Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





Show your support for what this community means to you:


Choose a Donation Amount
Username (required for credit)



Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Take a look around and join the community. Have a topic? Join us and start a thread.

PWC: Gun violence in America, explained in 17 maps and charts

2

Comments

  • 2001400ex2001400ex Posts: 11,228
    10000 Comments 250 Answers 500 Awesomes 500 Up Votes

    2001400ex said:

    Vox aren't the sharpest tools in the shed...

    If you are going to site Australia's gun suicide rate dropping as a leading example of why you should limit guns shouldn't you do a bit more background research on that (i.e. is it really changing anything)?

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com.au/2016/09/27/australias-suicide-crisis-has-peaked-to-a-terrifying-new-height_a_21480647/

    image

    Yes, the Australian gun laws changed in the late 90s. Notice the drop since then until now? Give the chart a different scale. Dullard.
    AZDuck said:

    Vox aren't the sharpest tools in the shed...

    If you are going to site Australia's gun suicide rate dropping as a leading example of why you should limit guns shouldn't you do a bit more background research on that (i.e. is it really changing anything)?

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com.au/2016/09/27/australias-suicide-crisis-has-peaked-to-a-terrifying-new-height_a_21480647/

    image

    Your @TheChart is hard as fuck to read, but it looks like Australia's death rate by suicide is as low as it's been since the early 1950's.
    Two morons that can't read.

    From the link...
    In 2015, 3,027 people ended their own lives in Australia. That's 12.6 people in every 100,000.

    Which puts it above the average of where its been for the last almost 100 years. So if you are "bright" enough to write an article that says getting rid of guns will save people from committing suicide and use Australia as the example, shouldn't you at least go spend 30 seconds Googling the actual Australia data to see if it helped before you claim this wonderful benefit?

    Like I said, the Vox folks are not the sharpest tools in the shed.

    And if you are "bright" enough to reply to a simple post pointing out this stupidity without reading/understanding a simple link and plot...well...that is how we coin terms like HondoFS...but in your defense at least you weren't alone?
    photo 51zFExbOw9L._SX331_BO1204203200__zpsgqkbrpvo.jpg
    HoustonHuskypawzdoogieAZDuckCuntWaffleRaceBannonMikeDamoneFire_Marshall_Bill
  • SledogSledog Posts: 3,804
    2500 Comments 250 Answers 500 Awesomes 500 Up Votes
    Japan has high suicide rates and they don't need any guns to get it done! People bent on killing themselves always find a way.
    MikeDamoneFire_Marshall_Bill
  • AZDuckAZDuck Posts: 13,018
    Swaye's Wigwam 10000 Comments 250 Answers Fucktard of the Week Award
    edited October 4
    @HoustonHusky

    Your HuffPoAustralia article was unsourced garbage. The chart, which is from the Australian statistics department, is more trustworthy but a shitty chart. Why you posted a HuffPo article and a chart that contradicted it I don't know. In your mind I guess that makes sense.

    Even taking the unsourced 12.6 number, it is well below highest rates listed in the Aussie chart.
    MikeDamoneFire_Marshall_Bill
  • BearsWiinBearsWiin Posts: 2,294
    Swaye's Wigwam 250 Answers 1000 Comments 500 Awesomes
    Sledog said:

    AZDuck said:

    Sledog said:

    AZDuck said:

    pawz said:
    Excellent compilation.

    This is why my default setting on guns is: people who want to keep things more or less as they are need to show me how to make gun ownership safe by developed-world standards.

    Alternatively - treat guns like cars.

    Switzerland does very nicely but I'm not sure how since most adults have an actual assault weapon and ammunition at home.

