Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Gun Control & RKBA
In reply to the discussion: Questions for gun control advocates, part 1 [View all]jimmy the one
(2,712 posts)54. #4, specious reasoning exposed
#4 Here are some fatality rates per 100,000 people at risk in that category:
boys softball: 2.89 fatalities per 100,000 players
boys water polo: 1.06 fatalities per 100,000 players
boys gymnastics: .95 fatalities per 100,000 players
boys football: .81 fatalities per 100,000 players
boys lacrosse: .80 fatalities per 100,000 players
boys basketball: .76 fatalities per 100,000 players
boys ice hockey: .48 fatalities per 100,000 players
boys soccer: .45 fatalities per 100,000 players
boys high school cross-country: .36 fatalities per 100,000 players
firearm accidents, all children,: .15 fatalities per 100,000 children ages 5 - 19
Question: For any group of 100,000 boys, which is more likely to result in a fatal accident, having a gun in the house or letting them play school sports? ?
All of the sports are more likely to cause fatal accidents than a firearm in the house.
Followup, which is more likely to be used to commit suicide or homicide, those sports equipages, or a gun in the house?
You gloss over the far more overall fatalities when it comes to guns.
And what is this? you include 19 yr olds as 'children', shamash? your colleagues will call this a 'sham'. You also need include a time determinant, are those accident figs per year?
boys softball: 2.89 fatalities per 100,000 players
boys water polo: 1.06 fatalities per 100,000 players
boys gymnastics: .95 fatalities per 100,000 players
boys football: .81 fatalities per 100,000 players
boys lacrosse: .80 fatalities per 100,000 players
boys basketball: .76 fatalities per 100,000 players
boys ice hockey: .48 fatalities per 100,000 players
boys soccer: .45 fatalities per 100,000 players
boys high school cross-country: .36 fatalities per 100,000 players
firearm accidents, all children,: .15 fatalities per 100,000 children ages 5 - 19
Question: For any group of 100,000 boys, which is more likely to result in a fatal accident, having a gun in the house or letting them play school sports? ?
All of the sports are more likely to cause fatal accidents than a firearm in the house.
Followup, which is more likely to be used to commit suicide or homicide, those sports equipages, or a gun in the house?
You gloss over the far more overall fatalities when it comes to guns.
And what is this? you include 19 yr olds as 'children', shamash? your colleagues will call this a 'sham'. You also need include a time determinant, are those accident figs per year?
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
90 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Question: why do all the questions assume a deadly, mobile, concealable WMD is a fluffy toy? Unneeded gun ownership is terrorism.
Fred Sanders
Jun 2015
#1
The inference says volumes about cartoon scrapers/Third Way® apologists...
friendly_iconoclast
Jun 2015
#15
Reposting cartoons, while insulting others, is easy. Answering questions is hard
friendly_iconoclast
Jun 2015
#16
Outstanding post Shamash. I expect you'll be getting nothing but dodges and slurs, though.
pablo_marmol
Jun 2015
#19
"(S)ubjective gibberish"? I'll gladly stipulate your expertise on the subject...
friendly_iconoclast
Jun 2015
#90
Some Palin-level 'legal scholars' seem to have a problem with that...
friendly_iconoclast
Jun 2015
#75