Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Journal of Trauma: More U.S. Children Die Where Guns Are Common-Study
yahoo.com ^ | Feb 28, 2002 7:04 PM ET | Christopher Noble

Posted on 03/01/2002 2:51:45 AM PST by Cincinatus' Wife

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-109 next last
To: bang_list

21 posted on 03/01/2002 4:25:32 AM PST by Joe Brower
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fporretto
Excellent points!!

One more day of hearing the truth.

22 posted on 03/01/2002 4:26:39 AM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife
BOSTON (Reuters) - Children are much more likely to be murdered, commit suicide or die accidentally because of guns in states and regions with higher levels of bullsh*t according to a new study by Harvard researchers.
23 posted on 03/01/2002 4:27:38 AM PST by Ajnin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GailA
You cant take a belt to our kid anymore. The liberals wont allow it. Lets ban all belts.
24 posted on 03/01/2002 4:28:00 AM PST by mcook4
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Ajnin
Harvard--where Enron CEO Jeff Skilling got his business degree.
As my mother often told me, figures don't lie but liars can figure.
They seem to produce a lot of liars at Harvard.
25 posted on 03/01/2002 4:34:20 AM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife
Why doesnt this "study" take into account the mainly male minority gangbangers in the 10 to 18 year old age group or the kids killed by gang bangers in drive by shootings? Is it not illegal for a "child" to even own a firearm?
26 posted on 03/01/2002 4:34:39 AM PST by mcook4
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mcook4
Why doesnt this "study" take into account the mainly male minority gangbangers in the 10 to 18 year old age group or the kids killed by gang bangers in drive by shootings? Is it not illegal for a "child" to even own a firearm?

Good point! And don't these studies include as children in their numbers, ages up to 23?

27 posted on 03/01/2002 4:36:54 AM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife
First of all, I distrust any study on guns and gun ownership out of Harvard. The lefties are willing to lie, cheat and steal to support their ideology. I'll reserve my judgment on the study until critics get ahold of it an exam it. We do know that accidental firearm deaths have been declining for decades, while the number of guns have been skyrocketing.

Second, I wonder how a Harvard Health Study would be accepted, if it looked at the deaths caused by vaccines and ignored the lives saved by vaccinations? We also know from John Lott's study and other studies that gun ownership reduces the number of murders, assaults, rapes and robberies and especially those public run amok killers. How many lives does widespread gun ownership save?

Third, if simple gun ownership kills kids, shouldn't the police and the military be disarmed too? If not, isn't that putting other priorities above the lives of kids? Just wondering.

28 posted on 03/01/2002 4:38:26 AM PST by Kermit
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife
The other thing it doesnt address is that the high ownership states are states where hunting is a very popular pastime. Hunting by its very nature is going to have a high risk for accidental shootings.

The study implies that keeping a gun for home protection is a bad move but it does not state that these "accidental shootings" happened in a home setting. Its very possible the majority happen during deer season.

29 posted on 03/01/2002 4:56:41 AM PST by rudehost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Kermit
Third, if simple gun ownership kills kids, shouldn't the police and the military be disarmed too? If not, isn't that putting other priorities above the lives of kids? Just wondering.

Oh, don't give them the green light!

30 posted on 03/01/2002 4:59:55 AM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: rudehost
Theses "studies" are bogus.
31 posted on 03/01/2002 5:00:59 AM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife
In that period, 6,817 children between 5 and 14 years old died from firearms

I find it most interesting that they chose to limit the children's ages. In most "guns kill children" studies, the "children's" ages range up to 19. I imagine this "significant" difference in child mortality disappears quite rapidly around 16. ;)

Given control of a dataset, you can prove anything. Statistics is so much fun!

32 posted on 03/01/2002 5:02:43 AM PST by antidisestablishment
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: go star go
That was my first thought too! Another worthless study.
33 posted on 03/01/2002 5:14:19 AM PST by cibco
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Kermit
First of all, I distrust any study on guns and gun ownership out of Harvard. The lefties are willing to lie, cheat and steal to support their ideology.

