Guns: The No. 1 cause of death for U.S. children

[Alias Detective 1,179]

10 hours ago, BeenHereBefore said:

If you watch a season or two of The First 48 Hours 90% are killed by 380's. Point is poor criminals can't seem to afford high caliber pistols.

The perps are 99% of the time black too.  Facts

[BeenHereBefore 1,329]

3 minutes ago, Alias Detective said:

The perps are 99% of the time black too.  Facts

Yes I have to agree.

[easilyscan 553]

16 hours ago, Pimpadeaux said:

We are the only nation on Earth with guns being the No. 1 cause of death for children.

https://www.kff.org/global-health-policy/issue-brief/child-and-teen-firearm-mortality-in-the-u-s-and-peer-countries/

You have every right not to own one.

[seafoam1 1,878]

11 hours ago, Pimpadeaux said:

Trump has shown us how it's done. You don't really have a plan. You just go on stage, whine about what a victim you are, viciously lash out at anyone who disagrees or criticizes you and then vow vengeance against them once elected.

That's the way to make America great again!

So to sum up this whole plain honesty thread...

Biden said..

"This is hard to believe," he said. "I never thought when I started my public life that guns would be the No. 1 killer of children in America. Guns. No. 1. It’s sick and overwhelming; a majority of gun owners agree we have to do something."

 

So generalpimpledoosh falls in line and agrees but is wrong again because in reality Biden doesn't know his assh0le from his ear hole and because generalpimpledoosh falls for all the leftist propaganda and is blind to the truth such as....

 

Based on the latest available data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, firearms are not the leading cause of death for children between the ages of 1 and 17 – motor vehicles are.

Firearm deaths listed under the CDC’s data category "Unintentional Injury," shows that out of 4,552 deaths of children between the ages of 1 and 17, motor vehicles accounted for 2,159 of those deaths. Drownings accounted for 753, poisoning accounted for 502, suffocation accounted for 212, fires accounted for 204, transport accounted for 152 and firearms accounted for 120.

 

And there sits generalpimpledoosh all alone, three glasses into his last bottle of white zinfandel, crying to sleep again thinking of ways to GET both TRUMP!!, for calling out the liberals for what they are, and HT, for following around his ex wife so he could share her hair color with the world via FFToday.com....It's a rough life in liberal land folks, don't let all the smiley faces posted on this site fool ya...  

[dogcows 1,029]

1 hour ago, seafoam1 said:

So to sum up this whole plain honesty thread...

Biden said..

"This is hard to believe," he said. "I never thought when I started my public life that guns would be the No. 1 killer of children in America. Guns. No. 1. It’s sick and overwhelming; a majority of gun owners agree we have to do something."

 

So generalpimpledoosh falls in line and agrees but is wrong again because in reality Biden doesn't know his assh0le from his ear hole and because generalpimpledoosh falls for all the leftist propaganda and is blind to the truth such as....

 

Based on the latest available data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, firearms are not the leading cause of death for children between the ages of 1 and 17 – motor vehicles are.

Firearm deaths listed under the CDC’s data category "Unintentional Injury," shows that out of 4,552 deaths of children between the ages of 1 and 17, motor vehicles accounted for 2,159 of those deaths. Drownings accounted for 753, poisoning accounted for 502, suffocation accounted for 212, fires accounted for 204, transport accounted for 152 and firearms accounted for 120.

 

And there sits generalpimpledoosh all alone, three glasses into his last bottle of white zinfandel, crying to sleep again thinking of ways to GET both TRUMP!!, for calling out the liberals for what they are, and HT, for following around his ex wife so he could share her hair color with the world via FFToday.com....It's a rough life in liberal land folks, don't let all the smiley faces posted on this site fool ya...  

You are only quoting the “unintentional injury” stats. Most gun deaths are intentional. But hey, you used a big font, so congrats on that.

[dogcows 1,029]

21 hours ago, Patented Phil said:

Here’s the real truth, from a reputable source that actually cites where its numbers came from.  The data here is from 2030:

Thanks for going to the future and getting this for us. Who is president in 2030?

[porkbutt 860]

can we ban the #1 disease spreading faction in the world while were at it? according to the cdc. men who have butt sex with other men. that would save way more lives. 

[KSB2424 3,082]

15 minutes ago, porkbutt said:

can we ban the #1 disease spreading faction in the world while were at it? according to the cdc. men who have butt sex with other men. that would save way more lives. 

If we’re being serious about saving lives he’s not wrong.  Inner city gun violence and butt sex would cut deaths of people under 50  by a third. 

