The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Conference Center > General Discussion Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old January 27, 2014, 05:31 PM   #26
Hal
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 9, 1998
Location: Ohio USA
Posts: 7,435
Quote:
From the study "Firearm injuries due to BB or air guns were included, whereas those due to paintballs were excluded."
I didn't see that part.
I only saw a part that mentioned air guns.

Thanks for the clarification.
Hal is offline  
Old January 27, 2014, 05:45 PM   #27
FAS1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 9, 2010
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 266
Quote:
I didn't see that part.
I only saw a part that mentioned air guns.

Thanks for the clarification.
I had the same thought so I read the study a little instead of just the article. So much is still left vague at best, but some good info in it.
__________________
Glenn

FAS1 SAFE, LLC
FAS1 is offline  
Old January 27, 2014, 07:08 PM   #28
Tom Servo
Staff
 
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 10,356
Quote:
From the study "Firearm injuries due to BB or air guns were included, whereas those due to paintballs were excluded."
Wow, good catch there. It really skews the data.
__________________
Sometimes it’s nice not to destroy the world for a change.
--Randall Munroe
Tom Servo is offline  
Old January 27, 2014, 08:13 PM   #29
FlyFish
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 20, 2009
Location: Overlooking the Baker River Valley
Posts: 1,486
Quote:
Wow, good catch there. It really skews the data.
In what way? And how do you know? I didn't see any breakdown in the study of air gun vs. "real" firearm injuries.

Remember, the study concerns injuries that require admittance to a hospital, not simply ER treatment or a visit to the doctor. Given that the study clearly indicates that the majority of the injuries are in the 15 to 19 age group, and mostly to blacks and hispanics, I really doubt that excluding hospitalization due to air gun injuries (primarily eye trauma, I would guess) would have changed the results much.
__________________
NRA Benefactor Life Member
NRA Certified Pistol Instructor
SASS #84900
Pemigewasset Valley Fish & Game Club
FlyFish is offline  
Old January 27, 2014, 09:25 PM   #30
Tom Servo
Staff
 
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 10,356
Quote:
I really doubt that excluding hospitalization due to air gun injuries (primarily eye trauma, I would guess) would have changed the results much.
We won't know from this study. Airguns can cause plenty of injuries causing hospitalization.
__________________
Sometimes it’s nice not to destroy the world for a change.
--Randall Munroe
Tom Servo is offline  
Old January 27, 2014, 10:14 PM   #31
Dashunde
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 22, 2004
Posts: 1,701
I'm not quite sure what you people are so stirred up about...

Quote:
Dr. John Leventhal and his team studied children and adolescents younger than age 20 at the time of admission to the hospital in 2009. In that year, in the United States, 7,391 hospitalizations occurred in this age group because of firearm injuries, and 453 of those young patients died while in the hospital. Most of these hospitalizations resulted from assaults (4,559), but in children younger than age 10, 75% of the almost 400 hospitalizations were due to unintentional or accidental injuries.
Again, so that its clear where they point out young-adult antics and mayhem..
Quote:
Most of these hospitalizations resulted from assaults (4,559),
I'm no big fan of Eastern high-brow studies or journals, particularly as they have historically applied to firearms... but nitpicking this one seems like a was of time, for a few reasons, some already mentioned here.
Dashunde is offline  
Old January 27, 2014, 10:24 PM   #32
carguychris
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 20, 2007
Location: Richardson, TX
Posts: 5,501
Setting aside political objections and teeth-gnashing, I was taken aback by this tidbit in the study (pg. 221).
Quote:
Of all hospitalizations, 89.2% were in males, and this marked difference in gender was found regardless of the cause of the injury.
(Emphasis mine)

Given that the number of young males and females in the USA is very close to equal, the number of young people injured in truly random accidental discharges- e.g. dropping a single-action revolver on the hammer, or accidentally pulling the trigger of a loaded shotgun while picking it up- should be roughly equal. IOW this data shows that many unintentional discharges are NOT random- most are likely the result of a young male intentionally playing with an unsecured gun, or using a gun in an unsafe manner.

Also...
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyFish
I really doubt that excluding hospitalization due to air gun injuries (primarily eye trauma, I would guess) would have changed the results much.
We won't know from this study.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Servo
Airguns can cause plenty of injuries causing hospitalization.
Tom is absolutely right, and furthermore, I surmise that many of the "unintentional" injuries in the study ARE the result of unsafe airgun use.

I'll be the first to tell you that the plural of "anecdote" is NOT "data", but I can tell you who I primarily see shopping the airgun section at the sporting goods store... preteen and teenage boys.

Kids need to be taught that airguns are NOT HARMLESS TOYS.
__________________
"Smokey, this is not 'Nam. This is bowling. There are rules... MARK IT ZERO!!" - Walter Sobchak

Last edited by carguychris; January 27, 2014 at 10:26 PM. Reason: minor reword...
carguychris is offline  
Old January 27, 2014, 10:30 PM   #33
jimbob86
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 4, 2007
Location: All the way to NEBRASKA
Posts: 6,812
Quote:
in children younger than age 10, 75% of the almost 400 hospitalizations were due to unintentional or accidental injuries.
I'm sure incidents such as the 5 year old killed last week here locally (eating breakfast and killed by a "stray bullet" from the gangland gun battle down the street) are classified as "unintentional" ....

I'd like to see what the data would look like if you took out all the "gang related" incidents.

It's not a "gun violence" problem. It's a "breakdown of the social order" problem.
__________________
TheGolden Rule of Tool Use: "If you don't know what you are doing, DON'T."

http://nefirearm.com/
jimbob86 is offline  
Old January 27, 2014, 11:43 PM   #34
leadcounsel
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 8, 2005
Location: Tacoma, WA
Posts: 1,738
Chalk this up to not believing the media, and always look deeper into the facts.

Movements have learned that to control the 'facts' is to win the argument. Easiest way to control the 'facts' is to change the definition.

You can claim that more women are 'sex assault victims' when you change the definition of 'sex assault.' Suddenly, MOST women are victims. It's a self-fulfilling claim. Drunk driving is on the rise, because the definition has been changed. You get the idea. More victims = bigger movement = more money and political power.

Same is true here. People hear children, and think of a toddler. Reality is that most are not true children. Here's a good article on the subject. https://gunowners.org/opnem04.htm
__________________
2A: "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." US Army Combat Veteran and Paratrooper: OIF (2008, 2009, 2010) and OND (2011). Bronze Star Medal and Meritorious Service Medal recipient. NRA Lifetime Member. I'm a lawyer, but not YOUR lawyer and I have not offered you legal advice.
leadcounsel is offline  
Old January 27, 2014, 11:55 PM   #35
towboat-er
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 2, 2011
Posts: 146
Ban shopping carts.


data involving children younger than 15 years of age who were treated for shopping cart-related injuries in emergency departments from 1990 through 2011.

An estimated 530,494 injured children were documented during the study period, averaging more than 24,000 children annually — or 66 children per day, treated in an emergency department.

Last edited by Brian Pfleuger; January 28, 2014 at 09:18 AM. Reason: Remove unrelated link
towboat-er is offline  
Old January 28, 2014, 12:19 AM   #36
Aguila Blanca
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 6,418
Quote:
Originally Posted by carguychris
Given that the number of young males and females in the USA is very close to equal, the number of young people injured in truly random accidental discharges- e.g. dropping a single-action revolver on the hammer, or accidentally pulling the trigger of a loaded shotgun while picking it up- should be roughly equal. IOW this data shows that many unintentional discharges are NOT random- most are likely the result of a young male intentionally playing with an unsecured gun, or using a gun in an unsafe manner.
Or that a significant percentage of the injuries were incurred by budding criminals either engaging in gang warfare, or by being shot by would-be victims or by the police in the act of committing felonies.

Did this study actually say it was counting only accidental shootings?
Aguila Blanca is offline  
Old January 28, 2014, 12:54 AM   #37
Armed_Chicagoan
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 18, 2013
Location: Albany Park, Chicago
Posts: 288
The study included all shootings. The 19 year old Boston Marathon bomber shot by police is counted in this study, as is the 15 year old in this story. In fact the vast majority of the "victims" in this study are teenagers engaging in gang or other criminal activity, not some innocent youngster whose parent's didn't properly secure their firearms.
Armed_Chicagoan is offline  
Old January 28, 2014, 06:11 AM   #38
UncleEd
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 13, 2013
Location: N. Georgia
Posts: 269
The FBI uses for its crime statistics "children" as being up to 21 years of age.
It's been that way for years.
UncleEd is offline  
Old January 28, 2014, 07:53 AM   #39
carguychris
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 20, 2007
Location: Richardson, TX
Posts: 5,501
Quote:
Did this study actually say it was counting only accidental shootings?
No. It very plainly explains that the vast majority of the tabulated shootings are the result of assaults (4,559 out of 7,391), and that the number of assaults goes WAY up in the 14-19 age group (4,143 of the 4,559). This study largely reflects a teenage crime problem, NOT an accident problem across all age groups.

Also, I surmise that a substantial number of the "unintentional" shootings- particularly within the 1,419 in the 14-19 age group- have been purposefully misreported to conceal criminal activity, although the study makes no readily apparent attempt to control for this factor.

FWIW my prior post was intended to make people aware that this study might tell us something useful about negligent firearms injuries, despite the fact that it's bound to be spun as a political hit piece, and I suspect that the authors intended it as such.

The study also makes some fairly stunning revelations about the racial and ethnic makeup of the victims. (Refer to the link in Flyfish's earlier post.) Unfortunately, I suspect that this aspect of the study will largely be ignored by the people who really need to read it.
__________________
"Smokey, this is not 'Nam. This is bowling. There are rules... MARK IT ZERO!!" - Walter Sobchak

Last edited by carguychris; January 28, 2014 at 11:35 AM. Reason: typo, boldface
carguychris is offline  
Old January 28, 2014, 08:03 AM   #40
Kev
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 18, 2013
Posts: 624
I heard a joke years ago that is near and dear to me and I use it often with customers and while public speaking..

"78.5% of all percentages are made up"

I will say that in 2010, 1,537 children (and I mean children, 80% 4 years old and YOUNGER) were killed (murdered) from child abuse.

This to me is a much more disturbing number than this skewed report.
__________________
"Classic over Plastic"
Kev is offline  
Old January 28, 2014, 11:53 AM   #41
Hal
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 9, 1998
Location: Ohio USA
Posts: 7,435
Quote:
I heard a joke years ago that is near and dear to me and I use it often with customers and while public speaking..

"78.5% of all percentages are made up"
LOL! That's an uncanny coincidence.....

The study mentions only drawing on figures from 44 states.
Toss in DC and the US territories and you have a total of 57.

78.5% of 57 is roughly - 44 !

Hal is offline  
Old January 28, 2014, 12:56 PM   #42
teeroux
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 12, 2006
Posts: 1,492
20 children shot per day. Thats not even dead that doesn't sound that bad. How many die per day from malpractice by pediatricians?
teeroux is offline  
Old January 28, 2014, 02:24 PM   #43
Tom Servo
Staff
 
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 10,356
Quote:
How many die per day from malpractice by pediatricians?
The number is likely higher, but that argument doesn't help us much. If we use it, our opponents claim we're being callous about the gunshot wounds.
__________________
Sometimes it’s nice not to destroy the world for a change.
--Randall Munroe
Tom Servo is offline  
Old January 28, 2014, 02:50 PM   #44
Glenn E. Meyer
Staff
 
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 15,698
Stay on topic. Posts deleted and infractions given.
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc.
http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...05_Feature.htm
Being an Academic Shooter
http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...11_Feature.htm
Being an Active Shooter
Glenn E. Meyer is offline  
Old January 28, 2014, 03:03 PM   #45
Kev
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 18, 2013
Posts: 624
Stay on topic.


Ok so it has to be dead kids by GSW. I get it.

We can never win against these medical surveys, except to point out the CDC report as mentioned that actually backfired when firearms didnt account for as many deaths as they and I HATE to say this.."hoped" or maybe expected would be a better choice of words.
__________________
"Classic over Plastic"
Kev is offline  
Old February 10, 2014, 07:23 AM   #46
OkieCruffler
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 9, 2001
Location: Denison Texas on the banks of Texhoma
Posts: 1,491
I can only go by my own experience. I was a nurse in the pediatric ICU for 10 years. In those ten years I saw 4 GSW. Of those 4, 2 were fatalities and one of the others was from an airgun (very nasty case actually). During my short stint in home health I saw one other, non-fatality obviously. So out of the hundreds of pediatric patients I've seen only 5 have been GSW. Not sure what that percentage is but I'm guessing it's pretty low.
__________________
John A. Monroe, Never Forgive, Never Forget, Blood Pays Blood
OkieCruffler is offline  
Old February 11, 2014, 03:27 PM   #47
slicknickns
Member
 
Join Date: September 14, 2012
Location: Orange County, CA.
Posts: 23
Maliciously shot or accidentally?
slicknickns is offline  
Old February 11, 2014, 06:07 PM   #48
OkieCruffler
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 9, 2001
Location: Denison Texas on the banks of Texhoma
Posts: 1,491
In my case one was a purposeful shooting against a 5 year old. the rest were all accidental. To be fair, any gang banger shot went across the road to the adult ICU regardless of age. We didn't need to deal with the security issues that created.
__________________
John A. Monroe, Never Forgive, Never Forget, Blood Pays Blood
OkieCruffler is offline  
Old February 11, 2014, 08:20 PM   #49
Aguila Blanca
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 6,418
I'm going to assume that this study is like the others I've seen, and includes 19 and 20 year old gang bangers who were shot by police officers in the line of duty as "children injured or killed by gun violence."

They just didn't pay attention in Sunday school: "He who liveth by the sword shall die by the sword."
Aguila Blanca is offline  
Old February 14, 2014, 08:18 PM   #50
dajowi
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 2, 2005
Posts: 976
Soon to include injuries caused by: rubber band guns, squirt guns, caulk guns, signs with images of guns, large dictionaries with words beginning with gun... Absurdity upon absurdity upon absurdity.
dajowi is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:58 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.13233 seconds with 9 queries