You are exactly right. There have been so many of these bogus "studies" made by radical anti-gun "scholars" that the pro-gun truth squads are kept busy debunking them. Even impartial independent research has shown them to be bogus, but seemingly to no avail because they are still given credence by the media and the leftist pols. The famous study made in Washington state a few years ago and which was ballyhooed on every 6 o'clock news show for years was quickly shown to be a total fraud by several different debunkers, yet we still hear the "statistic" that a gun in the home is 48 times (or some such ridiculous number) more likely to kill a household member than a criminal intruder. Even though the original "study" has been completely discredited by non-partisan research as well as by pro-gun research, the fraudulent figures are still regularly quoted as gospel truth by the media whores at every opportunity.

Then there is the bogus "study" statistic of thirty-something "children" killed by guns every day in America. We have shown over and over that that statistic counts young people up to 24 years old as children, which takes in virtually all of the gang-banger, drug dealer, stick-up artist population. If only actual, honest-to-Pete children are counted, the number of firearms related child deaths is drastically reduced into the same general statistical realm as drownings in 5 gallon buckets. Yet again, even though this child-death fraud has been thoroughly and repeatedly debunked, the media keeps on endlessy quoting the bogus statistic. Once this kind of traudulent "study" gets out into the media it will live on forever, even though a stake has been driven squarely through it's heart by real, honest research.

As you said, the anti-gun people are shameless liars who will lie, steal, cheat, and do or say anything to advance their cause of disarming the American people. It makes you wonder why one particular sector of the political spectrum is so relentlessly determined to establish a total government monopoly on weapons possession.

34 posted on 03/01/2002 5:27:07 AM PST by epow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife
Clearly manufactured data. Certainly at least a mix of legally and illegally owned guns and no account for lives SAVED by gun use.
35 posted on 03/01/2002 5:28:59 AM PST by School of Rational Thought
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: go star go
I suppose a man could have concluded from the evidence given that the low gunownership states had such an enlightened population that they intervened with the child before gunplay ensued?

The study says that it considered factors such as education and income, both of which would be related to your factors of "enlightenment" and "intervention" via drugs or other efforts. The factors were not sufficient to explain the gross difference in gun deaths among children.

36 posted on 03/01/2002 5:35:26 AM PST by TwakeIDFins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: antidisestablishment
As FReeper fporretto points out in Post #19, this is bundling.
Not to mention, it spans ten years.

The study looked at data from all 50 states from 1988 to 1997. In that period, 6,817 children between 5 and 14 years old died from firearms: 3,447 from homicides, 1,782 from accidental shootings and 1,588 from suicide.

37 posted on 03/01/2002 5:36:31 AM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife
according to a new study by Harvard researchers.

thats as far as i had to go

38 posted on 03/01/2002 5:39:35 AM PST by TheRedSoxWinThePennant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife
Please post a barf alert next time.
39 posted on 03/01/2002 5:40:37 AM PST by Intimidator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

Accidental Death Rates for Children (ages 0-14)

 

Cause

Number

Motor Vehicle  3,059
Drowning  1,060
Fires, burns     833
Mechanical Suffocation     459
Ingestion of Food or Object     213
Firearms     181
Figures are for 1995. National Safety Council, Accident Facts: 1998 Edition, at 10, 11, 18.

In 1997, the total number of children, ages 0-14 killed  by firearms (all causes) was 629 or 1.7 per day.
National Center for Health Statistics, 1997

Accidental gun deaths among children have declined by over 50 % in 25 years, even though the population (and the gun stock) has continued to increase.
Kopel, Guns: Who Should Have Them?, at 311 and National Safety Council, Accident Facts: 1998 Edition, at 18.

Children 14 and under are over 21 times more likely to die in an automobile, and nearly 8 times more likely to drown than die in an accident with a gun.
Data compiled from
National Health Safety Council, Injury Facts, 1999

Courtesy of gunfacts.org

40 posted on 03/01/2002 5:41:03 AM PST by AAABEST
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-109 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson