Re: 8 & 9 year old girls riding bicycles

On 12/25/2024 8:12 PM, John B. wrote:

On Wed, 25 Dec 2024 19:13:18 -0500, Frank Krygowski
<frkrygow@gXXmail.com> wrote:
 

On 12/25/2024 3:25 PM, AMuzi wrote:

On 12/25/2024 1:26 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:

On 12/25/2024 4:53 AM, John B. wrote:

>
I've mentioned numerous times that my family had guns in the house for
3 generations with no one being shoot. But reality apparently has no
bearing on what some people want to be true.

>
I think there's no way to logically converse with people who think one
or two anecdotes are more valid than reams of carefully gathered data.
>
So much for science!
>

>
For actual numbers:
>
400 million civilian firearms with just under 20,000 firearm homicides
per year, one per 20,000 firearms.
>
https://usafacts.org/data-projects/firearms-suicides
>
About 100 million bicycles
>
https://electronwheel.com/bike-facts-and-statistics/
>
for about 1300 deaths, one per 73,528 bicycles
>
>
https://injuryfacts.nsc.org/home-and-community/safety-topics/bicycle-
deaths/
>
Which is a lower rate, only 27% of the likelihood of death per bicycle
as per firearm.
>
283,400,986 autos and light trucks in USA
>
https://www.consumeraffairs.com/automotive/how-many-cars-are-in-the-us.html
>
with 44,534 auto/ light truck deaths, one per 6363 vehicles.
>
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/accidental-injury.htm
>
That's over 3x (3.14) more dangerous per vehicle as per firearm.
>
>
For an anecdote, all four of my firearms have been oiled and cased,
undisturbed in any way, for well over a month. Not one of them has
jumped up and wrought mayhem. Not even a little bit.

>
Nice try, Andrew, but that's a thorough and elaborate attempt at
distraction.
>
The issue specifically being discussed is whether there's more risk of
being shot - or killed by gunshot - when there is a gun in the house,
versus no gun in the house.
>
The data is clear, and not even close. Even accounting for differences
in neighborhood climate (or comparing houses that are both in the same
sorts of neighborhoods) if you have a gun in the house, it's more likely
that people will be harmed or killed by that gun.
>
Of course there are houses with guns that have not had that experience.
Just as there are people who smoked and did not die of lung cancer.
Nobody is claiming 100% of guns cause death, nor that 100% of gun owner
households have gun deaths. The evidence is that the risk is over twice
as high in those households, not 100%.
>
Citing bicycle crashes, car crashes, or any other source of harm are
attempts at distraction.

  Ah yes but ignoring reality is equally as fault.Example, according to
FBI data Blacks (forgive the description as I'm not up to date on the
current politically correct term) who comprise something like 13% of
the U.S. population commit more then 50% of homicides in the U.S.
Do you suppose that a study made in a site with a large percent of
Black residents might, just possible, be a tiny bit different then a
site with fewer, or even no, Blacks?

Again (and again!) at least one of the papers I cited compared households that were as similar as possible, _except_ for guns.
And anyway, what do you think we should do about blacks? Pretend they're a different species, so they don't count?
--
- Frank Krygowski