    This article is total bullshit. Just look where most homicides occur and it'll be democrat controlled and have very strict gun laws. Try the book More Guns Less Crime. By this guy:

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gary_Kleck

    526 murder victims in Chicago alone so far this year. Hondo's silence is the normal response from the far left.
    https://swissinfo.ch/eng/soldiers-can-keep-guns-at-home-but-not-ammo/970614

    Not the case
    Linky no worky. I even run into Swiss citizens at rifle ranges here in the states because even if they are out of country they turn in there qualification targets. The don't have their Stg57's or SG550'something. They were shooting K31's because they can't have the others here. They buy ammunition at cost from the government and that most towns have shooting ranges. I guess they were all crazy liars.
    http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-21379912

    you're the crazy liar, not they
    UWhuskytskeetMikeDamone
  • AZDuckAZDuck Posts: 13,018
    Swaye's Wigwam 10000 Comments 250 Answers Fucktard of the Week Award
    BearsWiin said:

    Sledog said:

    AZDuck said:

    Sledog said:

    AZDuck said:

    pawz said:
    Excellent compilation.

    This is why my default setting on guns is: people who want to keep things more or less as they are need to show me how to make gun ownership safe by developed-world standards.

    Alternatively - treat guns like cars.

    Switzerland does very nicely but I'm not sure how since most adults have an actual assault weapon and ammunition at home.

    This article is total bullshit. Just look where most homicides occur and it'll be democrat controlled and have very strict gun laws. Try the book More Guns Less Crime. By this guy:

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gary_Kleck

    526 murder victims in Chicago alone so far this year. Hondo's silence is the normal response from the far left.
    https://swissinfo.ch/eng/soldiers-can-keep-guns-at-home-but-not-ammo/970614

    Not the case
    Linky no worky. I even run into Swiss citizens at rifle ranges here in the states because even if they are out of country they turn in there qualification targets. The don't have their Stg57's or SG550'something. They were shooting K31's because they can't have the others here. They buy ammunition at cost from the government and that most towns have shooting ranges. I guess they were all crazy liars.
    http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-21379912

    you're the crazy liar, not they
    no, no I met this guy once who said that his cousin's little brother was with a Swiss guy once and they all have FULL AUTO machine guns with ANTITANKROCKETATTACHMENTS in their closets and they all shoot them off in the town square because that's how they vote in Switzerland
    TierbsHsotBoobsMikeDamoneFire_Marshall_Bill
  • 2001400ex2001400ex Posts: 11,228
    10000 Comments 250 Answers 500 Awesomes 500 Up Votes
    edited October 4
    This is in the country that @sledog is using to make his point? How do you feel to about communism again?

    All healthy Swiss men aged between 18 and 34 are obliged to do military service and all are issued with assault rifles or pistols which they are supposed to keep at home.
    MikeDamonedoogie
  • HoustonHuskyHoustonHusky Posts: 1,695
    Swaye's Wigwam Solar Eclipse Donator 250 Answers 1000 Comments
    edited October 4

    AZDuck said:

    @HoustonHusky

    Your HuffPoAustralia article was unsourced garbage. The chart, which is from the Australian statistics department, is more trustworthy but a shitty chart. Why you posted a HuffPo article and a chart that contradicted it I don't know. In your mind I guess that makes sense.

    Even taking the unsourced 12.6 number, it is well below highest rates listed in the Aussie chart.

    HuffingtonPost is garbage, but even they aren't Vox-stupid and got a number correct:
    http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Lookup/by Subject/3303.0~2015~Main Features~Intentional self-harm: key characteristics~8

    One of the main points the Vox moron made was taking away guns saves lives because there will be fewer suicides, yet Australia govt data shows the death rate in 2015 (well after their gun laws were enacted) was above the average for the last 100 years and well within line of historical data (i.e. suicide rates in Australia are not statistically different now from historical averages before the gun laws, directly contradicting the 22 year old "Senior Writer" at Vox).

    You got caught being HondoFS and are just flailing now...
    MikeDamone
  • RaceBannonRaceBannon Posts: 25,748
    Swaye's Wigwam 10000 Comments 250 Answers 500 Awesomes
    2001400ex said:

    This is in the country that @sledog is using to make his point? How do you feel to about communism again?

