Gun in Home Hikes Gunshot Death Probability

Status
Not open for further replies.

2dogs

Member
Joined
Dec 25, 2002
Messages
1,865
Location
the city
journal Annals of Internal Medicine.

I think they spelled "anus" wrong.:evil:


http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tm.../hl_hsn/guninhomehikesgunshotdeathprobability

Gun in Home Hikes Gunshot Death Probability

Tue Jun 10, 7:03 PM ET Add Health - HealthDay to My Yahoo!



(HealthDay is the new name for HealthScoutNews.)



TUESDAY, June 10 (HealthDayNews) -- At least one statistical study now confirms a popular belief: Keeping a gun in your home greatly increases the likelihood that you'll die from a gunshot wound.a study in the June issue of the journal Annals of Internal Medicine.


The study by the Violence Prevention Research Group at the University of California at Los Angeles appears in the June issue of the journal Annals of Internal Medicine.


It found that people who have guns in their homes were almost twice as likely to die in a gun-related homicide and 16 times more likely to use a gun to commit suicide than people who don't have guns in their homes.


Handguns accounted for 40 per cent of all domestic homicides and a third of all suicides, the study found.


The study compared 1,720 homicide victims and 1,959 suicide victims over age 18 with other American adults.


"Keeping guns at home is dangerous for adults regardless of age, sex, or race," study author Douglas J. Wiebe says in a news release.


"Our findings suggest that, when violence occurs and a gun is accessible, the gun may be selected for use over a weapon that is less lethal. That is particularly significant in terms of suicide and domestic violence," Wiebe says.


This study supports widely-debated studies published a decade ago in the New England Journal of Medicine (news - web sites) that also linked the presence of a gun in the home to higher rates of suicide and murder.


The U.S. National Institute of Justice says that there are firearms in 1 in every 3 households in the U.S., which works out to a total of nearly 200 million guns. In any 24-hour period, more than 160 people are treated for gunshot wounds at U.S. hospital emergency rooms.


More information


Here's where you can learn more about the dangers of firearms.
 
Riding in an automobile increases your probability of being killed or seriously injured in an auto accident.

The difference is that they own automobiles, we own guns.
 
The U.S. National Institute of Justice says that there are firearms in 1 in every 3 households in the U.S., which works out to a total of nearly 200 million guns.
So there are 600 million homes in the united States? If this is indicative of their analytical skills, I don't care to read the rest of their tripe. :rolleyes:

TC
TFL Survivor
 
The study by the Violence Prevention Research Group at the University of California at Los Angeles...

Yeah, and the Nazi party used to publish studies on the racial inferiority of Jews, too. You'd think the leftist extremist anti-Second Amendment bigots could at least come up with an occasional new lie.
 
My flippant response for the day: A shocking new academic study has just confirmed a popular belief that homes without pools have far fewer drowning deaths than homes with pools.

Speaking of that, can anyone cite the ratio that drowning deaths in household objects (tubs, buckets, pools) outnumber shooting deaths? It's significant, IIRC.
 
I think there was a thread on this a couple of weeks ago.

My favorite part of the "study" was that they admitted that they couldn't even verify that firearms were actually kept in the homes included in the data.

Makes you wonder how they came to that conclusion, huh?:banghead: :barf:
 
The study compared 1,720 homicide victims and 1,959 suicide victims over age 18 with other American adults.
OK, this is what I was asking about in this thread.

How can you compare:

Set A (deaths) vs set B (non deaths)

to make a claim about

Set C (guns owners) vs Set D (non gun owners)?

This is the umpteenth "study" I've seen over the years that uses this method. What valid statistical whichamacallit do they use to make this jump?
 
Handguns accounted for 40 per cent of all domestic homicides and a third of all suicides, the study found.
If I shoot a burglar in my house, is that classified as a domestic homicide?
If not, then what is the meaning of "domestic homicides.":fire:
I notice it only accounted for 1/3rd of the suicides. The question to be asked is, how many commited suicide by a method other than with a firearm, when there was a firearm available in the house?:what:
Another question not asked, nor answered, is, how many committed suicide with a firearm, when there was no firearms available in their home?
 
sounds like an Onion article

It is amazing there isn't someone from the the high road killed everyday.

