Results 1 to 25 of 25

Thread: Virginia Gun Deaths Outpace Motor Vehicle Deaths, Anti Group Claims

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Pacific Northwest
    Posts
    623

    Virginia Gun Deaths Outpace Motor Vehicle Deaths, Anti Group Claims

    Link

    They are getting their data from the CDC's WISQARS system for 2009, and using that data to claim that there needs to be federal consumer safety regulation of firearms.

    Here's the problem: While, on the face of it, they are right that there were more firearm deaths than motor vehicle deaths, their proposed solution wouldn't help that in any significant fashion.

    Let's look at the breakdown of the data:

    Firearm-related deaths
    Total: 836
    Unintentional: 13
    Homicide: 272
    Legal Intervention: 16
    Suicide: 527
    Undetermined: 0

    Motor Vehicle-related deaths
    Total: 827
    Unintentional: 826
    Homicide: 0
    Legal Intervention: undefined
    Suicide: 0
    Undetermined: 0

    I don't know why there is a 1-death discrepancy between the reported total motor vehicle deaths and the sum of all the listed categories.

    This breakdown (which you can do for yourself) shows how flawed their "study" is, and how it is unrelated to their conclusions. First of all, if you remove the "Legal Intervention" deaths (as they are presumably in the public interest, being ruled justified shootings by police officers), the number of firearm deaths immediately drops below the number of motor vehicle deaths. However, the number is still not properly comparable.

    For their conclusion (that federal consumer product safety regulations should apply to firearms) to hold up, we need to look only at the unintentional deaths, as consumer product safety regulations don't cover intentional uses of products. In that, we find a massive difference (13 compared to 826). Moreover, most of those deaths are not attributable to flaws in the product itself, but to operator errors. (Admittedly, the same would hold true for motor vehicles; most accidents are caused by operator error, not product safety issues.)

    Since they released this report yesterday, I expect we'll be hearing more about it. I just wanted to preemptively provide the raw data that they used so we all have the data to refute the inevitable claims.
    Last edited by grylnsmn; 05-23-2012 at 11:10 AM.
    Alma 43:47 - "And again, the Lord has said that: Ye shall defend your families even unto bloodshed...."
    Self defense isn't just a good idea, it's a commandment.

  2. #2
    Regular Member mk4's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    VA
    Posts
    548
    it's starting to get picked up by the media: http://www.vpc.org/inthenews.htm
    “For life, liberty and Little Lizzie.” - John Connor (2005)

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Newport News, VA
    Posts
    47
    Quote Originally Posted by grylnsmn View Post
    For their conclusion (that federal consumer product safety regulations should apply to firearms) to hold up, we need to look only at the unintentional deaths, as consumer product safety regulations don't cover intentional uses of products. In that, we find a massive difference (13 compared to 826).
    I try and keep out of politics, but I agree with that statement. I believe it may be common to count homocides because we all know that laws prevent crimes so more are always needed (/sarcasm). However, like suicides, a person determined to murder another person (or themselves in suicide cases) will always find a method to do so. There will never be a law to prevent either from occuring much to their chagrin. I think it's pretty rare a person hops in a vehicle with the intention of causing a massive pile up and/or mass murder via vehicular manslaughter or whatever, so comparing apples to apples would be comparing accidents to accidents. In that regard, their argument fails basic logic and/or common sense.

  4. #4
    Campaign Veteran roscoe13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Catlett, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    1,134
    Quote Originally Posted by chammer View Post
    . . . their argument fails basic logic and/or common sense.
    The anti's arguments always do...

    Roscoe
    "The very atmosphere of firearms anywhere and everywhere restrains evil interference - they deserve a place of honor with all that's good." - George Washington

  5. #5
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705
    These guys (VPC) are so pathetic, it's laughable - except the general population is THAT gullible, so it's not. They're trying to make a safety point when their own numbers show that virtually ALL car deaths are unintentional, while only 13 out of 836 gun deaths are. The rest, whatever the unfortunate reasons may be, were not unintentional, so not safety related at all.

