statistics

An interesting talk that is definitely worth watching:

Every time I see one of these types of scientific videos where they talk about wounds, I realize how bad I never want to be shot.

The rifle v.s. handgun pictures he shows are especially frightening.

LOL at the zombie target joke at around 13:12.

Summary:

  • Handguns are not as deadly as most people think.  6 out of 7 people survive their injuries
  • It’s impossible to assess injury severity at scene properly
  • There are often no exit wounds
  • Handguns have a very low penetration depth
  • Be concerned about airways
  • The most likely death is due to hemorrhage
  • Quick transport to OR is key

Moral of the story is that if you’re going to get shot you better hope it’s with a handgun.  On the flip side of that Clint Smith’s saying  “The only purpose for a pistol is to fight your way back to the rifle you should have never laid down.” definitely holds true, because you’re going to want a rifle (if you have the option) to stop the threat.

Thoughts?

Hat tip: Arthur

50 COMMENTS

A record-low 26% of Americans favor a legal ban on the possession of handguns in the United States other than by police and other authorized people.

The results are based on Gallup’s annual Crime poll, conducted Oct. 6-9. This year’s poll finds support for a variety of gun-control measures at historical lows, including the ban on handguns, which is Gallup’s longest continuing gun-control trend.

I was excited until I saw the poll was conducted only over a 3 day period, with a random sample of 1005 adults. :/  I took 3 statistics courses in university, but I squeaked by.  I’m pretty sure surveying 1005 people when the total population is 307 Million is an awfully small sample size.

You can check out the rest of the questions, and the results – HERE

Anyone care to weigh in?

14 COMMENTS

Or as I’d prefer to call it; Firearms Save Lives! :P (yea yea I know.. that’s not necessarily true):

The hypothesis of “more guns = more deaths” is demonstrably false over the past 28 years of documented American history. The number of firearms in civilian circulation have been steadily increasing over that time period, and the number of firearm-related fatalities has not been equivalently increasing.

Linoge over at Walls Of The City turns the numbers into visuals.  He put the spreadsheet up with the data so you can look it over if you have any doubts.

Check out the full article – HERE

A lot of good analysis always going on over at Walls Of The City, add the site to your feed and don’t miss out.

22 COMMENTS

Summary:

  • Murders total – 13636
  • Murders with handguns – 6452 (47.32%)
  • Murders with rifles – 348 (2.55%)
  • Murders with shotguns – 418 (3.07%)
  • Murders with unknown firearms – 1928 (14.14%)
  • Murder with knives or cutting instruments – 1825 (13.38%)
  • Murders with other weapons – 1864 (13.67%)
  • Murders with hands, fists, feet etc.. – 801 (5.87%)

Summary of the 2009 crime statistics – HERE

List of Murders by state and types of weapon used – HERE

Can’t say I’m shocked at the results, nor the ranking of each individual state. Nice to see there was a decline in violent crime at least.

19 COMMENTS

Linoge investigates the common assertion – HERE

I still don’t know what to think.  There are so many external variables involved when you’re dealing with guns and people, that I don’t like to be like the anti gun nuts (and the NRA on at least on occasion) and make statements about the correlation between guns and crime just to further promote my own views.

4 COMMENTS

According to the Journal Pediatrics, children in the most rural areas of the United States are as likely to die by gunfire as those in the biggest cities, a new analysis of nearly 24,000 deaths finds.

The researchers analyzed data on nearly 24,000 gun-related deaths among those 19 and younger from 1999 through 2006. That included about 15,000 homicides, about 7,000 suicides and about 1,400 accidental shootings for the eight-year period.

Full Story – HERE

One problem:

Last time I checked, a person is no longer considered a youth when they turn 18… so why are they including 18 and 19 year olds in the statistics?

Fix your stats Journal Pediatrics, then get back to us.

15 COMMENTS