I wonder how many of these incidents involved people who had tried suicide in the past, or had a record of spousal abuse.

Now excuse me while I go count my lucky stars that my gun collection hasn't 'just gone off' and killed me before now.
 
As someone that has done some serious research data collection on DES stents used in angiograms to open coronary arteries, I will chime in with a few points about statistics and complex models. To establish any reasonable cause and effect one must be able to ISOLATE certain variables. In medicine, we do this by having what is called "double blind" research studies, where neither the clinicians nor the patients actually know whether or not they are even receiving a certain drug, or, in some cases, any drug at all. This works out great until something comes along that works so well that to continue the study and deny the group of patients that would get either a different drug or a placebo would be unethical. No, in order to actually accertain anything of value from these controlled studies, we must ensure that the patients admitted to the study fit a very, very, very stringent and specific set of conditions, usually related to gender, age, health history, smoking and drinking habits etc...etc....

Anyhow, to get to my point, if one is not able to select and use data from such a specifically selected population, all with very common characteristics and lifestyle traits (and sometimes even if you ARE able to), the researchers run into situations where it is impossible to say that A leads to B and establish a reasonable basis for belief in situational cause and effect. As an example I am going to use vitamins. It is generally accepted that taking oral vitamins/supplements is a good thing however, most vitamins/supplements are never tested in the same manner of other drugs in a double-blind study with a control group and stringent criterea for admission into the trial study. What does this mean in a nutshell? Here's what it means: the "good" effects of vitamins could very well be related more to factors not addressed in the vitamin companies "study." These factors could be exercise, access to quality health care, family history, etc.... It could very well be the case with many supplements that the people willing to spend the money on them just plain care about their health more than the people who do not take them, and that may lead to exercise, healthy eating habits, and other things not taken into account by the "study."

Finally, how does this relate to guns and studies like the one mentioned? It is simple. Studies like the one cited never take into consideration countries and populations with HIGHER per capita firearms ownership and LOWER per capita crime rates than the United States. Two countries come to mind readily: Switzerland and Norway. The bottom line is that any intellectually honest researcher knows that the existence of large populations that have very high gun ownership and low crime point to other factors being at least as significant to the equation as the inanimate object (the firearm). These researchers would never ignore a data set like the countries mentioned in research related to drugs, and the FDA would never approve any drug with results to geographically variable simply because the data is useless in assessing the effectiveness of a drug. It would be like approving a drug to treat high blood pressure when there are huge data sets of patients that take the medication in question and have statistically significant blood pressure elevation that was not present before taking the med.

As a final thought, for those of you that have read Mr Lotts book on guns and crime, keep in mind that his data CANNOT prove that more guns CAUSE less crime. The data can only show that more guns does not cause MORE crime. It would be impossible to isolate even a fraction of the variables involved in crime, so Lott did the next best thing and used the data from every county in the United States. Most of the studies used and financed in an attempt to discredit Mr Lott used small groups of counties selected to ensure the results desired. That is pretty much the equivelant of ignoring Switzerland and Norway when you try to assert that guns have a causative relationship with violence. Intellectual dishonesty is what it is, and it is pretty sad, because physicians of all people DAMN WELL KNOW BETTER!!!

End rant. Sincere apologies to anyone who actually tried to read this, but I have had some good scotch (Glenmorangie 1971) and a really bad day in the ICU. :p

Edit: Oh, and to make it even more intellectually corrupt, the study ignores places like Japan. Japan has an incredibly high suicide rate (per capita) and an incredibly low firearms ownership rate. OK, I really am done now hehe
 
It found that people who have guns in their homes were ... 16 times more likely to use a gun to commit suicide than people who don't have guns in their homes.

Hey, Enrico Fermi! Would you mind explaining to me how someone who doesn't have a gun could kill themselves with one?

Jeezo pete, it's a wonder people this dumb don't starve to death from forgetting which end of the spoon goes in their mouths... :rolleyes:

The U.S. National Institute of Justice says that there are firearms in 1 in every 3 households in the U.S., which works out to a total of nearly 200 million guns. In any 24-hour period, more than 160 people are treated for gunshot wounds at U.S. hospital emergency rooms.

Amazing! You mean that in any given 24-hour period, one hundred ninety-nine million nine hundred ninety-nine thousand eight hundred and forty guns don't cause so much as the tiniest boo-boo? They sound safer than most household appliances!
 