    Following this logic, we should examine the method of all suicides and conduct safety studies on the means used... It seems to me that most suicides are overdoses or hanging, maybe CO poisoning... how do you make legitimate drugs or household items such as belts or ropes "safe?" Such money would be much better spent on mental health issues, not trying to eliminate firearms.

    We need to keep our eyes out for Virginia news media to pick this up since Virginia is one of the ten states in the study. Coherent and well thought out comments that respond the articles will go a long way to dispel this rubbish.

    TFred

  6. #6
    Regular Member The Wolfhound's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Henrico, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    697

    What a bunch of loons!

    Comparing the deliberate behavior of shooting (murders and suicides) to the unplanned incidence of crashes is low even for these bottom feeders. Only accidental shootings vs crashes are an actual comparative match.
    Appleseed, Virginia State Coordinator
    Are you a Rifleman yet?
    http://appleseedinfo.org

  7. #7
    Regular Member paramedic70002's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Franklin, VA, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    1,448
    I believe that Congress has prohibited the CPSC from regulating firearms, I guess that is what all the fuss is about. I'd love to see how they would make a product LESS dangerous that by design is lethal when used properly.

    One BIG reason why the stats fall as they do, is the engineering of cars to make them MORE SAFE as they are NOT INTENDED to be lethal.
    "Each worker carried his sword strapped to his side." Nehemiah 4:18

    Guns Save Lives. Paramedics Save Lives. But...
    Paramedics With Guns Scare People!

  8. #8
    Regular Member Dreamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Grennsboro NC
    Posts
    5,358
    The Violence Policy Center is headed up by Josh Sugarmann, and is headquartered in Washington DC.

    Josh Sugarmann has a Class 03 Federal Firearms License (dealer).

    His FFL Number 1-54-000-01-8C-00725.

    HE has had this license for decades, and it is fraudulent and felonious. BATFE requires that Class 03 FFLs meet certain requirements, one of which is that you must operate your dealership in a location that is zoned for firearms sales.

    VPC's HQ is not zoned as such, therefore he falsified his applications and renewal forms.

    Josh Sugarmann is a serial compulsive liar, and has committed multiple federal offenses in obtaining and renewing his FFL. He should be in prison.

    If Josh Sugarmann told me the sky was blue, I would go outside to check...
    It is our cause to dispel the foggy thinking which avoids hard decisions in the delusion that a world of conflict will somehow mysteriously resolve itself into a world of harmony, if we just don't rock the boat or irritate the forces of aggression—and this is hogwash."
    --Barry Goldwater, 1964

  9. #9
    Accomplished Advocate peter nap's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    13,580
    Well I certainly think Josh has a point. Congress should pass a law making it illegal to commit suicide with a firearm. That'll take the skew out of the numbers.

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    ripley wv
    Posts
    144
    The last man to hang for a crime in WV was John Morgan, Dec. 1897, he is buried within cite of my home. He killed Pfost/Green family with an axe just a few miles up the road. No gun needed. The problem with studies is the way they are studied, I.E. the mind set you have to inturpet the numbers before you even start the study. Also how many homocides were commited in self defence, weather homicide is committed with malice or in self defence it is still "HOMICIDE"
    Last edited by eamelhorn; 05-24-2012 at 08:42 AM.
    I am not a gun nut, nor am I a nut with a gun
    I simply rufuse to be a helpless victim, I may be unable to stop myself from being a victim but at least I wont be helpless

  11. #11
    Accomplished Advocate user's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Northern Piedmont of Virginia
    Posts
    2,373

    limiting stochastic deaths

    I agree that something needs to be done. First, the big preventable number is homicide, and the answer to that is more guns and better training for the just-plain-folks, so they can defend themselves against personal attacks. And secondly, effective speed limit enforcement, because most people don't realize that the function of a speed limit is not to control speed but stopping distance in an area determined by engineering studies to require that vehicles be able to stop within a certain distance (on average).
    Daniel L. Hawes - 540 347 2430 - HTTP://www.VirginiaLegalDefense.com

    By the way, nothing I say on this website as "user" should be taken as either advertising for attorney services or legal advice, merely personal opinion. Everyone having a question regarding the application of law to the facts of their situation should seek the advice of an attorney competent in the subject matter of the issues presented and licensed to practice in the relevant state.

