Alphecca: Moonbat Marta

February 20, 2006

Moonbat Marta

Apparently suffering from propaganda overload, Marta Cook writes in the Cavalier Daily:

Guns kill thousands of children every year in the United States. In fact, according to the Violence Policy Center, American children are more likely to be injured or killed by gunfire than children in any other industrialized nation. The Children's Defense Fund and National Center for Health Statistics report that 3,012 children or adolescents were killed by guns in a year. That translates to one child every three hours. These shocking statistics should make all of us stop and think. A father might buy a gun intending to protect his family, but the Brady Campaign reports that this gun would be 22 times more likely to kill unintentionally rather than in self-defense. Simply put, guns pose amuch greater threat to children than to burglars.

Virginia gun laws, or lack thereof, are ridiculous and nonsensical. A person can buy an assault weapon as easily as he can buy a rifle. Even more disturbing, child safety locks are not mandatory with the purchase of guns. According to the American Bar Association, more adolecents and children die from gunshot wounds than the combined death totals from all diseases in the United States. These locks can cost around $10, which would be a small price to pay to protect children.

Talk about pulling statistics out of your ass, Cook wants to rely on juggled numbers provided by the Brady Bunch and the VPC. Both of them, you know, consider a child to be anyone up to the age of 19-years-old. That is, people old enough to marry, serve in the armed forces, buy their own rifle. In point of fact, most of those deaths are from kids 16 and up and result from gang violence. Accidents or other deaths from firearms for children 14 and under are actually quite few.

Dave Kopel puts it into perspective:

How many children die in senseless gun accidents? One of America's leading gun control advocates, a physician, puts the figure at "almost 1,000 children" per year. The National Safety Council, however, reports a considerably lower figure. In 1988, 277 children under the age of 15 were killed by accidental firearms discharges. In 1990, according to the National Center for Health Statistics, the number fell to 236.

Most of the children who are involved in fatal accidents are older children. In 1990, the most recent year for which data are available, 34 children under the age of 5 died in gun accidents. Among children aged 5-9, there were 56 fatal gun accidents; and among children aged 10-14, 146 fatal accidents.

[...]

Compared to the risk of dying in a gun accident, a child aged 0-14 is four times more likely to drown, four times more likely to die in a fire, and 13 times more likely to die in an auto accident.

It is to be expected that accidents and other "man-made" factors would be leading causes of death for young persons. Persons aged 1-24 rarely die of natural causes, especially in a century where medicine has advanced so far. Accordingly, any cause of death in this age group - even if it occurs infrequently - may have a relatively high rank.

In any case, showing the particular ranking of a cause of injury is hardly the same as proving that the factor related to the injury should be outlawed or drastically restricted. Among children aged 5 to 9, the rate of reported dog bites is higher than the combined rate of reportable childhood diseases (such as measles). The fact does not by itself prove that dogs should be outlawed, or that the law should require that dogs always be locked up if children might come nearby.

In regards swimming pools, with all the safety regulations (permits, fencing, etc.) it's worth noting from a post of mine last year that The Arizona Star (their link no longer working) noted:

Standard summer companions in our desert climate, swimming pools can be deadlier for children than guns. A child is 100 times more likely to die in a swimming accident than in gunplay, writes Steven D. Levitt, University of Chicago economics professor and best-selling author.

Levitt analyzed child deaths from residential swimming pools and guns and found one child under 10 drowns annually for every 11,000 pools. By comparison, one child under 10 each year is killed by a gun for every 1 million guns, according to his research, outlined in a new book "Freakonomics: A Rogue Economist Explores the Hidden Side to Everything," which he co-wrote with journalist Stephen J. Dubner.

In part because they are so familiar, swimming pools are less frightening than guns, Levitt writes.

But the danger is clear - drowning is the leading cause of accidental death for children younger than 5 in Arizona and the second-leading cause of injury-related death nationally among children younger than 15.

