From: cochran@spam.rtp.dg.com (A. Jing Hippy)
Subject: Re: More Gun Control
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 93 13:24:52 GMT
Organization: A Suffusion of Yellow

In article <1993Jan19.230523.28900@igor.tamri.com>, donb@igor.tamri.com (Don Baldwin) writes:
|> In article <1jhbv0INNaa6@umbc4.umbc.edu> potler@umbc.edu (Laura Potler) writes:
|> >>Although TV news won't tell people this, gun accidents are less frequent than
|> >>deaths on a bicycle.  Still, with proper training from your local gun club
|> >>or the NRA, no such accidents will happen.  We've had guns in our family for
|> >
|> >ay, there's the rub... no, lower... mmmmyes there, uh, oh, sorry, where was 
|> >i... ah! people *don't* get proper training when they get guns. they don't 
|> >practice. they don't! we all know that the average joe or josephine is a bdi.
|> >do you want to trust the moron going 46 in the left lane (with the obligatory
|> >left blinker blinking) with a gun? i think not.
|> 
|> It seems as if you're addressing the gun accident issue here.  The thing is,
|> Laura, that where accidents are concerned, guns are way down there in the
|> noise.
|> 
|> In 1990, there were 46,300 motor vehicle accidents,
|>                     12,400 deaths in accidental falls,
|>                      6,500 accidental deaths by poisoning,
|>                      5,700 accidental drownings,
|>                      4,300 accidental deaths in fires,
|>                      3,200 accidental deaths by choking/suffocation
|> 
|> and only 1,400 firearms-related accidental deaths.  Another thing you
|> should know about that number is that it's HALF the number of accidents
|> from 1970, this despite a massive increase in the number of firearms out
|> there.

Once again, I can't *believe* that I'm watching where I'm going and yet am
about to step into this anyway.  I'll just leave my shoes on the front porch
when I get home.

Note the difference in the types of accidents reported above.  It's difficult
to get around these days with some sort of motor vehicle transportation, 
especially in the more rural areas such as the one where I live.  People will
accidentally fall. People will ingest things that seem perfectly safe and
yet are poison due to mislabelling or improper preparation/packaging. Even
if people stop swimming or boating, there will be the occasional slip in the
tub or falling into water that will lead to drowning.  Fires happen for all
sorts of reasons that may or may not be preventable.  Choking or whatever?
Well, that's anatomy for you.  It happens sometimes no matter what.

But we don't *need* the guns.  If they weren't around, then that's 1400
people that would still be here today.  Since 1970, it must be in the
thousands.  I'm sure that you could cite the astoundingly low number of 
accidental deaths that occur from bungee jumping or leaping out of a perfectly
good plane with a parachute on your back, but that doesn't make the 
activity any more defensible or intelligent.

"There have been zero deaths since 1970 that occurred from backing naked
 into glowing pot-bellied stoves with a piece of dynamite stuck up your 
 butt.  Therefore, this is a perfectly safe activity in which we can all 
 participate as long as we are properly trained."

Peeve: "Logic" that says that as long as it hasn't killed *too* many people,
       then it's ok.

+--------------------------------------------------+
|Dave Cochran, Data General Corporation, RTP, NC   |
|cochran@dg-rtp.dg.com                             |
+--------------------------------------------------+
|If you could choose between the body of a 20-year |
|old or the body of a 50-year old, where would you |
|keep it?                                          |
+--------------------------------------------------+
Newsgroups: alt.peeves