  12. #12
    Campaign Veteran roscoe13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Catlett, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    1,134
    Quote Originally Posted by user View Post
    And secondly, effective speed limit enforcement, because most people don't realize that the function of a speed limit is not to control speed but stopping distance in an area determined by engineering studies to require that vehicles be able to stop within a certain distance (on average).
    That's how it's SUPPOSED to work. Unfortunately, all to often it's based more on the influence of some politically connected individuals that don't want people driving past their house "too fast"...

    Roscoe
    "The very atmosphere of firearms anywhere and everywhere restrains evil interference - they deserve a place of honor with all that's good." - George Washington

  13. #13
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    over 500 suicides ... thats sad .. and the majority of the deaths....

  14. #14
    Regular Member papa bear's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    mayberry, nc
    Posts
    2,258
    well the obvious conclusion is to ban all cars, where is the Coalition Against Car Violence


    i think the OP was right in the fact that there is no product liability, it is operators error
    Luke 22:36 ; 36Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one.

    "guns are like a Parachute, if you don't have one when you need it, you will not need one again"
    - unknown

    i you call a CHP a CCW then you are really stupid. period.

  15. #15
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705
    Quote Originally Posted by user View Post
    I agree that something needs to be done. First, the big preventable number is homicide, and the answer to that is more guns and better training for the just-plain-folks, so they can defend themselves against personal attacks. And secondly, effective speed limit enforcement, because most people don't realize that the function of a speed limit is not to control speed but stopping distance in an area determined by engineering studies to require that vehicles be able to stop within a certain distance (on average).
    So if you buy a really sporty car with great brakes... you should be able to speed... as long as you can stop in that certain distance...

    TFred

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Pacific Northwest
    Posts
    623
    Quote Originally Posted by papa bear View Post
    well the obvious conclusion is to ban all cars, where is the Coalition Against Car Violence


    i think the OP was right in the fact that there is no product liability, it is operators error
    I wouldn't say that there should be no product liability (for either firearms or automobiles). To use a recent example, if a firearm has a design flaw that allows it to fire without the trigger being pulled, I would call that a product liability issue. (Yes, I know that you should always practice muzzle control, but that doesn't necessarily prevent injuries from ricochets or property damage from a discharge.) Similarly, if your car has a design flaw that causes the brakes to fail, it is also a product liability issue.

    However, I would say that the vast majority of accidental deaths from both firearms and automobiles are caused by operator errors, rather than product liability issues. Is it 100%? No, but probably in the high 90s (on the close order of 98 or 99%).
    Alma 43:47 - "And again, the Lord has said that: Ye shall defend your families even unto bloodshed...."
    Self defense isn't just a good idea, it's a commandment.

  17. #17
    Regular Member half_life1052's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    271
    Quote Originally Posted by grylnsmn View Post
    Link

    They are getting their data from the CDC's WISQARS system for 2009, and using that data to claim that there needs to be federal consumer safety regulation of firearms.

    Here's the problem: While, on the face of it, they are right that there were more firearm deaths than motor vehicle deaths, their proposed solution wouldn't help that in any significant fashion.

    Let's look at the breakdown of the data:

    Firearm-related deaths
    Total: 836
    Unintentional: 13
    Homicide: 272
    Legal Intervention: 16
    Suicide: 527
    Undetermined: 0

    Motor Vehicle-related deaths
    Total: 827
    Unintentional: 826
    Homicide: 0
    Legal Intervention: undefined
    Suicide: 0
    Undetermined: 0

    I don't know why there is a 1-death discrepancy between the reported total motor vehicle deaths and the sum of all the listed categories.

