In another example of hand-wringing, excessive, faux compassion that ignores the real statistics, the Charlotte Observer has given space to one of their writers to vent against the evil gun, once again. I love how these people want to present themselves as more "caring" than an evil, stupid gun owner, yet their "compassion" is predicated not on facts, but on mere feelings.
The Observer's Dannye Romine-Powell (God save us from another hyphenated named liberal) gets all amush over the "unruffled thinking" of her gun hating husband and tries her hand at citing statistics to such poor effect... poor once some perspective and reality is brought to bear on the issue, that is.
Romine-Powell blathers on how her husband told her they didn't need a gun because they wanted to save the lives of their grandchildren who might be unlucky enough to find it in their grandparent's home where they might play with it, accidentally injuring or killing themselves. Of course, one wonders why these supposedly intelligent, caring grandparents would leave such a thing laying around where a child could so easily get to it, so with that it makes one glad they have decided not to get one.
Now to her absurd use of statistics.
About 200 people in the United States kill someone each year in self-defense.
But how many die each year -- innocently -- from guns?
Let me tell you.
In the 10 years ending in 2006, 486 children under age 18 in North Carolina, alone, died from gun-related injuries.
First of all, it is misleading to make it seem like the "200 people" each year who use their firearms in self-defense is such a low number when compared with the supposed "486 children under 18" who died from "gun-related injuries." After all, Romine-Powell uses one year of pro-gun statistics and matches that up with 10 years of anti-gun statistics. Not a very fair comparison there. By simple extension, her stats for 10 years of guns being used to save a life would be somewhere near 2,000 compared to only 486 instance of misused firearms. Suddenly the numbers don't seem as far out of whack when looked at it that way.
But, even that academic exercise pales when more numbers are reviewed.
According to the CDC between 2000 and 2002, there were only 542 accidental gun deaths in the USA. Naturally, we mourn the accidental loss of each and every one of those children and, should such an accident have happened to your own child, that loss is 100%. Compassion makes each and every one of us feel bad about these accidents.
...but they ARE accidents.
Let's look at the CDC's stats on some more accidents:
- Car accidents- 23,487
- Drowning- 3,653
- Run over by cars- 2,987
- House fires- 1,736
- Poisoning- 1,530
- Falling- 567
- Accidental gun deaths- 542
- Machinery- 107
- Cut/pierced- 22
See how low on that list accidental gun deaths are?
Now, one of the arguments that anti-gun propagandists make is that guns deaths are "preventable," and shouldn't we, they ask, try to prevent them? Well, yes, of course we should is the sensible answer. But the logical follow up to that overly simplistic thinking would be to also eliminate swimming pools and to do so with far more urgency than we would to eliminate guns. After all, many thousands more children die a year by drowning than die by gun misuse. For that matter, many, many thousands more die by misuse of automobiles. Or, shouldn't we eliminate houses since the CDC shows us that well over one thousand more children died from accidental house fires than accidental gunfire?
Looking the REAL statistics over certainly makes the brainless "compassion" of an anti-gun nut seem... well... rather brainless, doesn't it? One last quibble. Our Mrs. Romine-Powell fancies herself a poet with a few Poetic tomes having been published here and there. The style of this piece seems the result of that predilection all too much. With short, single lines, she seems to have been going for some sort of lyrical style that completely fails here.
Let's just say this:
I didn't like it.
The sentences were too short.
And I don't want my grandchildren exposed to such simple-minded writing.
In my house, we'll remain free of Romine-Powell's work.
Free of her work is better than discovering someone I love dead because they listened to her.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
get rid of cars
August 1, 2007 - 14:21 ET by LionKingIt would make more sense to get rid of evil cars. (There is no Constitutional Right to car ownership.)
Eliminating cars would:
Ah but you forget LionKing
August 1, 2007 - 14:30 ET by The Wicked ConservativeAh but you forget LionKing libs worship the UAW and all the money they send to the lib cause. This is another beautiful example of liberal madness in a divided house. What will help dems win more power? Support the unions or the AGW fanatics? Looks like the agw fanatics are the pet cause du jour. But don't expect UAW jobs to be threatened any time soon.
You can't save the Earth unless You're willing to make other people sacrifice. Dogbert the Green Consultant summing up the elite left.
Very cool punchline- nicely set up, and well delivered
August 1, 2007 - 14:39 ET by JohnMOnce again, Mr. Huston's writing stands out as a stellar example: Solid research and facts, excellent point-by-point elucidation, and a writing style that's smart and immensely fun!
(Not to say that other writers here aren't great, just that I enjoy his articles the best.)
Please post more often!! Better, how about teaching journalism to the up-and-comers?
Well, geeze. Now yer makin'
August 2, 2007 - 00:19 ET by Warner Todd HustonWell, geeze. Now yer makin' me blush!
Thanks for the compliment. I'll do the best I can.
Well said, Warner
August 1, 2007 - 14:44 ET by sarcasmoThe lefties I know, due entirely to rampant media bigotry against guns, are universally shocked and in disbelief when I tell them that having a swimming pool is more dangerous to kids than having a gun in the house, but it's true.
JMR
Aaaah, but
August 1, 2007 - 14:51 ET by misterbillAaaah, but having a kid around the house is the most dangerous of the three.
Well, the odd thing is, I'm
August 1, 2007 - 15:05 ET by sarcasmoWell, the odd thing is, I'm a huge advocate of swimming and of drown-proofing kids at the youngest possible age. This means that as I'm preaching the dangers of pools compared to guns, I'm also constantly thinking about the virtues of having a nice pool here in Florida. It's one of those risks that's worth taking because of the fun, especially if you take the time to put safety first and make sure young kids really learn how to swim well.
JMR
As the saying goes "no one
August 1, 2007 - 15:33 ET by BruzillaAs the saying goes "no one ever drowned by falling in the water. They drowned by not getting out of it." Pools don't drown kids, kids drown themselves by getting in the pool and not knowing how to swim. Same deal with guns. There is no place a gun owner can hide a gun where a kid can't find it, so the philosophy of keeping a gun out of reach, or hidden in a closet, isn't any more effective that hanging a sign on your pool saying "keep out".
If you want to protect your kids from accidental shootings, teach them to shoot, how to safely handle guns, how to tell if a gun is loaded, what damage a bullet can do, etc. Most kids learn about guns from TV and movies, and they can't learn to swim from watching TV any better than they can learn gun safety. Educate your kids so they know what to do, and not to do, when they come across a gun, and they'll be much safer.
Excellently put. Now if
August 1, 2007 - 17:06 ET by dscottExcellently put. Now if the NRA would simply use this comparison then the whole issue is over once and for all. I mean, just apply that thinking to public pools. So libs, if you care about children, using your thinking we must for the sake of the nation close all the public pools because they are a demonstrated danger to children even more so (7 times!) than guns. If you wouldn't put a loaded gun in the hand of a child, then how could you possibly put a child in a public pool. Shame on you libs for putting children at risk!
The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane. Marcus Aurelius
Well said by all
August 1, 2007 - 17:23 ET by sarcasmoWell said by all (but dscott & I may have inadvertently given the control freak lobby a brand-new "pool control" idea!).
JMR
"If you want to protect your
August 1, 2007 - 17:10 ET by JohnM"If you want to protect your kids from accidental shootings, teach them to shoot, how to safely handle guns, how to tell if a gun is loaded, what damage a bullet can do, etc. Most kids learn about guns from TV and movies, and they can't learn to swim from watching TV any better than they can learn gun safety. Educate your kids so they know what to do, and not to do, when they come across a gun, and they'll be much safer."
Yes, yes, yes, yes, yes!!!! On all points, yes! Could not have said it better!
(And here in Liberalland NJ, I've tried repeatedly... Car safety OK, bike safety OK, gun safety not OK. Why not? When it comes to guns, why are they so quick to legislate and so hesitant to educate? It makes absolutely no sense to me. At all. None.)
BTW: Since TV and movies ARE where lots of people "learn" about guns, I wish there were a blog for us to post all the stupid, idiotic, and just downright WRONG things about guns that get shown. Like in MI, two guys with rifles on a stationary building roof can't hit Cruise's car from 200 yards, but he can jump out at 60mph, roll (without getting smashed up), and hit them with a series of 100% accurate shots from a pistol. No wonder handguns are so feared. Or those crime shows when they talk about damage done by a high-caliber rifle, then show a 9mm cartridge. Nice job!
