Where did Travis Haley come up with this stat?

[AethelstanAegen]

While watching a youtube add for Travis Haley's new Adaptive Kalashnikov video (link here with the statement starting around 0:25). He states that the AK platform (ie all varieties) account for 250,000 deaths every year. Anyone know where in the world he came up with this statistic? That sure seems like it'd be a bit high. Does anyone know if he elaborates in the video (ie over what time period, etc).

 

[rcmodel]

I didn't do the math, but if you took all these 3rd. world war casulities since 1960?
http://www.scaruffi.com/politics/massacre.html

And added up all the ones where the AK-47 was used by one or both sides?
Might be pretty close?

rc

 

[jimmyraythomason]

Three statisticians went out hunting, and came across a large deer. The first statistician fired, but missed, by a meter to the left. The second statistician fired, but also missed, by a meter to the right. The third statistician didn't fire, but shouted in triumph, "On the average we got it!"

 

[AethelstanAegen]

No, I understand about the averages and certainly there's been enough conflict over the last 50 years to reach some high numbers (including up to 250,000), but where might there be data available about the weapons used. For instance, looking at the numbers for casualties in genocide, civil war, irregular/asymmetric conflict, we can't assume those were all deaths by AKs (for instance, in many cases only one side might have had AKs or even means beyond small arms were used. For instance the numbers for genocide in Rwanda are probably mostly not attributable to AKs (an awful lot of that was committed by machetes and other low tech weapons). I'm really most interested in the source for the data (ie which NGO, UN committee, federal agency, etc might break down those numbers on weapons used and release them) or did someone just add up those numbers and take some percentage of it to reflect the availability of AKs in the conflict? I'm just curious how they came up with the number and what data sets they're using.

 

[The Lone Haranguer]

The problem is really people who would rather kill each other than grow food, not the AK-47. But, of course, that wasn't the question you were asking.

If the 250,000 deaths per year figure is even halfway close to accurate, it is still surely the total number of deaths from all causes. IEDs and other weapons probably account for more of these deaths than gunshot wounds from AKs, to say nothing of disease and starvation.

I'm just curious how they came up with the number and what data sets they're using.

Who says he is using any kind of scientific data? He could have pulled it out of his ___ for all we know.

 

[parsimonious_instead]

The wikipedia article on the Rwandan genocide (up to a million dead) mentions AKs and Grenades, but I thought the majority of the killings were done by machete.

 

[The Lone Haranguer]

I don't suggest any deception is intended, but there is just no way who was killed by what or how many can be determined with accuracy, so IMO the figure is a guess at best.