    This breakdown (which you can do for yourself) shows how flawed their "study" is, and how it is unrelated to their conclusions. First of all, if you remove the "Legal Intervention" deaths (as they are presumably in the public interest, being ruled justified shootings by police officers), the number of firearm deaths immediately drops below the number of motor vehicle deaths. However, the number is still not properly comparable.

    For their conclusion (that federal consumer product safety regulations should apply to firearms) to hold up, we need to look only at the unintentional deaths, as consumer product safety regulations don't cover intentional uses of products. In that, we find a massive difference (13 compared to 826). Moreover, most of those deaths are not attributable to flaws in the product itself, but to operator errors. (Admittedly, the same would hold true for motor vehicles; most accidents are caused by operator error, not product safety issues.)

    Since they released this report yesterday, I expect we'll be hearing more about it. I just wanted to preemptively provide the raw data that they used so we all have the data to refute the inevitable claims.
    I have a problem with the figures. According to other sources we have death rates in the thousands in the teen-aged driver segment. Hell, we have had 22 fatal accidents in the Lyncburg area in the last few months. How are these figures derived? Are they expressed in fatalities per 100k people?

  18. #18
    Regular Member papa bear's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    mayberry, nc
    Posts
    2,258
    Quote Originally Posted by grylnsmn View Post
    I wouldn't say that there should be no product liability (for either firearms or automobiles). To use a recent example, if a firearm has a design flaw that allows it to fire without the trigger being pulled, I would call that a product liability issue. (Yes, I know that you should always practice muzzle control, but that doesn't necessarily prevent injuries from ricochets or property damage from a discharge.) Similarly, if your car has a design flaw that causes the brakes to fail, it is also a product liability issue.

    However, I would say that the vast majority of accidental deaths from both firearms and automobiles are caused by operator errors, rather than product liability issues. Is it 100%? No, but probably in the high 90s (on the close order of 98 or 99%).
    agreed, even with your example. it still is human error

    you must take hold of the firearm
    you must not clean it very well
    you must put a round in the chamber
    and last but not least, you must have it pointing toward someone
    Luke 22:36 ; 36Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one.

    "guns are like a Parachute, if you don't have one when you need it, you will not need one again"
    - unknown

    i you call a CHP a CCW then you are really stupid. period.

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Central VA
    Posts
    49

    Apples & Oranges

    I have a number of issues, having been a Paramedic for 20 years I saw many a suicides by car. They are almost never reported as such unless the driver leaves a note on the front seat, it is hard to prove. Those who drink and drive should also be placed in a separate category as the use of drugs or alcohol and then driving is an intentional act. Just as homicides are an intentional act by a criminal and a misuse of the gun, knife, ax, or other object.

    All they did with this study is pick their apple and then go hunting for an orange the same size. How many people died from heart attacks, cancer etc. The must have apart time job with the federal bureau of useless information.
    Last edited by Docgmt; 05-26-2012 at 02:50 PM.

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Pacific Northwest
    Posts
    623
    Quote Originally Posted by papa bear View Post
    agreed, even with your example. it still is human error

    you must take hold of the firearm
    you must not clean it very well
    you must put a round in the chamber
    and last but not least, you must have it pointing toward someone
    That's why I said "Yes, I know that you should always practice muzzle control, but that doesn't necessarily prevent injuries from ricochets or property damage from a discharge."

    A defect that allows the firearm to go off without the trigger being pulled is still a defect in the firearm. Yes, it can be exacerbated by human error, but that doesn't change the underlying defect that allowed the gun to go off.
    Alma 43:47 - "And again, the Lord has said that: Ye shall defend your families even unto bloodshed...."
    Self defense isn't just a good idea, it's a commandment.

  21. #21
    Regular Member F350's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    The High Plains of Wyoming
    Posts
    1,030
    I doubt "they" keep figures on this but..... What would the firearms death rate be if you excluded certain racial minority drug related killings?!?!?!

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Falls Church, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    392
    Quote Originally Posted by grylnsmn View Post
    A defect that allows the firearm to go off without the trigger being pulled is still a defect in the firearm. Yes, it can be exacerbated by human error, but that doesn't change the underlying defect that allowed the gun to go off.
    I have to disagree, "the rules" make it immaterial whether the firearm itself is "safe" or not. If the firearm is under the control of a responsible person, then it doesn't matter whether it will spontaneously fire or not. Not "exacerbated" by human error, but caused by human error.