    All healthy Swiss men aged between 18 and 34 are obliged to do military service and all are issued with assault rifles or pistols which they are supposed to keep at home.

    So Sledog was right
    pawzcreepycougMikeDamone
  • 2001400ex2001400ex Posts: 11,228
    10000 Comments 250 Answers 500 Awesomes 500 Up Votes

    2001400ex said:

    This is in the country that @sledog is using to make his point? How do you feel to about communism again?

    All healthy Swiss men aged between 18 and 34 are obliged to do military service and all are issued with assault rifles or pistols which they are supposed to keep at home.

    So Sledog was right
    You and @Sledog hate communism except for when you love it.
    pawzMikeDamonedoogie
  • RaceBannonRaceBannon Posts: 25,748
    Swaye's Wigwam 10000 Comments 250 Answers 500 Awesomes
    Fuck off dumbass. You got schooled by the Sledog
    doogiepawzHoustonHuskyMikeDamoneTurdBufferFire_Marshall_Bill
  • SledogSledog Posts: 3,804
    2500 Comments 250 Answers 500 Awesomes 500 Up Votes
    Just for you Hondo a few numbers and how the lefty run cities skew the stats.

    There are 30,000 gun related deaths 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: 0.000000925% 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, assault 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." We now know what they're trying to do".
    AZDuckMikeDamone
  • 2001400ex2001400ex Posts: 11,228
    10000 Comments 250 Answers 500 Awesomes 500 Up Votes
    Sledog said:

    Just for you Hondo a few numbers and how the lefty run cities skew the stats.

    There are 30,000 gun related deaths 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: 0.000000925% 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, assault 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." We now know what they're trying to do".

    It's insignificant yet you said you knew several people who died Monday.

    Dumbass.
    AZDuckpawzHoustonHuskyRaceBannonMikeDamonedoogie
  • UWhuskytskeetUWhuskytskeet Posts: 3,071
    2500 Comments 250 Answers 500 Awesomes 500 Up Votes
    Sledog said:

    Just for you Hondo a few numbers and how the lefty run cities skew the stats.

    There are 30,000 gun related deaths 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: 0.000000925% 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, assault 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." We now know what they're trying to do".

    /ForwardsFromGrandma
    AZDuckMikeDamone
  • SledogSledog Posts: 3,804
    2500 Comments 250 Answers 500 Awesomes 500 Up Votes
    2001400ex said:

    Sledog said:

    Just for you Hondo a few numbers and how the lefty run cities skew the stats.

    There are 30,000 gun related deaths 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: 0.000000925% 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, assault 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." We now know what they're trying to do".

    It's insignificant yet you said you knew several people who died Monday.

    Dumbass.
    Yes I did. I wish I could have saved them but the BS of which you speak would not have done so.
    AZDuckMikeDamone
  • AZDuckAZDuck Posts: 13,018
    Swaye's Wigwam 10000 Comments 250 Answers Fucktard of the Week Award




    AZDuck said:

    @HoustonHusky

    Your HuffPoAustralia article was unsourced garbage. The chart, which is from the Australian statistics department, is more trustworthy but a shitty chart. Why you posted a HuffPo article and a chart that contradicted it I don't know. In your mind I guess that makes sense.

    Even taking the unsourced 12.6 number, it is well below highest rates listed in the Aussie chart.

    HuffingtonPost is garbage, but even they aren't Vox-stupid and got a number correct:
    http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Lookup/by Subject/3303.0~2015~Main Features~Intentional self-harm: key characteristics~8

    One of the main points the Vox moron made was taking away guns saves lives because there will be fewer suicides, yet Australia govt data shows the death rate in 2015 (well after their gun laws were enacted) was above the average for the last 100 years and well within line of historical data (i.e. suicide rates in Australia are not statistically different now from historical averages before the gun laws, directly contradicting the 22 year old "Senior Writer" at Vox).