Gun safety is a better answer than gun laws
August 1, 2007 - 17:13 ET by RoverAbsolutely-I was thinking, of the number of kids killed by gun accidents, how many can be attributed directly to the negligence of the gun owners themselves? (By definition, I'd suspect all, in one way or another.)
The liberals would take guns away from us. Even if they did, though, I don't think guns will go away, and kids will still get killed. I think you'll save more kids with better gun education and safety awareness.
If I had a kid younger than about 11, I'd consider getting rid of my gun until he was old enough to understand basic gun safety. I'd AT LEAST have trigger locks, with key in a secure location (probably ON ME); or put them in a safe; keep them unloaded when not in use; and indoctrinate the kid from day one that guns need to be respected.
Rover
Warner, I think you've
August 1, 2007 - 14:56 ET by BruzillaWarner, I think you've fallen into that age old "child" trap of the anti-gunners. I say that because you've taken the bait and said "we mourn the accidental loss of each and every one of these children..." Key word here is "accidental". Note that the reader's statistic you're responding to is "486 children under age 18 in North Carolina dies from gun related injuries". You then write "... 486 instance(sic) of misused firearms" to attack the writer on comparing these "accidental" deaths to the number of lives saved through the use of guns. Where, in the reader's statistic, does it show that any of the 486 deaths of children were accidents or due to firearm misuse?
The reason I take issue with this is that when most of us read "children under age 18 dying from guns" we draw a mental picture of a six-year old Dick & Jane finding grandpa's gun and accidentally shooting themselves. Yes, we are all sympathetic to that loss. But these situations are a very small sample of that statistic. We forget that everytime some drug dealer, car jacker, burgler, rapist, thief, or other miscreant under the age of 18 gets shot, they add to this statistic as it only tracks that A: you're 18 or less and B: You were shot. What you were doing when you got shot is conveniently left out of the equation. If you're one of those folks who defends their home and adds to the protection statistic, but you shoot some burglar who's 17, you've just added another digit to the "children under 18 killed by firearms" statistic. Everytime a police officer shoots and kills some hood that's under 18, that's another "child" added to the list. Everytime a gang-banger drops another gang-banger who's under 18, add another to the list of "innocents".
The truth is we don't mourn the loss of each and every one of those "kids" because most of them were killed while in the commission of committing a crime, either by the victim, the cops, or a cohort. The proper response to this writer would be "provided your children do not become criminals, there is very little chance that they will suffer a firearms-related death."
Another part of the
August 1, 2007 - 16:12 ET by BeowulfAnother part of the statistics not mentioned, or elaborated on, is that "About 200 people in the United States kill someone each year in self-defense". This only takes into account those killed in self defense. Very, very few defensive uses of firearms result in death. Indeed, many don't even involve a shot being fired.
Actually, the last figure I heard was that guns were used defensively on the order of 2 million times per year. As to the number of lives saved through this defensive use, who knows. But it's far, far more than 200.
The Closed Mind Erects Strong Barriers
Let's be careful about our use of "statistics"
August 1, 2007 - 18:43 ET by Buzz CarterBruzilla, I agree with you wholeheartedly. However, you used the following statement:
"...most of them were killed while in the commission of committing a crime..."
I submit that since, as you say, they don't keep track of who was killed in the commision of a crime, that you should be wary of using words like "most." If one can't verify that at least 51% of those kids were killed in the commission of a crime, the word "many" can suffice instead. The statement works just as well with that, and no one can then accuse you of sensationalism, a sin that both sides of the gun argument are guilty of.
Buzz Carter
“War is not violence and killing, pure and simple; war is
controlled violence, for a purpose. But…it’s never a soldier’s
business to decide when or where or how—or why—he fights;
that belongs…to other people…”
Leftists like Romine never
August 1, 2007 - 15:56 ET by bigtimerLeftists like Romine never quit...never... always trying to spin their agenda to take away our rights of the Second amendment.