    Just as you can say that any given firearm is (potentially) loaded, it is equally as true that that firearm is (potentially) defective. Thus, every firearm should be under the control of a responsible person at all times. Please don't think I am preaching, I have been irresponsible lots of times, I am sure I will be again.

    We're going to get this safety thing, and responsibility thing figured out eventually, but until then "direction" matters a whole lot, maybe more than anything else. As in, "make sure your automobile is always pointed in a safe direction."

    Guns don't kill people, irresponsibility kills people.

  23. #23
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705
    Quote Originally Posted by architect View Post
    I have to disagree, "the rules" make it immaterial whether the firearm itself is "safe" or not. If the firearm is under the control of a responsible person, then it doesn't matter whether it will spontaneously fire or not. Not "exacerbated" by human error, but caused by human error.
    I think we're starting to nit-pick to the point of ridiculous. (Not directed solely at architect.)

    The bold statement above is simply not true. Unless you happen to be at a shooting range, it is much more likely than not that you will be in a place where there is no safe direction in which to fire the gun. If you are around people, you can't point it in any horizontal direction. If you are standing on a hard surface, you can't point it down. And nowhere other than perhaps rural Kansas farmland or the desert far west is it safe to shoot any gun in the air.

    Safety is the total of all the parts. Nobody would consider carrying around a gun that was prone to fire on its own, no more than anyone would want to hang around with a moron who made a habit of pointing his perfectly functional (safety wise) gun at things he should not.

    TFred

  24. #24
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Pacific Northwest
    Posts
    623
    Quote Originally Posted by TFred View Post
    Safety is the total of all the parts. Nobody would consider carrying around a gun that was prone to fire on its own, no more than anyone would want to hang around with a moron who made a habit of pointing his perfectly functional (safety wise) gun at things he should not.
    This is almost exactly my point.

    If my gun has a safety defect, (for example, I hit a bump on the road and it causes my gun to go off in its holster on my hip without the trigger being pulled*) it's reasonable to hold the manufacturer responsible. As a firearms community, we should welcome regulations or legislation that holds the manufacturer responsible for actual defects that could make a gun unsafe. Personally, I have no more problem with that sort of regulation than I do with holding any other manufacturer responsible for the safety of their products. That is the purpose of consumer product safety laws and regulations.

    However, the VPC is advocating something very different than that. They are trying to claim that those same regulations (that are supposed to protect against issues with product design) should be used to restrict guns from actually doing what they are designed to do. That is an abuse of regulatory power.

    * Alternately, consider a firearm whose design makes it easy to fail and slam fire and empty the magazine. That is another clear safety defect.
    Alma 43:47 - "And again, the Lord has said that: Ye shall defend your families even unto bloodshed...."
    Self defense isn't just a good idea, it's a commandment.

  25. #25
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    , Virginia, USA
    Posts
    387
    Quote Originally Posted by roscoe13 View Post
    That's how it's SUPPOSED to work. Unfortunately, all to often it's based more on the influence of some politically connected individuals that don't want people driving past their house "too fast"...

    Roscoe
    Which explains the 45 MPH limit on 28 south of Manassas when 55 MPH would seem more reasonable. However, I tend to believe that the local BOS view setting odd speed limits as an opportunity for additional revenue and use safety as the excuse.

    As to the OP, everyone formulates the numbers to fit their agenda and VPC is not opposed to even reformulating the math to fit theirs. Unfortunately, it always seems that the media sides with the anti-freedom method of calculations and results and never question the data they were provided by the offending organizations. It does beg the question, how do pro-Liberty groups get their data accepted by the media?
    I often wounder, when considering that facts don't work, if we too should start lying about and emotionalizing the data... would we get unquestioned coverage as well!
    Last edited by Toad; 05-27-2012 at 05:29 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •