Doctors vs Guns - Statistics

[PIGEON-RAT]

I am a gunowner and avid hunter, what blows my mind is the comparison of guns to doctors!

word

 

[Turd Ferguson]

Pointless doctor compairison. They don't compair. Just because you use the word death dosen't mean they have commonality. And Just because a study suggests that shit taste good dosen't mean I'm having it for dinner.

 

[danielson]

they should then do a comparison of the number of healthy people doctors kill vs. number of gun deaths

i'm pro gun because the proliferation of guns in the US makes it completely illogical to remove them from legal owners but leaving them in the arms of criminals because some mums with nothing better to do think its a good idea

but showing the incidence of crime increasing in the UK because of gun restrictions is not a fair comparison...it misses out important social changes in the UK, plus imigration and black market weapons being availible

a doctor never intentionally kills a patient, and to be honest its society's restraints like JP pointed out that cause a lot of it...

 

[Fast Twitch Fiber]

This has to be the most illogical comparison ever made.

 

[atlantabiolab]

This has to be the most illogical comparison ever made.

It is not illogical in that it demonstrates the frivolous nature of the attack on guns. Those who yell about gun possession do not take into consideration the relative risks compared to the rest of human activities, many of which are much more dangerous to life and limb. They look at guns as a direct cause of violence and death, as opposed to studying the factors that are involved in gun related deaths. One does not read in the paper "Gun kills woman." or "Gun shoots police officer." A human, in most situations, must shoot another, yet it is the gun that is demonized, as if it took possession of the owner and caused him/her to kill. In such mindless reasoning, Fascism killed millions, not Germans.

Using such examples is not intended to be a direct comparison, merely an example of the waste of time that is the gun control advocate.

 

[atlantabiolab]

Poink,

I've been through this before with you.

And please don't recite John Lott. His nonsensical studies have been unravelled a number of times. The fact that the gun lobby continually quote John Lott just goes to show that the pro-gun lobby has nothing.

Please show us the links to this or present the evidence that Lott has been discredited, unlike his gun control counterpart, Bellisailes (sp.) who was outed as a complete fraud.

The other ridiculous aspect of your's and most pro-gun people's argument is this constant comparison of gun related deaths to other causes of death. It is so irrelevant to make those comparisons and i really don't understand what you andothers try to achieve by making these comparisons.

What is irrelevant about demonstrating the comparitive risks associated with gun ownership vs. other human activities? If my chance of being harmed by one activity is so low, compared to other risks I take, then there is little reason to fear this activity. Removing this fact removes logic from the equation, so I do understand why the gun control crowd wishes to deny the comparitive risk idea.

The central point is that if you reduce the presence of guns in the community, you will reduce the incidence of homicide. Thank you very much.

But you have also removed the protection people have against other crimes, as demonstrated in areas where gun possession has become outlawed. So you again focus on one factor while rejecting reality. Demonstrating statistical relationships focuses too much attention on small numbers of variables and discards external effects.

The reality is that man has the right to self-defense, through reasonable means, guns being one of them. Those who wish to deny gun ownership wish to deny man his rights, thus they are threats to freedom.

 

[Nubly]

from my experience- its usually the patient that caused said 'accident'. the patient and/or the family of the patient just like to blame the doctors. and the american courts, especially in cali, are crappy

 

[vinylgroover]

Please show us the links to this or present the evidence that Lott has been discredited, unlike his gun control counterpart, Bellisailes (sp.) who was outed as a complete fraud.



What is irrelevant about demonstrating the comparitive risks associated with gun ownership vs. other human activities? If my chance of being harmed by one activity is so low, compared to other risks I take, then there is little reason to fear this activity. Removing this fact removes logic from the equation, so I do understand why the gun control crowd wishes to deny the comparitive risk idea.



But you have also removed the protection people have against other crimes, as demonstrated in areas where gun possession has become outlawed. So you again focus on one factor while rejecting reality. Demonstrating statistical relationships focuses too much attention on small numbers of variables and discards external effects.

The reality is that man has the right to self-defense, through reasonable means, guns being one of them. Those who wish to deny gun ownership wish to deny man his rights, thus they are threats to freedom.

Atlanta, for a reasonably intelligent guy, you have a complete lack of common sense which is unfortunate.

When it comes down to a question of reducing indiscriminate killing vs. preserving 'freedom', i could care less about preserving freedom.

the only thing worth preserving in society without any compromse is life.

 

[juiceddreadlocks]

Where is your proof. I've done extensive research on this (I was pro gun control when I started) and found everything to the contrary. Did you read my stat on crimes committed with illegally obtained firearms?

Gun control only affects law abiding gun owners. It does NOTHING to stop illegal sales.

pigeon rat for president.

 

[p0ink]

i could care less about preserving freedom.

that explains it all right there.

it's a damn good thing many men, much braver and more intelligent than yourself, didn't subscribe to this same ideology.