mcculloch@mail.utexas.edu (Jim McCulloch) wrote:

>On Wed, 06 Jan 1999 18:20:21 GMT, "M. Eglestone"
> wrote:
>
>>Let's look at total population of the U.S. and gun involved crimes,
>>shooting, deaths and injuries for a 12 month period. There are 271+
>>million people living in this country. If you add up ALL the figures
>>that involve death or injury by guns, excluding self defense, you
>>still have LESS than 1 percent of the population involved. It's more
>>on the order of .015 percent of the Total U.S. Population that are
>>directly or indirectly effected by the presents of guns.
>>
>> Which sort of indicates that 99 percent of the population is
>>"perfectly safe" from gun related incidents each year and, that guns
>>are not much of a problem. Any time you can ASSURE 99 percent of the
>>population that they WILL be safe from anything, you're doing good.
>>
>> Go ahead and do the figures yourself. Take the total population of
>>this country as your base figure. Add up ALL the categories of gun
>>related deaths or injuries that you can get your hands on. If the
>>figures total more than 1 percent of our population (per year) I'll
>>eat my hat. I was perfectly satisfied when I thought it was around 2
>>percent, but I couldn't even get the figures up THAT high when I did
>>the math.
>>
>> Folks, there are RISK factors involved in all activities that life
>>presents to us. The risk factors involved in gun ownership just to NOT
>>warrant all the fuss that's being made over the subject.
>>
>> Mike Eglestone
>
>Thanks, Mike, for a diversion from the ongoing discussion, your
>remarks having nothing at all to do with my post or with anyone
>else's, as far as I can tell.
>
>Your reasoning puzzles me, though.  If we are at low risk for
>something, like, say, murder, we should conclude that the low risk
>factors involved do not warrant all the fuss that's being made over
>the subject?  You sure you want to say something like that on such
>newsgroups as tx.guns and talk.politics.guns?  

Well, Jim, you've made an issue of confiscation of privately owned
firearms in the so-called name of public safety when, in fact, the vast
majority of firearms are never involved in a crime.  Specifically, per
the 25th Edition of the DoJ Sourcebook, 1997, there were 482,954 violent
crimes committed with a firearm.  This is less than two tenths of one
percent of all firearms in the U.S.--- but apparently you would outlaw
the remaining 99.8% just to get at the criminal....  A little paranoid,
yes?


Note:  Refer to Table 3.116, DoJ Sourcebook, 1997, page 274 and NCJ
pamphlet NCJ-148201 for data on firearms related crime and total
firearms stockage.

 
Sam A. Kersh
NRA Life Member
LEAA Life
TSRA L-111738
JPFO
Training is Sergeant's Business
http://www.flash.net/~csmkersh/
===============================================================
talk.politics.guns' resident hypocrite admits to using a gun 
by proxy

     "So for me and my family, all we need for protection
against crime is some basic knowledge of where not to
travel, and how to travel there if we have to.  For
instance, I've had to go into the Cabrini and Taylor Homes
in Chicago a number of times, but because they are
high-crime areas, I go in daylight, to meet someone I know,
with a bodyguard."

Robert L. Ray aka kira@interaccess.com