[seafoam1 1,878]

56 minutes ago, dogcows said:

You are only quoting the “unintentional injury” stats. Most gun deaths are intentional. But hey, you used a big font, so congrats on that.

So majority of kids getting killed by guns are intentional? Nice try bozo. 

[dogcows 1,029]

52 minutes ago, seafoam1 said:

So majority of kids getting killed by guns are intentional? Nice try bozo. 

Yes.

Quote

CDC data shows 4,368 kids died from gunshot wounds in the US in 2020. Of those, 2,811 were considered homicides, 1,293 were suicides. 

An additional 149 were listed as “unintentional” deaths, and 25 were classified as “legal interventions.” Ninety of the deaths could not be classified due to a lack of information.

Source: https://nypost.com/2022/05/26/guns-leading-cause-of-death-for-american-children-cdc-says/

[Patented Phil 823]

2 hours ago, dogcows said:

Thanks for going to the future and getting this for us. Who is president in 2030?

You are such a douche.

[seafoam1 1,878]

39 minutes ago, dogcows said:

Yes.

Source: https://nypost.com/2022/05/26/guns-leading-cause-of-death-for-american-children-cdc-says/

Wrong again nut job. Children are not 18 and 19 year olds. And not 17 either as a matter of fact.

Get rid of liberal run cities and you'll get rid of most of those older deaths too. 

[League Champion 1,593]

6 hours ago, KSB2424 said:

If we’re being serious about saving lives he’s not wrong.  Inner city gun violence

We can't discuss that. We can only discuss it when cute white kids get shot at school. Ask dogcows, he'll tell you. 

[League Champion 1,593]

20 hours ago, TimHauck said:

Why do other countries in Europe for example have far less shootings?  Honest question.  What do they do differently?

Because Baltimore, Philly, Chicago, LA, NY, Washington DC and Miami aren't in Europe. They're here!

The Dems bred and created these animals. This is where you need to start. Check out what's happening in these cities every day & night. I bet you don't care.

WHY ARE DEMS AFRAID TO ADDRESS INNER CITY GUN VIOLENCE AND CRIME?? 

INTERESTING HUH? 

[seafoam1 1,878]

2 hours ago, League Champion said:

Because Baltimore, Philly, Chicago, LA, NY, Washington DC and Miami aren't in Europe. They're here!

The Dems bred and created these animals. This is where you need to start. Check out what's happening in these cities every day & night. I bet you don't care.

WHY ARE DEMS AFRAID TO ADDRESS INNER CITY GUN VIOLENCE AND CRIME?? 

INTERESTING HUH? 

Because local liberal "leadership" are to blame and the liberal voters don't know what the fock they are doing in life.

[Bert 1,087]

8 hours ago, dogcows said:

Yes.

Source: https://nypost.com/2022/05/26/guns-leading-cause-of-death-for-american-children-cdc-says/

And how many of those murders were the result of  Zimbabalolo Snoop Johnson gang banger with 4 felony warrants shooting into a house in Buffalo, Chicago, Houston, Dallas, Atlanta, LA. Miami because of a turf war?  How many accrued in liberal controlled inner Cities?

[dogcows 1,029]

Nothing seems to get MAGA types more riled up than simply providing factual data.

If reality is in constant conflict with one’s preconceived notions, it might be time for a change of perspective.

[Hawkeye21 1,848]

Just now, dogcows said:

Nothing seems to get MAGA types more riled up than simply providing factual data.

If reality is in constant conflict with one’s preconceived notions, it might be time for a change of perspective.

I'm nowhere close to a MAGA type and I don't think guns are the main problem.  I'm on their side.

[seafoam1 1,878]

1 minute ago, dogcows said:

Nothing seems to get MAGA types more riled up than simply providing factual data.

If reality is in constant conflict with one’s preconceived notions, it might be time for a change of perspective.

You should try providing some for once.

[dogcows 1,029]

15 minutes ago, Hawkeye21 said:

I'm nowhere close to a MAGA type and I don't think guns are the main problem.  I'm on their side.

We can disagree on that, that’s fine.

My issue is with those like peefoam who post part of a CDC report and make a false claim based on the fact that they misread the information. Then when I link the actual report, they start with the name-calling, denial, moving goalposts, racism, attacks on liberals, and on and on.

[seafoam1 1,878]

3 minutes ago, dogcows said:

We can disagree on that, that’s fine.

