Comparing Washinton DC to Irak

Maromero · April 21, 2010, 03:12 PM

I recieved this e-mail. Thought to share with the forum, if only as a joke.

"If you consider that there has been an average of 160,000 troops in the Iraq theater of operations during the past 22 months, and a total of 2112 deaths, that gives a firearm death rate of 60 per 100,000 soldiers.

The firearm death rate in Washington , DC is 80.6 per 100,000 for the same period.

That means you are about 25 percent more likely to be shot and killed in the U.S. capital, which has some of the strictest gun control laws in the U.S., than you are in Iraq."

Conclusion: The U.S. should pull out of Washington ..

johnwilliamson062 · April 21, 2010, 04:27 PM

Although I like this I think if you looked at the casualty rate you would be forced to another conclusion.

Kreyzhorse · April 21, 2010, 06:56 PM

Quote:

Conclusion: The U.S. should pull out of Washington ..

I'm not sure I'm buying the "facts" but I do like the punchline.

speedycat · April 21, 2010, 07:15 PM

I'm amazed this thread hasn't been locked yet.

ScottRiqui · April 21, 2010, 07:30 PM

I think the numbers are out-of-whack as well.

Going back 22 months in Iraq (June 2008 & forward), total U.S. military deaths are 273, not 2112. But we also don't have 160,000 troops in Iraq anymore - it's actually below 100,000 now.

But even if troop strength had been steady at 160,000 for the past two years, 273 deaths in two years works out to about 85 deaths per 100,000 per year.

But on the other hand, the total homicide rate for the past two years combined in D.C. is only about 45 per 100,000, not anywhere close to 80.6.

In all, it appears that the numbers were pulled out of someone's butt, and I don't know that a meaningful comparison between the two areas is possible anyway.

Al Norris · April 21, 2010, 10:27 PM

Pulled out of someones southern hemisphere ... Indeed.

Oh, and IBTL

April 21, 2010, 03:12 PM	#1
Maromero Junior member Join Date: January 21, 2009 Location: Outside the continental U Posts: 752	Comparing Washinton DC to Irak I recieved this e-mail. Thought to share with the forum, if only as a joke. "If you consider that there has been an average of 160,000 troops in the Iraq theater of operations during the past 22 months, and a total of 2112 deaths, that gives a firearm death rate of 60 per 100,000 soldiers. The firearm death rate in Washington , DC is 80.6 per 100,000 for the same period. That means you are about 25 percent more likely to be shot and killed in the U.S. capital, which has some of the strictest gun control laws in the U.S., than you are in Iraq." Conclusion: The U.S. should pull out of Washington ..

April 21, 2010, 07:30 PM	#5
ScottRiqui Senior Member Join Date: January 27, 2010 Location: Norfolk, VA Posts: 2,905	I think the numbers are out-of-whack as well. Going back 22 months in Iraq (June 2008 & forward), total U.S. military deaths are 273, not 2112. But we also don't have 160,000 troops in Iraq anymore - it's actually below 100,000 now. But even if troop strength had been steady at 160,000 for the past two years, 273 deaths in two years works out to about 85 deaths per 100,000 per year. But on the other hand, the total homicide rate for the past two years combined in D.C. is only about 45 per 100,000, not anywhere close to 80.6. In all, it appears that the numbers were pulled out of someone's butt, and I don't know that a meaningful comparison between the two areas is possible anyway. Last edited by ScottRiqui; April 21, 2010 at 07:35 PM.

April 21, 2010, 04:27 PM	#2
johnwilliamson062 Junior member Join Date: May 16, 2008 Posts: 9,995	Although I like this I think if you looked at the casualty rate you would be forced to another conclusion.

April 21, 2010, 07:15 PM	#4
speedycat Member Join Date: June 8, 2009 Posts: 26	I'm amazed this thread hasn't been locked yet.

April 21, 2010, 10:27 PM	#6
Al Norris Moderator Emeritus Join Date: June 29, 2000 Location: Rupert, Idaho Posts: 9,660	Pulled out of someones southern hemisphere ... Indeed. Oh, and IBTL