Honestly, whats more dangerous


PDA






DontBurnMyFlag
April 25, 2005, 11:18 PM
Alcohol or Guns? Clearly a gun can kill you in a second, but firearms are not nearly as abused as alcohol. Think about it, the majority of Americans consume alcohol, many more abuse it. Firearms deaths are miniscule percentage of people killed in America. How many people die of alcohol poisoning, car crashes and fights/murders that are alcohol related. Its just a thought that I think the American public should chew on for a while.

If you enjoyed reading about "Honestly, whats more dangerous" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Nehemiah Scudder
April 25, 2005, 11:34 PM
90,000 people die per year from going to the hospital and getting an infection.

That's rediculous, yet not many people are upset about that. Unless you've had a relative die from it. Which, I think is why people are upset about guns.

g56
April 25, 2005, 11:41 PM
Alcohol kills more people than guns.

Doctors mistakes kill more people than guns, which explains why the doctors are trying to change the subject and ban guns.

AnthonyRSS
April 26, 2005, 12:01 AM
Neither is dangerous, really. Fireworks- those are dangerous. Abuse of anything is dangerous, but does that make the item itself dangerous?

Mikul
April 26, 2005, 11:13 AM
Guns do not impair the decision-making processes of people. Alcohol does. Okay, maybe a pretty gun in a store will make you spend money that you know you shouldn't, but that doesn't count. Alcohol will make certain people do violent things that they wouldn't do if they were sober.

kfranz
April 26, 2005, 11:42 AM
Both are inatimate objects and pose no danger in and of themselves. The abuse of either is where the danger lies. The amount of danger posed by abusing either is entirely dependent on the individual doing the abusing.

redneck2
April 26, 2005, 11:48 AM
Neither alcohol nor firearms kill anyone. When was the last time you saw a bottle of whisky pick up a knife and stab someone? Questions like this play into the liberal's hands...blame the object. Then sue the person that made the object

Blame the person instead.

Gunnutz13
April 26, 2005, 11:50 AM
Subject: Doctors vs. Guns

Get a load of these statistics. Looks like the gun banners are
after the wrong people.


Doctors:

(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.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>


Guns:

(A) The number of gun owners in the U.S. is 80,000,000.

(Yes, that's 80 million..)

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Accidental gun deaths per year, all age groups, is 1,500.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

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.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

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.



Gunnutz13 ... concerned citizen ( and gun owner ) :evil:

petrel800
April 26, 2005, 11:52 AM
Interesting question, because both have virtues and dangers.

A gun can be used in a self destructive manner (for crime) or as a tool to save lives (defensive situation).

Alcohol can be used in a self destructive manner (alcoholics) or as a tool to save lives (disinfectant).

What it all comes down to is who is the individual using it and what is their intention. It is the individual that determines what is dangerous.

Gordon Fink
April 26, 2005, 11:54 AM
It’s all about the abuse. Doctors who abuse alcohol while armed are especially dangerous. :D

~G. Fink

benEzra
April 26, 2005, 11:59 AM
In terms of raw statistics, alcohol abuse probably costs several times as many lives per year as gun homicides. Especially when you consider that the majority of homicides (IIRC) and many suicides are committed under the influence of alcohol, not to mention other violent crimes (rape, battery, etc.). Do be aware that the NHTSA's "alcohol-related traffic deaths" statistic is pretty bogus, though (if a sober driver causes a multi-car pileup in which 6 people are killed, and one of the victims had a BAC of 0.02, all six deaths are "alcohol related" in NHTSA parlance, if I understand correctly). The CDC says 100,000 deaths/yr from alcohol, but the NHTSA numbers inflate that quite a bit over the true total.

Having said that, I don't support alcohol prohibition, though.

Justin
April 26, 2005, 12:00 PM
It's not a matter of which object/consumable/activity can be linked to more deaths. It's a matter of how much money you can whip up for your cause (and your pocketbook.)

Nobody listens to The Women's Christian Temperance Union (http://www.wctu.org/) anymore because their cause is passé and won't get any facetime on Mtv, FOX Nooze, or CSPAN where people can be whipped into such a frenzy that they're willling to open their wallets for The Cause.

Gun control, on the other hand, means you're hip and with it. Spouting off in support of gun control allows you to posture (hopefully in a public place, ideally on television) for a greater good. After all, you should donate some money, for the sake of the children.

:rolleyes:

svtruth
April 26, 2005, 12:54 PM
Always remember there was a time when possession of alcohol was prohibited by constitutional amendment.

Standing Wolf
April 26, 2005, 01:16 PM
Both are inatimate objects and pose no danger in and of themselves. The abuse of either is where the danger lies. The amount of danger posed by abusing either is entirely dependent on the individual doing the abusing.

Oh, fine! Go ahead and inject a note of intelligent rationality into what should have been a shouting match. See if I care!

Always remember there was a time when possession of alcohol was prohibited by constitutional amendment.

Well, yeah, but we had little or no organized crime in America before Prohibition, so it wasn't a total loss.

Smurfslayer
April 26, 2005, 03:06 PM
for both alcohol, and guns, there is "use" and there is "abuse".

Using either one is perfectly legitimate.
Abusing either one often has tragic results.

Henry Bowman
April 26, 2005, 03:52 PM
There are some parallels, but it's an apples-to-oranges comparison.

Just for the sake of argument...
I'm trying to think of how one could use alcohol to intentionally harm someone else. Even though the use is intentional (drinking), the harm (DUI crash) is negligent. If one wanted to head-on a van full of nuns and babies, they could just do so without using alcohol.

I guess you could douse someone with rum and set them on fire. Following the lead of the Brady Bunch, the WCTU would sue Baccarti

kfranz
April 26, 2005, 03:59 PM
Oh, fine! Go ahead and inject a note of intelligent rationality into what should have been a shouting match. See if I care!

Sorry, my bad. I'll try harder in the future. :)

If you enjoyed reading about "Honestly, whats more dangerous" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!