My issue is with those like peefoam who post part of a CDC report and make a false claim based on the fact that they misread the information. Then when I link the actual report, they start with the name-calling, denial, moving goalposts, racism, attacks on liberals, and on and on.

You included adult numbers cowshlt. So you are wrong again and I was right again.

[The Real timschochet 2,884]

Politically this is a winning issue for Democrats.  The vast majority of the public wants more federal gun legislation, particularly universal background checks. The support for banning assault rifles is a little less, and Republicans can oppose that without losing much favor. But Republicans generally oppose ALL federal gun legislation based on the argument that it’s a slippery slope which will end up infringing upon their 2nd Amendment rights. And that’s why this is a winning issue for Democrats IF they are able to make it a priority come election time. So far they haven’t done so. 

[Bert 1,087]

20 minutes ago, Hawkeye21 said:

I'm nowhere close to a MAGA type and I don't think guns are the main problem.

  

It is simply a symptom of a much bigger problem no one wants to address or deal with.  Instead we get MAGAtard, but but we were once slaves, and all the other political horse sh!t.  

[Hardcore troubadour 12,597]

28 minutes ago, dogcows said:

Nothing seems to get MAGA types more riled up than simply providing factual data.

If reality is in constant conflict with one’s preconceived notions, it might be time for a change of perspective.

Let’s say five years from now you would get all of the gun regulations you wish for. But not until then. What would you do to curb gun violence until then with the existing laws and regulations? To protect against school shootings as well? 

[dogcows 1,029]

34 minutes ago, seafoam1 said:

You included adult numbers cowshlt. So you are wrong again and I was right again.

I simply posted a link to the CDC report you referenced. That’s all. And you’re having a meltdown over it. Crapman, is that you behind the keyboard?

[seafoam1 1,878]

15 minutes ago, dogcows said:

I simply posted a link to the CDC report you referenced. That’s all. And you’re having a meltdown over it. Crapman, is that you behind the keyboard?

What meltdown? It's really dumb to think I'm being emotional like liberals get when I simply point out you are wrong. 

And I have no idea why you are crapping your pants. That's all you.

[tubby_mcgee 686]

2019 and beyond internet arguments.....  One posts a source.  Next one posts a source with opposite info. 

Then the criticizing of sources takes places.

My source is better than your source!

[Hardcore troubadour 12,597]

1 hour ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Let’s say five years from now you would get all of the gun regulations you wish for. But not until then. What would you do to curb gun violence until then with the existing laws and regulations? To protect against school shootings as well? 

Crickets. 

[GobbleDog 816]

24 minutes ago, tubby_mcgee said:

 

Yep. Certain posters I refuse to interact. Impossible to have intelligent discussions with people who use the word liberal in every sentence. They side with whatever mainstream GOP says without critical thought. And I'm republican.

Be interesting if hypothetically people had no idea where their party stood on issues and had to decide for themselves. They certainly wouldn't match up.

[GobbleDog 816]

1 hour ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Let’s say five years from now you would get all of the gun regulations you wish for. But not until then. What would you do to curb gun violence until then with the existing laws and regulations? To protect against school shootings as well? 

Existing laws and regulations are inadequate. That's the problem. Nothing to do but send flowers to funerals.

What would you suggest?

[The Real timschochet 2,884]

4 minutes ago, GobbleDog said:

Existing laws and regulations are inadequate. That's the problem. Nothing to do but send flowers to funerals.

What would you suggest?

Well we could spend more money on the ATF. Republicans always cut spending there. 

[Hardcore troubadour 12,597]

5 minutes ago, GobbleDog said:

Existing laws and regulations are inadequate. That's the problem. Nothing to do but send flowers to funerals.

What would you suggest?

Work with what we have now. Are you saying nothing at all can be done to crack down on gun violence? You don’t seem to want to answer a simple question. Inadequate isn’t nothing. It’s not a zero sum situation. 

[Hardcore troubadour 12,597]

1 minute ago, The Real timschochet said:

Well we could spend more money on the ATF. Republicans always cut spending there. 

Not true. Not getting an increase isn’t a cut. HTH. Reminds me of when George Steinbrenner said the Yankees made less than the year before and he claimed he lost money. 

[League Champion 1,593]

2 hours ago, dogcows said:

Nothing seems to get MAGA types more riled up than simply providing factual data.

If reality is in constant conflict with one’s preconceived notions, it might be time for a change of perspective.

 

[GobbleDog 816]

1 minute ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Work with what we have now. Are you saying nothing at all can be done to crack down on gun violence? You don’t seem to want to answer a simple question. Inadequate isn’t nothing. It’s not a zero sum situation. 

We can have gun rights and high gun violence rates, or no gun rights and low gun violence rates. We can't have both. It sucks I know.

".. but what if we just spent more on the ATF, or had more police, or better background checks, or longer waiting periods, or banned assault rifles, or gave harsher sentences to gun offenders, or outlawed violent video games, etc...  then perhaps we could keep our guns and have low gun violence rates.?."   Nope.

Seems America already made it's choice. They want gun rights and have learned to stomach an unbelievable amount of carnage.

[Strike 3,952]

2 minutes ago, GobbleDog said:

We can have gun rights and high gun violence rates, or no gun rights and low gun violence rates. We can't have both. It sucks I know.

".. but what if we just spent more on the ATF, or had more police, or better background checks, or longer waiting periods, or banned assault rifles, or gave harsher sentences to gun offenders, or outlawed violent video games, etc...  then perhaps we could keep our guns and have low gun violence rates.?."   Nope.

Seems America already made it's choice. They want gun rights and have learned to stomach an unbelievable amount of carnage.

Except whether we have "high gun violence rates" is not necessarily true.  For decades violent crime was on a downwards trajectory in the U.S.  I don't know how it's trended over the last decade or so but I'd be surprised if it was higher than it was in the 60's.   One of the problems now is that we have a 24/7 news cycle and the Internet.  But this notion that violent crime is SUDDENLY an issue is wrong.  So, the first question we need to discuss is what is the ACCEPTABLE rate.  If that number is zero we have nothing to discuss because that will never happen.   Then the next question is, what are we willing to give up to attain that acceptable rate, assuming we can agree on an acceptable rate.  We also need to quit comparing the U.S. to other countries because many of those countries don't have the rights/protections we do, and some of us aren't going to be willing to give up basic rights chasing some utopian or unattainable goal.

[Hawkeye21 1,848]

11 minutes ago, GobbleDog said:

We can have gun rights and high gun violence rates, or no gun rights and low gun violence rates. We can't have both. It sucks I know.

".. but what if we just spent more on the ATF, or had more police, or better background checks, or longer waiting periods, or banned assault rifles, or gave harsher sentences to gun offenders, or outlawed violent video games, etc...  then perhaps we could keep our guns and have low gun violence rates.?."   Nope.

Seems America already made it's choice. They want gun rights and have learned to stomach an unbelievable amount of carnage.

Doesn't everyone agree on the one thing though?  Try harder to fix the problem we have with people wanting to shoot others.  That is the biggest problem there is and everyone knows it.

[Hardcore troubadour 12,597]

17 minutes ago, GobbleDog said:

We can have gun rights and high gun violence rates, or no gun rights and low gun violence rates. We can't have both. It sucks I know.

".. but what if we just spent more on the ATF, or had more police, or better background checks, or longer waiting periods, or banned assault rifles, or gave harsher sentences to gun offenders, or outlawed violent video games, etc...  then perhaps we could keep our guns and have low gun violence rates.?."   Nope.

Seems America already made it's choice. They want gun rights and have learned to stomach an unbelievable amount of carnage.

 Not true. America made its choice to make carrying a gun without registration to be illegal and put laws in place that called for prison time. 

[GobbleDog 816]

1 minute ago, Strike said:

We also need to quit comparing the U.S. to other countries

Ya only say that because America's gun violence rate (and mass shooting rate) is ridiculously higher than every other first world country.  So your answer is "well, then let's not compare them. We should be higher because we have more rights/protections..."  What does that mean?  That's insane. No we shouldn't.

Here's the thing that drives me insane with gun-right nuts. At least I'm unbiased and realistic. If you asked me "hypothetically, if the U.S. gun violence rate was consistent with other first world countries, then would you still favor gun control?" to which I'd say no.

But if you ask gun-right nuts... "hypothetically, if the U.S. gun violence rate was five times higher than it is now, then would you favor gun control?" - no.  10x's higher?  - no.  100x's higher?  - no. Is there any point or situation in which you'd favor gun control? - no.  

How can you have an intelligent debate with people that have no critical thinking?

[GobbleDog 816]

7 minutes ago, Hawkeye21 said:

Try harder to fix the problem we have with people wanting to shoot others.  That is the biggest problem there is and everyone knows it.

All countries have some people wanting to shoot others. The difference is Americans have easy access to an arsenal of weapons and ammunition.  That's the problem.

"If only we could get people to not want to shoot others..."  kumbaya