They should just keep banging their empty-leftists heads against the wall...maybe, just maybe they will see the light one of these days.
You will never take our rights to own a gun away from us you simple little leftist fools.
From our cold dead hands!
Poor Brits...
August 1, 2007 - 16:19 ET by Army BratTalk to the Brits about how it feels to be without the means to defend yourself from those who would kill you. With all the happy Jihadists in their midst, and soaring guncrimes, they are beginning to rethink giving up their guns. All they have now is their kitchen knives, and sticks.
My father was undegoing treatment for cancer while in his 80s. He was put in a position where he had to go to an ATM late at night. After getting his cash a man much larger than his 5'5" and 130 pounds, stepped from the shadows and asked for "some of his money." He reached into his pocket and put his hand on the AMT 380 backup I got for him and suggested that the man get a job. One glance at my fathers hand and the man vanished. These worhtless pieces of crap would rather see my father dead at the hands of a criminal, than allow guns in the hands of law abiding citizens. This is a VERY personal issue to me. Happy Trails...
Army Brat. They are trying
August 2, 2007 - 00:41 ET by ZippyArmy Brat. They are trying to close the prisons in MI.
They say there is not enough money.
I say build more prisons. Pay the guards $15/hr. I'm sure there are people, who would like to be, on the outside for $15/hr.
Just to celebrate hoplophobe ignorance...
August 1, 2007 - 17:30 ET by annoyedman...I went out and bought a new pistol today. I know that somewhere, some nelly leftist screamed and fainted. It made me feel good.
The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left. ~~ Ecclesiastes 10:1-2
It sure seems like the
August 1, 2007 - 21:22 ET by marvlIt sure seems like the major prerequisite for being a newspaper writer (or, for that matter, a media person in general) is to be equal parts ignorant and stupid. None of these people seem to have an education worth more than about $1.50, and none of them seem to have an I.Q. much above room temperature in Greenland.
And then there's my real pet peeve, idiots that attempt to make use of statistics who have never taken a mathematics course beyond 9th grade arithemetic. As Benjamin Disraeli noted, the 3 types of lies are lies, damned lies, and statistics. The last, of course, is on the list largely because of romantic empty heads like Mrs. Romine-Powell. She should stick to sniffing pansies in her garden.
NRA
August 2, 2007 - 00:36 ET by ZippyTo all thanks.
To Freedom lovers. You don't have to own a gun to be apart of the NRA. The NRA is about Freedom.
I know a few people, NRA members, who don't own guns.
I believe either Jefferson, Madison or Franklin said the 2nd Amendment protects the First.
And the NRA does have safety programs. Call them and they will come out. Or tell You the nearest local NRA instructor.
Is Powell trying to blame her husband???
the best gun control there is.
August 2, 2007 - 03:16 ET by PK1. check the bacdrop behind the target.
2. assume the position.
3. achieve the sight picture.
4. stop the breath.
5. stop the heart.
6. refine the sight picture.
7. touch off the round.
8. restart the heart.
9. restart breathing.
10. observe the results.
just remember there are only a bout 50.000 t'heads that can shoot well (they waste their ammunition shooting at the moon).
there are millions of americans that can shoot really well.
C
Do people really think that
August 2, 2007 - 09:15 ET by FALalleujahDo people really think that founders gave zero thought as to the order of the Bill Of Rights?
If any of you are interested in becoming shooters or if you are already a gun owner and want to shoot better please go to a clinic called Appleseed. The goal of this weekend clinic that travels across the country is to teach safety, marksmanship out to 500 yards with a rifle and the history and tradition of American Rifleman without whom the founding of this country would not be possible.
I had never shot a rifle before the appleseed I attended and I can say it was one the best experiances I had in my life. I learned how to be a safe and effective shooter for a low price and was welcomed with open arms being a beginner. Oh those under 21 or in the military shoot for free ! It's also a CMP (civilian marksmanhip program) sancationed program which attendence qualifies you to buy surplus ammo and rifles from the government. www.odcmp.com
The enemies of 2nd will work hard to limit YOUR rights. Don't let your freedom slip away..besides..it's fun! It's the only sport endorsed by the Founding Fathers. It's up to YOU.
here's the link www.appleseedinfo.org