Water kills an average of three children each year in Tucson and, even with proper fences, swimming lessons and caution, danger lurks.

What Moonbat Marta leaves out is that the number one cause of kid's deaths is the automobile. Maybe we should ban them -- do it for the kids! Getting back to her witless screed:

These wise men gave the right to own a gun to the people in order to maintain "a well regulated militia," which is "necessary for the security of a free State." The vast majority of gun owners today are not part of militias. Thus, the Second Amendment essentially is irrelevant to the question of whether or not stricter gun laws should be imposed. Americans cannot hide behind vague statements of the great men who wrote the Bill of Rights over 200 years ago. Misinterpreting and manipulating the Amendment obfuscates the spirit of the law meant to guide, not suffocate, the American people.

Furthermore, the individual freedoms guaranteed by the Bill of Rights are limited the minute a person's right to bear arms takes away another person's right to live. The endangerment of another person's life should make people question what is more important -- an arguably obsolete right, or making American streets, homes and schools safer.

The best way to make sure guns do not get into the wrong hands is to make sure they get into few, if any, hands...

So now the Second Amendment is an "obsolete right" and making our homes and streets safe is far more important. Again, cars kill far more people; what's more important? Safe streets or convenient transport? And driving a car isn't even a defined "right" in the Constitution.

Ughhh, I get sick reading such stuff. Feel free to continue the discussion while I head off to work. Hope I don't have an auto-accident on the way...

Posted by Jeff Soyer at February 20, 2006 07:11 AM

Comments

"These shocking statistics should make all of us stop and think. A father might buy a gun intending to protect his family, but the Brady Campaign reports that this gun would be 22 times more likely to kill unintentionally rather than in self-defense."

Statistics can't lie, can they? After all, statistics show that one out of every three anti-gunners are dishonest and four out of every six anti-gunners are just unable to deal with facts and logic. A stunning 87% are anti-gun because someone else made up their mind for them. Hey - pulling stats out of nowhere is much easier than research. I see why they like it!

"Simply put, guns pose amuch greater threat to children than to burglars."

Tell that to the father defending his family from some drug-induced thug who just broke into his house at 2am.

Posted by: Jay at February 20, 2006 10:27 AM

So if there are about a million people who use a firearm in self-defense in a year, and a gun is 22 times more likely to kill unintentionally rather than in self-defense, then we must have 22 million people a year killed accidentally...why have I never seen this statistic recorded anywhere...?
I am amazed that people actually believe this BS without even bothering to do any research. It just proves that they are pulling statistics from anywhere to shore up their preconceived beliefs.

Posted by: BobG at February 20, 2006 10:51 AM

I believe the Second Amendment is the shortest one in the entire Constitution. Nowhere does it state that only militia members have the right to bear arms. And yet, somehow, due to lefty dyslexia, many people are convinced that the words "the people" there do not mean the same as the same words anywhere else.

Posted by: Steve Skubinna at February 20, 2006 12:30 PM

I bet her brain fills up with white noise if she reads this site...

I sent her a photo of the Junior Service Rifle firing line at Camp Perry. That will give her sweet dreams.

Posted by: robert at February 20, 2006 12:53 PM

The editor at the Cav just asked me to quit sending him photos of juniors and women shooting at the National Matches. He said he was tossing them in his junk mail file.

Hehehehehehe.

I'm for declaring a Gunwa.

