[WAGCEVP]

Reducing Firearm Injury and Death: A Public Health Sourcebook on Guns

Two experts in public health and injury control, Trudy A. Karlson and
Stephen W. Hargarten, explain how changes in the design, technology, and
marketing of firearms can lead to reductions in the number of injuries and
fatalities. The book teaches basic facts about guns and gun injuries, and
by reframing the problem of firearms as a public health issue, offers hope
for saving lives.Please visit the link below for ordering and pricing
information.

http://rutgerspress.rutgers.edu/acatalog/__Reducing_Firearm_Injury_and_Death_575.html

[Old Fuff]

Me thinks’ this is some more anti-gun liberal bull-crap. A “safe” firearm is one that is made so complicated that it can’t be used quickly in an emergency, and the ultimate solution is to “reduce” the number of people who can legally own them. As usual they play with the numbers, digging up statistics that are used out of context and sometimes never verified.

The society they dream of exists right now - in the Great Britain - where legal ownership of guns by the general population has been eliminated. They should go there and see how well the system works.

[labgrade]

Didn't read the linked article, nor did need to (likely wuz drivel).

From a guy who really can't see the sense in a 1911-style grip safety, anything more complicated than engaging brain first seems so nonsensical as to be wasted design flaws.

As an intellectal exercize (pre-reading into their "though process"), I'd guess that even though someone finally "passed the test" to engage a vehicle's steering wheel ..... :confused: .... there would never again be another traffic accident .... ?

Are not mechanical devices ultimately under the control of the human that possess them?

I know ....

[glocksman]

Hmm...

From the linked page:
SOURCEBOOK SAMPLES

There are nearly 40,000 gun-related deaths and more than 100,000 injuries annually in the U.S.


When was this book published?

In 1990, there were 37,155 deaths (nonfatal injury stats not available for that year from WISQARS).

In 2000, there were 28,663 deaths and 75,865 injuries.

If it was published in the early 90's, I can see where the author's statement comes from. If it was written more recently, then they're playing the same game of handpicking statistics.

[4v50 Gary]

The public health perspective does not take into account the deliberate abuse of firearms by the criminal elements who are intent of "capping" their foeman (or foewoman). That is a law enforcement issue and not a public health one. Public Health $ should be spent on cancer, MS, heart or lung, HIV, etc.

[labgrade]

I'd disagree, & agree, Gary.

Many of the "legal shoots" are not, merely based on "sworn testimony of reliable witnesses."

"Reliable" seems to have many more examples, depending upon who was watching at the time AND the gravity their testimony holds.
Had an incident (posted later?) regards cops "surprised at night where I
was charge with a plethora of weapons charges + obstruction ....)

(sorry, my "insert" key seems to have taken a dump here .... )

May be I'm blathering & should just post.

Point is, none of their offerings would have prevented anything.

A "smart gun" is still alllowed to be fired by its owner & if its owne ris unaware of The Big 4, well, there's likely to be a mishap.

[Standing Wolf]

...reframing the problem of firearms as a public health issue...

Wrong! It's a constitutional issue. The leftist extremists want to recast the entire so-called "debate" in their terms; they can't, however, alter the fact that the Second Amendment guarantees an individual right to keep and bear arms.

[Brian Dale]

Agree with Wolf. Think of quarantines for tuberculosis. No accusation of a crime; therefore no "due process" rules to follow. Create a misconception that guns are like pathogenic bacteria, and the panic they hope to create will sweep aside that pesky Bill of Rights. "Public Health," indeed.

No sale.