Tamara

Do you allways have to use logic and reason to to disarm and confuse wee little liberal thinking minds? Where's the sport in that? :D




Interesting thing... most white-collar crime is committed by people who drink Designer Water. I’ll let you draw your own conclusions. :what: :neener:
 
homes that keep Gambian Rats as pets

were more likely to get monkeypox...why don't they get
gambian rat pox? maybe the VPC can tell us that?

I don't care what the "studies" say,it's my GOD GIVEN RIGHT & not subject to "studies" by bigots or Nazi's
 
hike's in gun owners homes by

uninvited hikers are likely to result in telling the hikers to hit the trail
however if a gun hikes in the woods and there is no liberal to shoot will the gun make a noise if a tree falls on the trigger?
lets see the VPC answer me that!:rolleyes:
 
Guess what....

People living on the beach in Daytona have a greater chance of being bitten by a shark than people living in Iowa.

People with swimming pools in their yard are more likely to have a child drown than people without pools.

People in NYC are more likely to be run over by a subway car than people living in Hawaii.

People working around Bill Clinton are more likely to be sexually abused than people working around GW Bush.
 
They also seem to forget that if you have a gun, that you MAY SHOOT A BURGLAR/RAPIST/SPOUSE BEATER/bad guy with it! That is buried in the stats. So is suicide. If they would separate all the justifiable shootings and suicides out, it may be interesting reading.:fire:
 
Folks:

This information comes from a group called
PAX ASK (Asking Saves Kids).

They are backed by left wing antigun groups.

PAX was created by an ad agency to change the gun ownership battlefield from the political arena to the health issue arena.
The idea that it is just doing it "for the kids" safety ploy.

Do a search on GOOGLE and see all the stuff that comes up.

PAX ASK uses many many venues to spread it's lies.

Please read bellow to see what I sent to a local TV station.
_________________

Channel 6:

I saw a PSA type PAX ASK segment on you channel today and was not happy!

Why do you broadcast such "propaganda"?

What age ranges are included in the definition of "child".

Will you be doing a PSA type ASK program for "matches" in the homes of your children's friends and your neighbors?

What about one for automobiles? National statics show that automobiles are extremely dangerous and the right to own and drive an automobile is not in the Bill of Rights.

Even better, an ASK campaign to find out if your children's friends parents have one of the "Naughty" channels on their cable service. We must protect the children.

The NRA has a program that is much better known and teaches children not to touch guns. It also teaches them what to do if they find or see a gun. When will you be broadcasting an "Eddie Eagle" PSA segment?

"PAX does not engage in political lobbying."

--It’s just supported by organizations with major political lobbing
efforts.

"Instead, PAX works to shift public perception of gun violence from being apolitical debate to being what it really is, an urgent crisis of public health and safety - a crisis with practical solutions that all Americans, including gun owners, can support."

-- They shift perception through lies. They label it a crisis so uninformedpeople swallow their lies. Assuming gun owners will demonize themselves islaughable. Gun violence is not an urgent crisis, accidental deaths byfirearms is at a 20 year low."


Thank you for your time,

Mr. Tom
PS: Please read the following reference PAX.
_________________________________________

“PAX: Ask Campaign†to Invade Your Privacy

By: Garry Harvey

" It never seems to amaze me that just when some “gun violenceâ€organization is debunked for using misinformation another one is created. Ihave found just one such organization and at first look it seems different.
Their site, http://www.pax.com says this.

propaganda
--TRUTH

"PAX does not engage in political lobbying."
--It’s just supported by organizations with major political lobbing efforts.

"Instead, PAX works to shift public perception of gun violence from being apolitical debate to being what it really is, an urgent crisis of public health and safety - a crisis with practical solutions that all Americans,including gun owners, can support."
--They shift perception through lies. They label it a crisis so uninformedpeople swallow their lies. Assuming gun owners will demonize themselves is laughable. Gun violence is not an urgent crisis, accidental deaths by firearms is at a 20 year low.

"Working with leading <anti-gun> organizations and <anti-gun> individuals in the fields of public health, <anti-gun> media, and <anti-gun> entertainment, PAX creates <anti-gun> media-driven public health campaigns that make the idea of preventing gun violence compelling and accessible to everyone <anti-gun>."
Make no mistake, PAX is a puppet of the extreme anti-firearm left. This puppet's job is to encourage invasion of the personal privacy of those Americans who choose to own firearms and make those who do appear evil.