    You got caught being HondoFS and are just flailing now...
    fuck, your dense

    This is youre chart, fuckhead.

    image

    Aussie did their gun ban in 1996. The Vox article said that there was a big decrease in firearm homicides and a 74 percent drop in gun suicides. Initially, it appears that there was no increase in suicides by other means. Vox was looking at numbers that concluded in 2006. Those numbers were correct.

    The latest data (released like yesterday or something) shows a bump in the overall suicide rate from around 10.0 per 100,000 to 12.5 per 100,000. Is it a blip or a trend? Hard to say, but the guy from the Aussie suicide-prevention organization is freaking out, probably because he's trying to get money to deal with that bump.

    But back to those older numbers. The report issued after the gun ban stated:

    The age-standardised suicide rate (for persons) in 2003 was 6% lower than the corresponding rate for the previous year and 24% lower than the peak for the period 1993-2003, which occurred in 1997.

    Source: Australian Bureau of Statistics

    So in conclusion, Vox was right, suicides in Australia are still way down from the peak in the early-mid-90's. And no, your own chart does not show that the 2016 suicide rate of 12.5/100,000 is well above the suicide rate for 1921-2015.

    Apparently some right-wing channel is pushing the Aussie HuffPo story, since I notice that it is the first thing you see when you punch "Australia suicide rate" into the Google. But anyway.

    Fuck you for making me look this shit up.

    whlinderHoustonHuskyMikeDamone
  • dfleadflea Posts: 2,338
    Swaye's Wigwam 250 Answers 1000 Comments 500 Awesomes
    Sledog said:

    Just for you Hondo a few numbers and how the lefty run cities skew the stats.

    There are 30,000 gun related deaths 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: 0.000000925% 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, assault 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." We now know what they're trying to do".

    How many die in terrorist attacks?

    An insignificant number there too?

    Amazing that sand pours out of your vag over one insignificant number but not the other.
    AZDuckcreepycougMikeDamone
  • HoustonHuskyHoustonHusky Posts: 1,695
    Swaye's Wigwam Solar Eclipse Donator 250 Answers 1000 Comments
    edited October 4
    AZDuck said:




    AZDuck said:

    @HoustonHusky

    Your HuffPoAustralia article was unsourced garbage. The chart, which is from the Australian statistics department, is more trustworthy but a shitty chart. Why you posted a HuffPo article and a chart that contradicted it I don't know. In your mind I guess that makes sense.

    Even taking the unsourced 12.6 number, it is well below highest rates listed in the Aussie chart.

    HuffingtonPost is garbage, but even they aren't Vox-stupid and got a number correct:
    http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Lookup/by Subject/3303.0~2015~Main Features~Intentional self-harm: key characteristics~8

    One of the main points the Vox moron made was taking away guns saves lives because there will be fewer suicides, yet Australia govt data shows the death rate in 2015 (well after their gun laws were enacted) was above the average for the last 100 years and well within line of historical data (i.e. suicide rates in Australia are not statistically different now from historical averages before the gun laws, directly contradicting the 22 year old "Senior Writer" at Vox).

    You got caught being HondoFS and are just flailing now...
    fuck, your dense

    This is youre chart, fuckhead.

    image

    Aussie did their gun ban in 1996. The Vox article said that there was a big decrease in firearm homicides and a 74 percent drop in gun suicides. Initially, it appears that there was no increase in suicides by other means. Vox was looking at numbers that concluded in 2006. Those numbers were correct.

    The latest data (released like yesterday or something) shows a bump in the overall suicide rate from around 10.0 per 100,000 to 12.5 per 100,000. Is it a blip or a trend? Hard to say, but the guy from the Aussie suicide-prevention organization is freaking out, probably because he's trying to get money to deal with that bump.

