Kaffy Mintcake

Is it 0.5% or 1.1%?

Steerpike

Can you provide a more independent source than the NRA, perhaps?

EDIT - never mind, I'm sure other sources are not radically different. I get back to my earlier point - we need to weigh these incidents against the purpose of the item in question. And look at what the manufacturers do to address the issues. Eg - poisoning - presumably from household products like Bleach, etc. Bleach has a purpose, but if drunk, kills you. What's done about it - make the bottle tops child-proof. Drowning - pools are now surrounded by fences even in private homes. Environmental factors - eg, lead - has been removed from gasoline; CFCs - removed from refrigeration units; fires - massive fire suppression systems exist in most buildings. Etc. But guns - a) have no primary function to offset their side-effects, and b) the manufacturers fight any attempt to increase safety.

Sally Redux

As the sole purpose of the gun is to kill, setting aside intentional killings will skew your figures somewhat.

chartreuse

It's quite clear - 0.5% across the board, 1.1% of incidents involving children.

Can you cite a reputable source that differs?

Why? We're talking about accidents.

Ray

What about death by water moccasins that come in the mail ...

Bob

How many more cars are on the road, and per household v guns though?

ian-mstm

Around these parts... it's just about 1:1.

For me, it's 2:1... for my neighbor down the road it's 3:7. For others on my road it's 1:1.

Ian

Kaffy Mintcake

I misread what you had posted. Still think guns were one of the worst inventions ever ...

Leslie

Oh that's a tricky one as water moccasins are notorious for under reporting on the census rolls.

I have a better one. What about death by stupidity? A human life is lost every three minutes in this country due to somebody doing something outlandishly stupid. Where's the outrage? Where are the lobbyists? I say, if we would just ban stupid people, there would be little need to ban anything else.

Sally Redux

Jesus said the stupid we will have always.

Leslie

Jesus also said stuff about sinners burning in hell. I think the stupid should be included in that. Stupid sinners can burn twice.

Sally Redux

Actually he didn't really say that, it was the poor, but he should have.

Leslie

He said the poor should burn in hell? Are you sure it was our Lord Jesus that said that? That sounds very Old Testament to me.







Just joking. I got it.

Bill_S

"Without a gun, I would not be able to ..." defend myself from two armed robbers. LINK

Steerpike

Closest incident to me that I can speak to was a local Asian family in Alamo, CA. Wealthy family, wealthy neighborhood. "Bad guys" got into the house as furniture delivery guys, and once inside, held family at gunpoint and robbed them. All indications were that the robbers were happy to tie up the victims and take the valuables. But the 'man of the house' slipped away, and located his handgun which he had hidden somewhere. He confronted the robbers, and a shoot-out ensued, leaving several family members dead, including himself. We will never know the 'what if' alternative, but I'd be willing to bet $1,000 that had the homeowner NOT had a gun, they would all be alive today. The 'feel good' notion that a gun protects you in this kind of situation is, in my mind, childish and naive. Robbers may carry weapons but would prefer not to use them. But - you go your way, I'll go mine ...