Posted by: robert at February 20, 2006 01:31 PM

Doctors: ( Including IHS )
(A) The number of physicians in the U.S. is 700,000.
(B) Accidental deaths caused by Physicians per year are 120,000.
(C) Accidental deaths per physician is 0.171.
Statistics courtesy of U.S. Dept of Health Human Services.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Now think about this:
Guns:
(A) The number of gun owners in the U.S. is 80,000,000. (80 million)
(B) The number of accidental gun deaths per year, all age groups,is 1,500.
(C) The number of accidental deaths per gun owner is .000188.
Statistics courtesy of FBI
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
So, statistically, doctors are approximately
9,000 times more dangerous than gun owners.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Remember, "Guns don't kill people, doctors do."
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
FACT: NOT EVERYONE HAS A GUN, BUT
ALMOST EVERYONE HAS AT LEAST ONE DOCTOR.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Please alert your friends to this alarming threat. We must ban doctors
before this gets completely out of hand!!!!!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Out of concern for the public at large, I have withheld the statistics on
lawyers for fear the shock would cause people to panic and seek medical attention

Posted by: albee at February 20, 2006 03:31 PM

Ever notice that these dire jeremiads against guns always make it sound as if the guns have somehow come to life on their own, and are floating around -- like the disembodied hand in those cheesy old horror movies -- killing people without anyone attached to them?

Guns---Boooo! Watch out the next time you see one floating by. The same goes for all those unmanned automobiles caused those accidents, and the swimming pools that simply gobble up children the way a flytrap catches bugs.

It really does seem like something out of The Twilight Zone. When will these hysterics come to their senses and recognize that PEOPLE kill people, but inanimate objects do not?

Posted by: Lori Heine at February 20, 2006 04:20 PM

My wife has decided she wants my S&W 642 (Airweight, hammerless .38). I'll probably get her the titanium version and keep my "old" gun - she carries enough around as it is. So now I have to get her enrolled in a "carry" class, then it's down to the Sheriff's office for the paperwork. Thank you, Colorado, for going to "shall issue". Of course, the cartoon frenzy had absolutley nothing to due with this. (Actually, it probably didn't - she's not paranoid, just aware that she's in and out of Denver, traveling through some suspect neighborhoods at all hours.)

Posted by: OldeForce at February 21, 2006 02:51 AM

Dealing with a person like Marta feels like trying to coaxing a bigot out of her racism or homophobia. It's tempting just leave them to their own inner craziness and get on with paying the bills and walking our walk through the world.

Life is it's own therapy.

Posted by: robert at February 21, 2006 11:10 AM

If you want to get really stupid about the whole "other objects cause deaths, so let's ban them" thing, consider this one:

You are capable of beating a person to death using your fists and feet. So, since there are quite a few cases of assault without weapons each year, shouldn't we impose mandatory amputations of all citizens, with the exception of police and military?

Posted by: Mordrach at February 21, 2006 04:34 PM

I hope those who read the previous realize it is pure sarcasm...

Posted by: Mordrach at February 21, 2006 04:35 PM

Mordach, Yup, noted sarcasm. With sarcasm off, I believe the FBI records show deaths by fists and/or feet beats (sorry for the pun) number of deaths by gun. Jeff?

Posted by: OldeForce at February 21, 2006 08:51 PM

I'm too lazy to look it up but then we'd have to ban hands and feet, too. Eating or going to the bathroom would be a true bitch...

Posted by: Jeff Soyer at February 22, 2006 01:51 PM

Note: Comments close down on posts after seven days and then
the comment input form disappears.

Your comments are welcome. You don't need to enter a URL and you don't need a "valid" email address, either. Note though that MT Blacklist is installed to flag suspiciously spam-like strings. Unfortunately, because of the bastard spammers, the strings "google.com" and "yahoo.com" (even in your email address) are currently banned as well. So are strings such as "cialis" (a common spam) which rules out words such as "socialism". Try putting a hyphan in a word like that.

By Golly, you're reading an archived post. Click Here to head to the main page and read current stuff...

Into science fiction? Check out my group blog novel, Colony: Alchibah.
See the reader's guide there for first-timer tips.

Alphecca

Check it out: My group sci-fi blog novel: Colony: Alchibah

February 20, 2006

Moonbat Marta

By Golly, you're reading an archived post. Click Here to head to the main page and read current stuff...

Check it out:

My group sci-fi blog novel:

Colony: Alchibah