They act harmless right, that’s until I began to read their ASK Campaign Help Kit. They claim not to be anti-gun but one of the tools that anti-gun rights organizations use is emotional hype, they feed you a sad story of how little Johnny was shot while playing with an evil gun. Then they tell you that if only all guns were banned this would not have happened. Guess what,
the first thing you will come across in there so-called “Help Kit†is just such a story. Read further and you come to a “Facts†section. Their stats are the same ones used over and over again by such fanatical anti-gun organizations as The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence (formerly Handgun Control Inc.) and Violence Policy Center, just regurgitated over
again.


propaganda
--TRUTH

"Over 3,500 people under the age of 20 are killed by gun violence every year." - PAX
--This includes suicide, self-defense, and accidents. Gun violence under most people’s definition entails murder through criminal use. In 1998 there were 866 accidental firearms deaths out of roughly 270,298,524 citizens. That’s 3.2 Millionths of one percent that means you are more likely to die from a fall in your home than to be accidentally shot.

"That means that every 24 hours another 10 children and teens die from guns." - PAX
--The 10 children a day stat is bogus. Again, they are using the sum of every death where a gun was used even criminals shot by police officers. Suicide has not been affected by gun-control in other counties that have instated it, why should we be different.

"Often, gun violence among youth, including accidents, suicides and homicides occurs because a child had access to a firearm that was brought into the home by an adult." - PAX

--Gun accidents among youth will always occur when the youth is not proficient in how to handle the weapon safely. A firearm in the home has nothing to do with suicides, countries such as Japan have a high suicide rate but firearms are scarce. A firearm in a law-abiding home has nothing to do with criminal use of a firearm, criminals will always have a gun and to suggest that gun ownership causes a child to become a criminal means that
condoms make sex, knives make stabbings, and fists make fights.

"Over 40% of American homes with children have a gun and many are left unlocked and loaded." - PAX

--Which is perfectly OK, you have the right to do so, young adults in the home should be proficient in the safe use of arms. Parents have a responsibility to do so.

"Unfortunately, many parents think that a gun in the home is protective rather than dangerous. In reality, a gun in the home is 22 times more likely to kill or injure a friend or family member than an intruder." - PAX

--Actually a firearm in the home is protective. This stat was drawn from <Kellermann Arthur & Reay Don, "Protection or peril? An analysis of firearms related deaths in the home> Not only is Kellermann's methodology flawed, butusing the same approach for violent deaths in the home not involving a firearm, the risk factor more than doubles from 22 to 1, to 99 to 1. (http://www.guncite.com/) You are three times more likely to survive home invasion with a firearm.


Their answer to this mythical problem is to “ASK†you, the gun owner, if a gun in your home.

propaganda
--TRUTH

"ASK! If there is not a gun in the home, that’s one less thing you have to worry about." - PAX

--“That’s none of your business.†Is my ideal response, the nosey parent can either join his child at my house or can keep his child at home.

"If there is a gun, make sure that the gun is stored unloaded and locked, ideally in a gun safe, with ammunition locked separately." - PAX

--That way even the responsible adult will not have immediate access to it. God forbid you save a life when a thug is after your family.

"Hiding guns is not enough." - PAX

--Right, carrying your pistol in its holster insures that there is absolutely no way the child cannot access it without your knowledge.

"There are countless tragic stories of kids finding guns that parents thought were well hidden." - PAX

--Fact: you have a 1 in 3 millionth chance of being accidentally shot.

“Curiosity killed the catâ€, simply teach your child about firearms and he will have no curiosity to search for them.
"If you have any doubts about the safety of someone’s home, you can invite the children to play at your house." - PAX

--That’s nice, my child will enlighten yours to the socialist roots of gun control in America and how you breed fear. They can also discuss the propaganda you spread by following PAX propaganda.

