: 77 to 1
Odds of being killed in any sort of non-transportation accident: 69 to 1
Odds of dating a supermodel: 88,000 to 1
Odds of being considered possessed by Satan: 7,000 to 1
Odds of being on plane with a drunken pilot: 117 to 1
Odds of dating a millionaire: 215 to 1
Odds of becoming a pro athlete: 22,000 to 1
Odds of finding a four-leaf clover on first try: 10,000 to 1
Odds of being injured by a firearm in Washington state: 75,000 to 1

So the odds of your being injured by a firearm in Washington state over the last 10 years (75,000 to 1) is somewhere between your being a native Cherokee speaker (20,000 to 1), and your dating a supermodel (88,000 to 1). You are 4 times more likely to speak Cherokee, and only slightly less likely to date a supermodel than be injured by firearm. Activities and objects that should be legislatively addressed before anything involving guns include fireworks, chain saws, lawn mowers, bathtubs, highways, Satan, and drunken pilots.

 

[Caveman Jim]

Ever since I was 8 yrs old I knew that it was my responsibility to be safe and aware when handling a firearm. A gun owner is responsible for it while in his hands or in the safe.
Why should it be the government's job?
If a new gun owner is not responsible enough to familiarize themselves with it then they are at fault no-one else.
Why do people think the government needs to get involved in everyday personal business?
It astounds me!!!!

 

[Kevinkris]

well, i have trouble recognizing the hazards of other tasks as relevant when you are talking about the problems we do have as gun owners. sure most of us wont even seriously injure ourselves but there are gun owners who will. just because cars, doctors, and chickenpox kill more people than guns does not mean we cant find ways to decrease the likelihood of someone getting shot by mistake. deferring to other stats is only sweeping the problem under the rug. those who say its already trending in the right direction are just denying that it can be better. this is a conversation about poor firearm handling, not children falling into a pool.

 

[GunRightsCoalition]

Ever since I was 8 yrs old I knew that it was my responsibility to be safe and aware when handling a firearm. A gun owner is responsible for it while in his hands or in the safe.
Why should it be the government's job?
If a new gun owner is not responsible enough to familiarize themselves with it then they are at fault no-one else.
Why do people think the government needs to get involved in everyday personal business?
It astounds me!!!!

Reality is that firearms are simple devices. If gun owners pay attention to the 3 basic safety rules (or 4 or 5 depending on the person providing them) then ND's will never endanger anyone. For the NRA these are 1: Keep it pointed in a safe direction. (This is the most important as the failure of all others are covered if this one is adhered to) 2: Keep your finger off the trigger. and 3: Keep it unloaded until it is ready to use.
Personally I prefer to always treat the gun as loaded instead of #3.

 

[freestoneangler]

I injure myself every time I see Rachel Maddeau

Odds of bowling a 300 game: 11,500 to 1
Odds of getting a hole in one: 5,000 to 1
Odds of an American speaking Cherokee: 15,000 to 1
Odds of injury from fireworks: 19,556 to 1
Odds of injury from using a chain saw: 4,464 to 1
Odds of injury from mowing the lawn: 3,623 to 1
Odds of fatally slipping in bath or shower: 2,232 to 1
Odds of being killed sometime in the next year in any sort of transportation accident: 77 to 1
Odds of being killed in any sort of non-transportation accident: 69 to 1
Odds of dating a supermodel: 88,000 to 1
Odds of being considered possessed by Satan: 7,000 to 1
Odds of being on plane with a drunken pilot: 117 to 1
Odds of dating a millionaire: 215 to 1
Odds of becoming a pro athlete: 22,000 to 1
Odds of finding a four-leaf clover on first try: 10,000 to 1
Odds of being injured by a firearm in Washington state: 75,000 to 1

So the odds of your being injured by a firearm in Washington state over the last 10 years (75,000 to 1) is somewhere between your being a native Cherokee speaker (20,000 to 1), and your dating a supermodel (88,000 to 1). You are 4 times more likely to speak Cherokee, and only slightly less likely to date a supermodel than be injured by firearm. Activities and objects that should be legislatively addressed before anything involving guns include fireworks, chain saws, lawn mowers, bathtubs, highways, Satan, and drunken pilots.

What are the odds of me being injured by a firearm if I make a pass at a supermodel who is the girlfriend of an American speaking Cherokee pro athlete?