    But back to those older numbers. The report issued after the gun ban stated:

    The age-standardised suicide rate (for persons) in 2003 was 6% lower than the corresponding rate for the previous year and 24% lower than the peak for the period 1993-2003, which occurred in 1997.
    Source: Australian Bureau of Statistics

    So in conclusion, Vox was right, suicides in Australia are still way down from the peak in the early-mid-90's. And no, your own chart does not show that the 2016 suicide rate of 12.5/100,000 is well above the suicide rate for 1921-2015.

    Apparently some right-wing channel is pushing the Aussie HuffPo story, since I notice that it is the first thing you see when you punch "Australia suicide rate" into the Google. But anyway.

    Fuck you for making me look this shit up.



    image

    My original post had:
    1) The article pointing out the suicide rate in 2015 (12.6 per 100,000 after the gun law)
    2) The graph to show that number in context i.e. a ton of data before the gun laws (average for the last 80+ years is < 12.6).

    The Vox guy is a moron. A non-moron would realize from the above two points the overall suicide rate was not statistically impacted by whatever law they passed in the late 90s since it is currently at/above the ~100 year historical average.

    Apparently a duck and a HondoFS not so much...

    Keep yapping...
    AZDuckMikeDamone
  • salemcoogsalemcoog Posts: 6,215
    5000 Comments 250 Answers 500 Awesomes 500 Up Votes
    AZDuck said:




    AZDuck said:

    @HoustonHusky

    Your HuffPoAustralia article was unsourced garbage. The chart, which is from the Australian statistics department, is more trustworthy but a shitty chart. Why you posted a HuffPo article and a chart that contradicted it I don't know. In your mind I guess that makes sense.

    Even taking the unsourced 12.6 number, it is well below highest rates listed in the Aussie chart.

    HuffingtonPost is garbage, but even they aren't Vox-stupid and got a number correct:
    http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Lookup/by Subject/3303.0~2015~Main Features~Intentional self-harm: key characteristics~8

    One of the main points the Vox moron made was taking away guns saves lives because there will be fewer suicides, yet Australia govt data shows the death rate in 2015 (well after their gun laws were enacted) was above the average for the last 100 years and well within line of historical data (i.e. suicide rates in Australia are not statistically different now from historical averages before the gun laws, directly contradicting the 22 year old "Senior Writer" at Vox).

    You got caught being HondoFS and are just flailing now...
    fuck, your dense

    This is youre chart, fuckhead.

    image

    Aussie did their gun ban in 1996. The Vox article said that there was a big decrease in firearm homicides and a 74 percent drop in gun suicides. Initially, it appears that there was no increase in suicides by other means. Vox was looking at numbers that concluded in 2006. Those numbers were correct.

    The latest data (released like yesterday or something) shows a bump in the overall suicide rate from around 10.0 per 100,000 to 12.5 per 100,000. Is it a blip or a trend? Hard to say, but the guy from the Aussie suicide-prevention organization is freaking out, probably because he's trying to get money to deal with that bump.

    But back to those older numbers. The report issued after the gun ban stated:

    The age-standardised suicide rate (for persons) in 2003 was 6% lower than the corresponding rate for the previous year and 24% lower than the peak for the period 1993-2003, which occurred in 1997.
    Source: Australian Bureau of Statistics

    So in conclusion, Vox was right, suicides in Australia are still way down from the peak in the early-mid-90's. And no, your own chart does not show that the 2016 suicide rate of 12.5/100,000 is well above the suicide rate for 1921-2015.

    Apparently some right-wing channel is pushing the Aussie HuffPo story, since I notice that it is the first thing you see when you punch "Australia suicide rate" into the Google. But anyway.

    Fuck you for making me look this shit up.



    It's still more than national average of death per 100,000 by guns here.
    MikeDamone
  • RaceBannonRaceBannon Posts: 25,748
    Swaye's Wigwam 10000 Comments 250 Answers 500 Awesomes
    Massive TL,DR in this thread
    HoustonHuskyGrundleStiltzkinMikeDamonepawzAZDuckFire_Marshall_Bill
Sign In or Register to comment.