PAX is so nice that they even tell you how to ask and what to do when a parent become defensive, like it’s a bad thing. They tell you what to say when a parent feels it’s none of your usiness, or when a parent says they trust their child. This book should be called “PAX: ASK Campaign, Real Solutions for Anti-Gun Americansâ€. The real kicker to this document is the last page which includes a printable sign that says “Ask your neighbor if
they have a gun in there home or dress your kids appropriately†below which is the picture of a child with oversized body armor on. The poster clearly demonizes gun-owning neighbors as inherently reckless, inherently criminal, and inherently uncaring for the lives of children.

In summary PAX is a puppet of the anti-gun organizations that, through indirect suggestions, and under the cloak of “protecting the childrenâ€, attempts to demoralize the great institution of firearms ownership in a FREE America. "
 
Folks:

This information comes from a group called
PAX ASK (Asking Saves Kids).

They are backed by left wing antigun groups.

PAX was created by an ad agency to change the gun ownership battlefield from the political arena to the health issue arena.
The idea that it is just doing it "for the kids" safety ploy.

Do a search on GOOGLE and see all the stuff that comes up.

PAX ASK uses many many venues to spread it's lies.

Please read bellow to see what I sent to a local TV station.
_________________

Channel 6:

I saw a PSA type PAX ASK segment on you channel today and was not happy!

Why do you broadcast such "propaganda"?

What age ranges are included in the definition of "child".

Will you be doing a PSA type ASK program for "matches" in the homes of your children's friends and your neighbors?

What about one for automobiles? National statics show that automobiles are extremely dangerous and the right to own and drive an automobile is not in the Bill of Rights.

Even better, an ASK campaign to find out if your children's friends parents have one of the "Naughty" channels on their cable service. We must protect the children.

The NRA has a program that is much better known and teaches children not to touch guns. It also teaches them what to do if they find or see a gun. When will you be broadcasting an "Eddie Eagle" PSA segment?

"PAX does not engage in political lobbying."

--It’s just supported by organizations with major political lobbing
efforts.

"Instead, PAX works to shift public perception of gun violence from being apolitical debate to being what it really is, an urgent crisis of public health and safety - a crisis with practical solutions that all Americans, including gun owners, can support."

-- They shift perception through lies. They label it a crisis so uninformedpeople swallow their lies. Assuming gun owners will demonize themselves islaughable. Gun violence is not an urgent crisis, accidental deaths byfirearms is at a 20 year low."


Thank you for your time,

Mr. Tom
PS: Please read the following reference PAX.
_________________________________________

“PAX: Ask Campaign†to Invade Your Privacy

By: Garry Harvey

" It never seems to amaze me that just when some “gun violenceâ€organization is debunked for using misinformation another one is created. Ihave found just one such organization and at first look it seems different.
Their site, http://www.pax.com says this.

propaganda
--TRUTH

"PAX does not engage in political lobbying."
--It’s just supported by organizations with major political lobbing efforts.

"Instead, PAX works to shift public perception of gun violence from being apolitical debate to being what it really is, an urgent crisis of public health and safety - a crisis with practical solutions that all Americans,including gun owners, can support."
--They shift perception through lies. They label it a crisis so uninformedpeople swallow their lies. Assuming gun owners will demonize themselves is laughable. Gun violence is not an urgent crisis, accidental deaths by firearms is at a 20 year low.

"Working with leading <anti-gun> organizations and <anti-gun> individuals in the fields of public health, <anti-gun> media, and <anti-gun> entertainment, PAX creates <anti-gun> media-driven public health campaigns that make the idea of preventing gun violence compelling and accessible to everyone <anti-gun>."
Make no mistake, PAX is a puppet of the extreme anti-firearm left. This puppet's job is to encourage invasion of the personal privacy of those Americans who choose to own firearms and make those who do appear evil.

They act harmless right, that’s until I began to read their ASK Campaign Help Kit. They claim not to be anti-gun but one of the tools that anti-gun rights organizations use is emotional hype, they feed you a sad story of how little Johnny was shot while playing with an evil gun. Then they tell you that if only all guns were banned this would not have happened. Guess what,
the first thing you will come across in there so-called “Help Kit†is just such a story. Read further and you come to a “Facts†section. Their stats are the same ones used over and over again by such fanatical anti-gun organizations as The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence (formerly Handgun Control Inc.) and Violence Policy Center, just regurgitated over
again.


propaganda
--TRUTH

"Over 3,500 people under the age of 20 are killed by gun violence every year." - PAX
--This includes suicide, self-defense, and accidents. Gun violence under most people’s definition entails murder through criminal use. In 1998 there were 866 accidental firearms deaths out of roughly 270,298,524 citizens. That’s 3.2 Millionths of one percent that means you are more likely to die from a fall in your home than to be accidentally shot.

