According to one organization that opposes guns, they claim that 9,484 people in the United States died as a result of "murder." They do not define murder and use the word murder rather than homicide.

I suppose it is nastier to say murder. No where on their web site do they cite the fact that over 37,000 people died in automobile accidents and of that number law enforcement estimates that alcohol was involved in at least 50% of motor vehicle deaths and probably more.

No where does this anti gun group cite the number of people injured in automobile accidents.

I think we should require background checks for the purchase of an automobile and car dealers should have to report multiple car sales to the same family.

Does that sound outrageous? Yeah I thought so too!

and to think there is no Constitutional provision concerning cars

There is nothing new about anti-gun groups throwing around unattributed "facts", outrageous numbers, or using inflammatory rhetoric. They aren't at all interested in the truth; all they care about is their vision of a better world.

Even when they speak about the number of "gun deaths" they make no differentiation between innocent victims of crime, street gang warfare, drug dealer executions, armed criminals killed by law enforcement officers in the line of duty, and lawful self-defense by innocent citizens. Everything is lumped together as "gun deaths" and presented as proof of the need for ever-greater restrictions on individual liberties.

More children drown in 5-gallon buckets than are killed by gunfire in the US, but we don't have folks demanding a ban on 5-gallon buckets, background checks on purchasers of 5-gallon buckets, registration of 5-gallon buckets, safe storage requirement for 5-gallon buckets, etc. All we hear about are the number of children killed by gunfire (usually including all gun deaths up to age 26, the federal definition of "youthful offenders").

There is no way to change the minds of people who have chosen what they wish to believe, regardless of the facts. There is no way to keep mainstream media outlets from reporting on sensational incidents or commentary. There is no way to keep politicians from using imbecilic arguments to further their political careers.

All we can do is to continue to state the truth clearly, patiently, and calmly. Anything else subjects us to media portrayals as radicals, and our message as something to be discarded out of hand.

Best regards.

And how about this that they don't tell you. Approximately 195,000 people die every year from in hospital medical errors.
Are we going to ban doctors and nurses next?
And the most revealing statistic is that the weapon that kills more people every year than any other weapon, is human hands.
Of course the gun control groups don't tell us that either.

__________________
NRA Benefactor/Cert Instructor

Study Of Trampoline-Related Injuries Calls For Ban On Devices

I say we ban trampolines instead of anything else...

well then....add one more item to background checks and safe storage and mandatory reporting if more than two are bought

I don't think we need to ban them. We just need some "common sense regulations." Who could be against that? After all, if it saves just one child...

__________________
LEO since 1981.

Hotdogs are dangerous now too.

Why don't we ban children, then we won't have that problem.

Around here we have a lot of murders from knife stabbing I don't know the percentage I'd guess 10 - 15 %, maybe more
Steve W

Very well said, and regrettably all too true. The media is complicit in this calumniation, mindlessly and unquestioningly regurgitating spurious "facts" and figures contained in propagandizing press releases, etc. The recent allegations that retail purchases at US gun stores supply "80%" of Mexican drug cartel weapons is another among many examples of the media (and politicians) shamelessly advancing a complete canard. Too bad their aren't some penalties for fraudulent and reckless journalism.

One thing I learned in college was that you can do anything you want with statistics to either make a point, or destroy someone else's point. I would have to dig out the magazine to get the actual figures, but the FBI did a survey of the cause of death of 300+ law enforcement officers over a 3 year period back in early 2005, when the assault rifle ban was the talk of the town. In all of those deaths, only one was attributed to an "assault" rifle. However, some 20-something officers were killed with their own service weapon. Now, according to those figures you could make an argument that you could save more policeman's lives by disarming them. Duh!

Interesting thing about all these specs killing people is the anti gun nuts say guns "but guns are bought/obtained by one person but used in a negative way against another, that's why we need to ban or get rid of them." To them I say this...second hand smoke, last I heard kills 104,000 each year but nobody thinks there should even be a waiting period on a pack of cigarettes much less a background check and to top that not a single person has been charged with a crime.

First, I expect that a minimum of 85% of those "murders" are Criminal on Criminal conflicts, so some might view this statistic as a good thing.

Second, the media in this country is not the least bit honest. In fact, I believe that the media in this country may be the single greatest threat this nation faces, because it's frighteningly easy to control large segments of population with propaganda.

In regard to the five gal bucket which is indeed a problem for very young children who tend to go in head first.
Some really brilliant Federal Regulator came to the very original conclusion that it was not really the bucket that was the problem it was the liquid in the bottom, hence no “ban the bucket” campaign.
Instead the Feds published a proposed regulation that all buckets of a certain size and shape be manufactured with a hole in the bottom so that liquid could not accumulate. This was such a brilliant solution that one wonders why industry had not thought of it.

Unlike most Federal Regulations which solve absolutely nothing but are established law anyway, this particular example of Federal thinking which would have worked was withdrawn.

__________________
Ipsis Rebus Dictantitbus