...death toll from shootings is nearly double that of alcohol-related auto fatalities

Status
Not open for further replies.
cordex - Just for future reference, CDCs legal intervention category does not include justifiable homicide. Since they only classify at the hospital or morgue, the person doing the classification doesn't know what the ultimate outcome of the investigation will be.

Legal intervention shootings are any conducted by law enforcement or military, regardless of whether they are eventually found to be good shoots or not. Likewise, under CDC stats, all justifiable homicides by Joe Citizen are counted as homicides. Here is a copy of my discussion with the CDC on the subject:


I assume you're talking about the difference between Homicides and
Legal Interventions (written as Legal Int. on the reports). Legal
Intervention is defined as the following:

Injuries inflicted by the police or other law-enforcing agents,
including military on duty, in the course of arresting or attemptint to
arrest lawbreakers, suppressing disturbances, maintaining order, and
other legal action. Includes legal exectutions.

Homicides are defined as:

Injuries inflicted by another person with intent to injure or kill,
by any means. Excludes injuries due to legal intervention (defined
above) and operations of war.

I hope that answers your question. Let me know if I can be of further
assistance.

XXXXX

Computer Specialist
Office of Statistics and Programming
National Center for Injury Prevention and Control
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

From the definitions below, there is no distinction between justifiable
homicide and an illegal homicide. The person who's filling out the death
certificate does not wait for the judicial system to rule on the case before
filling out the cause of death. The pertinant detail is who the person
who does the killing is. So justifiable homicide by citizens would fall
under homicides and not legal interventions.

If this is not clear, let me know.

XXXXX
 
Another thing to question is the whole premise of comparing one source of death to another. This country has a screwed up way of looking at mortality. We get bent out of shape by things like SARS that kill less than 1% of infections and ignore much more dangerous things. We accept the highway carnage as the price of doing business. Well, maybe some of us consider the few accidental deaths from firearms an acceptable risk for the greater good of retaining our civil rights.
 
28,913 people were killed by guns in the U.S., while 15,778 died in car crashes involving drinking.
I'm alternately amused and annoyed by the usual choice of words when this type of comparison is made. On the one hand, they blame the gun, the inanimate object; on the other hand they either blame a person, the drunk driver, or the person's actions, his drinking and driving.

This isn't even an apples-and-oranges comparison, it's more of a kumquat-and-screwdriver comparison . . . it's just intellectually dishonest and borderline irrational to lump an inanimate object in with people and their actions as if there was some equivalence.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top