"That means that every 24 hours another 10 children and teens die from guns." - PAX
--The 10 children a day stat is bogus. Again, they are using the sum of every death where a gun was used even criminals shot by police officers. Suicide has not been affected by gun-control in other counties that have instated it, why should we be different.

"Often, gun violence among youth, including accidents, suicides and homicides occurs because a child had access to a firearm that was brought into the home by an adult." - PAX

--Gun accidents among youth will always occur when the youth is not proficient in how to handle the weapon safely. A firearm in the home has nothing to do with suicides, countries such as Japan have a high suicide rate but firearms are scarce. A firearm in a law-abiding home has nothing to do with criminal use of a firearm, criminals will always have a gun and to suggest that gun ownership causes a child to become a criminal means that
condoms make sex, knives make stabbings, and fists make fights.

"Over 40% of American homes with children have a gun and many are left unlocked and loaded." - PAX

--Which is perfectly OK, you have the right to do so, young adults in the home should be proficient in the safe use of arms. Parents have a responsibility to do so.

"Unfortunately, many parents think that a gun in the home is protective rather than dangerous. In reality, a gun in the home is 22 times more likely to kill or injure a friend or family member than an intruder." - PAX

--Actually a firearm in the home is protective. This stat was drawn from <Kellermann Arthur & Reay Don, "Protection or peril? An analysis of firearms related deaths in the home> Not only is Kellermann's methodology flawed, butusing the same approach for violent deaths in the home not involving a firearm, the risk factor more than doubles from 22 to 1, to 99 to 1. (http://www.guncite.com/) You are three times more likely to survive home invasion with a firearm.


Their answer to this mythical problem is to “ASK†you, the gun owner, if a gun in your home.

propaganda
--TRUTH

"ASK! If there is not a gun in the home, that’s one less thing you have to worry about." - PAX

--“That’s none of your business.†Is my ideal response, the nosey parent can either join his child at my house or can keep his child at home.

"If there is a gun, make sure that the gun is stored unloaded and locked, ideally in a gun safe, with ammunition locked separately." - PAX

--That way even the responsible adult will not have immediate access to it. God forbid you save a life when a thug is after your family.

"Hiding guns is not enough." - PAX

--Right, carrying your pistol in its holster insures that there is absolutely no way the child cannot access it without your knowledge.

"There are countless tragic stories of kids finding guns that parents thought were well hidden." - PAX

--Fact: you have a 1 in 3 millionth chance of being accidentally shot.

“Curiosity killed the catâ€, simply teach your child about firearms and he will have no curiosity to search for them.
"If you have any doubts about the safety of someone’s home, you can invite the children to play at your house." - PAX

--That’s nice, my child will enlighten yours to the socialist roots of gun control in America and how you breed fear. They can also discuss the propaganda you spread by following PAX propaganda.

PAX is so nice that they even tell you how to ask and what to do when a parent become defensive, like it’s a bad thing. They tell you what to say when a parent feels it’s none of your usiness, or when a parent says they trust their child. This book should be called “PAX: ASK Campaign, Real Solutions for Anti-Gun Americansâ€. The real kicker to this document is the last page which includes a printable sign that says “Ask your neighbor if
they have a gun in there home or dress your kids appropriately†below which is the picture of a child with oversized body armor on. The poster clearly demonizes gun-owning neighbors as inherently reckless, inherently criminal, and inherently uncaring for the lives of children.

In summary PAX is a puppet of the anti-gun organizations that, through indirect suggestions, and under the cloak of “protecting the childrenâ€, attempts to demoralize the great institution of firearms ownership in a FREE America. "
 
Personally, I agree in part.....It very well does increase the possiblity that if I have a firearm in my home and someone breaks in to do harm to me or my family harm,then there very likely is a a much greater chance of a death occuring:D
 
People working around Bill Clinton are more likely to be sexually abused than people working around GW Bush.

Or found under a tree in a DC park with a bullet hole in the back of your head. Ask Vince Foster.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top