John B. Slocomb writes:

On Tue, 6 Aug 2019 23:35:43 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 8/6/2019 10:02 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
AMuzi writes:

On 8/6/2019 1:34 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 8/6/2019 2:09 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 8/6/2019 12:46 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
John B. Slocomb writes:

On Mon, 5 Aug 2019 14:34:51 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 8/5/2019 12:23 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 8/5/2019 9:58 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 8/5/2019 4:07 AM, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Mon, 5 Aug 2019 00:13:04 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 8/4/2019 8:47 PM, John B. wrote:
rOn Sun, 4 Aug 2019 11:06:33 -0400, Frank
Krygowski wrote:

On 8/4/2019 1:37 AM, John B. wrote:


Well, of course. After all everybody knows that
"guns
kill" so
logically if there no guns there would be no
"killed".

I don't know of anyone who seriously believes that.

But to be more realistic: What are the gun laws
in the
country where you
now live? And what's the gun murder rate per
100,000?
What's the total
murder rate per 100,000? IOW, how are your gun laws
working out?

The gun laws in Thailand are essentially that guns
are
banned...
except in some cases. You can't legally carry a
pistol
in your pocket
in Bangkok but no one will object to your having a
shotgun over our
shoulder in some remote jungle area where wildlife
is a
danger.

Yes, nobody much objects to long guns in the woods
here.
But "can't
legally carry a pistol in a pocket"? Some here
would say
that's akin to
slicing off a man's ... um, masculinity. (And it's
true
that some men
seem to confuse their guns with their genital organs.)

As for gun deaths it would be rather misleading to
quote
them as the
UNODC murder rate in Thailand is 3.24/100,000 and
in the
U.S.
5.30/100,000 so obviously whatever criteria you
care to
define murder
rates in the U.S. will likely be higher than in
Thailand.

Ah. 3.24 vs. 5.30.

But you don't think the differences in gun laws are a
factor?

I was pointing out that the table I saw was based on
UNODC
rates.

But I'm not sure whether gun laws, specifically, are
really a factor
in Thai homicide rates. Certainly the news is full of
knife, club,
whatever, (even by hand), murders and illegal
ownership of
firearms is
extremely common so I'm not sure what effect the rather
strict gun
laws in Thailand have on homicide rates.

As an aside I might mention that the CDC homicide
numbers
in the U.S.
seem to be all - homicides - 19,510, Firearms -
14,542 so
about 75% of
homicides in the U.S. age gun related. But!

According to the Centers for Disease Control, using
data
available for
analysis on September 5, 2018, there were a reported
70,652 deaths
attributed to drug overdose in the US for the year
ending
December
2017. Some deaths were still under investigation.
The CDC
projects
that the total for 2017 will be 72,222.

It makes the 14,542 gun deaths seem a bit.... well one
might say
somewhat less than urgent :-)

According to Statistia some 43% of U.S. households
owned
one or more
guns in 2017. That is (I believe) some 126,220,000
households with
guns and 14,000 gun deaths (not, I believe,
including self
inflected
death) or a rate of 1 gun death per 9,015.7 households.

And Auto Deaths? Some 37,133 deaths in 2017 - the same
year as the
14,000 gun deaths. Or one traffic death per 3,399
families.

But than, we all know that they are "traffic
accidents",
which seem to
be acceptable and "GUN DEATHS!" which are horrifying.


We just had two mass murders within about half a
day,
one in Texas, the
next in Ohio. Does that happen a lot where you live?

You seem to be "proving" my stated point that "guns
kill", unless of
course then guys in Texas were waving swords.

You seem to be sidestepping my question. How often
_does_
that happen
where you live?

Well, I gave you the figures, about 61% of the U.S.
numbers.

No, John, you didn't give me the numbers I asked for.
Nice
try at sidestepping, though.

Here was my question: "We just had two mass murders
within
about half a day, one in Texas, the next in Ohio.
Does that
happen a lot where you live?" And I repeated: "How often
_does_ that happen where you live?"

I'm not surprised you have occasional killings using
knives,
clubs and hands, as you describe. But how many _mass_
killings? How many instances of a guy with a knife
quickly
slaying, say, 20 people who were shopping and injuring a
couple dozen more?



I don't know from Thailand but in Chicago it's all day
every day:
https://maggionews.com/
https://heyjackass.com/

I see very few reports of mass killings using knives.

Well, of course not. these are modern times and modern
man is too lazy
to undertake "mass killings" with a butcher knife but in
years gone
my, when man kind was a bit more energetic...

For example:
In the year 390 when Roman Emperor Theodosius I sent
troops to
Thessalonica in order to quell some civil unrest. and
7,000 were
killed.

On May 20, 1645Â Qing troops led by Prince Dodo of the
Qing Dynasty
killed as many as 80,000 people.

Machetes were prominent during the Rwandan genocide much
more recently.


Machete murders were once big news. Now we have a term for
that, "Tuesday":

https://duckduckgo.com/?q=machete+mu...17&t=h_&ia=web

https://duckduckgo.com/?q=machete+mu...8&t=h_&ia=news

https://duckduckgo.com/?q=machete+mu...19&t=h_&ia=web

Readers of delicate countenance should not click "images"
on the search menu.

Anyone know the annual count of U.S. machete killings?


No idea but I'm sure each and every victim thought there was one too
many.

If we're doing this by numbers alone now, I'll watch for your
impassioned pleas about medical ineptitude and hospital-acquired
infection which kill more people than either car wrecks or ODs.

Also, by numbers, US homicides have decreased markedly since the 90's.
If total numbers are your thing then mass shootings should be of no
particular interest.

I challenge you to attend the next memorial service for these victims,
carrying that on a sign. I can guarantee lots of attention. Would you do
that?

Why memorial services for those shot with guns and total ignore the
several times as many killed on the roads? Or that die of hospital
acquired diseases, or those killed by illegal narcotics, or, or, or?

My point was a little finer -- why concentrate on those deliberately
killed 20 at a time, when those killed in ones or twos are really a much
bigger problem?

Frank is constantly reminding us to rely on data, for example on the
relative scarcity of car bike collisions from behind. That does not
mean I will attend a memorial service for the next unfortunate killed in
that way with a sign belittling "fear from the rear".