Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A gun is now more likely to kill you than a car is in the U.S

economist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 155 posts

Re: A gun is now more likely to kill you than a car is in the U.S

#61

Post by underbluewaters »

apetresc wrote: post #4

From the article: > By contrast, safety features on firearms—such as smartguns unlocked by an owner’s thumbprint or a radio-frequency encryption—are opposed by the National Rifle Association, whose allies in Congress also block funding for the sort of public-health research that might show, in even clearer detail, the cost of America’s love affair with guns. Can someone explain the NRA to me? At this point they come…

Easy. Each weapon is a tool that will likely never be used, but if it is must be 100% reliable and quickly deployable while under extreme stress. "Smart" guns introduce a new feature that would impact both speed and reliability.

No implementation of a TouchID-like system for guns would be perfect and so the gun owner must weigh the potential benefits and risks. I don't think the NRA's members want to take that choice away from the gun owner, but even having a commercial solution come to market means some states will require it's use. IIRC one state has laws on the books to mandate the use of the technology once it's commercially available.

Re: A gun is now more likely to kill you than a car is in the U.S

#62

Post by vor_ »

otikik wrote: post #37
vor_ wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Including suicides seems unfair. Why?

I can't read the article, but I would assume that they have not included the suicides happening at home using the car (by inhaling exhaust in a closed space), and have only counted the deaths on the road.

Emission controls on modern vehicles make it difficult to die from carbon monoxide poisoning these days.

Re: A gun is now more likely to kill you than a car is in the U.S

#63

Post by sesutton »

mseebach wrote: post #23
apetresc wrote: post #4

From the article: > By contrast, safety features on firearms—such as smartguns unlocked by an owner’s thumbprint or a radio-frequency encryption—are opposed by the National Rifle Association, whose allies in Congress also block funding for the sort of public-health research that might show, in even clearer detail, the cost of America’s love affair with guns. Can someone explain the NRA to me? At this point they come…

Accepting the premise that it's a good thing that the population at large can own guns, their argument is that they're thinking a few steps ahead: If smartguns become popular, the government can then outlaw non-smartguns without too many people caring (they can still own and fire guns). Then the smart-stuff is leveraged to "enhance" security - transferring ownership, for an example, could be made subject to a governm…

This is just a variation of the slippery slope argument except this slope doesn't seem very slippery to me. Gun rights have been getting stronger in the US not weaker, courts in recent years have decided that the 2nd amendment is an individual right and that it is incorporated against the states.

I don't see how a libertarian, as many gun advocates but certainly not all, can make a rational argument for preventing a private company from selling smart-guns to individuals.

Re: A gun is now more likely to kill you than a car is in the U.S

#64

Post by sosuke »

I keep looking through the data, http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr63/nvsr63_03.pdf, and it seems like cars still beat out guns by a good margin. They even say in the article most of the gun deaths are by suicide. Just the few numbers I grabbed says you're still 3 times more likely to be killed by or in a car. I looked again at the article and they don't even list the numbers because it conflicts with the story they WANT to have. The proper title is "The forecast for ways you might die in the next 5 years if you remain in the 15-24 age bracket shows a higher change of being killed by a gun, or killing yourself with a gun, than by being killed in or by a car."

Assault (homicide) by discharge of firearms 11,068

Accidental discharge of firearms 591

Discharge of firearms, undetermined intent 248

Motor vehicle accidents 35,303

Unless you're taking your own life: Intentional self-harm (suicide) by discharge of firearms 19,990

Re: A gun is now more likely to kill you than a car is in the U.S

#65

Post by geebee »

bryanlarsen wrote: post #27
samsnelling wrote: post #16

Including suicides seems unfair. > The U.S. Department of Justice reports that approximately 60% of all adult firearm deaths are by suicide, 61% more than deaths by homicide. [1] [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_Stat...

Just making suicide slightly more difficult dramatically reduces suicide rates. It's difficult to stop someone determined to kill themselves, but most suicides are impulse decisions, so removing the opportunity often prevents the suicide. That's why suicide barriers on bridges actually reduce suicide rates rather than changing the method.

I agree with you generally… but in this specific case, do regions with very strong and effective gun control have dramatically lower suicide rates than the US? My understanding is that suicide rates in Europe aren't dramatically lower, though they do appear to be a bit lower in western europe and higher in eastern… I can't tell if this might be handgun related, is the delta large enough?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_suicide_ra...

I don't have any information on the suicide rates by gun in each country, though it would be useful information from a public health standpoint (especially if, as you pointed out, the accessibility could be reduced).

Re: A gun is now more likely to kill you than a car is in the U.S

#66

Post by dllthomas »

donatj wrote: post #60

Depending on your source of numbers, 40-60% of gun deaths are suicide and 30-60% are gang related. That at most leaves 0-30% "preventable" shootings. Gang member aren't going to use "smart guns" and I have the moral right to kill myself.

"I should have the legal right to kill myself."

And of course, even if someone disagrees with that, getting rid of the gun is more likely to change the method than the result.

Re: A gun is now more likely to kill you than a car is in the U.S

#67

Post by apetresc »

yebyen wrote: post #49
apetresc wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is the "keep the government in line" thing really a reason that anybody actually believes anymore? Like, if things got so bad that the government was "turning on its own people" with weaponry, somebody really thinks some guys with guns from Wal-Mart are going to be what stops them?

So are you saying you think they stand a better chance at defending themselves from the oppressive government without the guns?

I guess I'm saying, by the time guns are actually involved, I think they have 0% chance either way.

Re: A gun is now more likely to kill you than a car is in the U.S

#68

Post by [deleted] »

ryandvm wrote: post #58

Ignoring the click-bait headline implying that guns have become more dangerous than cars - what we actually see are that deaths from both have declined. Car deaths slightly more quickly than gun deaths. I find that incredibly encouraging. Nothing about guns or gun ownership has changed dramatically in the United States over this period. Perhaps this signals that the bizarre, and often fetishized, culture of violence…

[deleted]

Re: A gun is now more likely to kill you than a car is in the U.S

#69

Post by coryrc »

apetresc wrote: post #38
jerf wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, among the key facts necessary to understand that is that the "safety features" are not pure cost-free benefit, and the NRA believes the costs outweigh the benefits. They have some decent arguments for the existence of the costs; reasonable people could disagree about the relative degree of each. It is also not generally the case that guns are always "bad"; guns are also significantly used in self-defense, usual…

> Well, among the key facts necessary to understand that is that the "safety features" are not pure cost-free benefit, and the NRA believes the costs outweigh the benefits. They have some decent arguments for the existence of the costs; reasonable people could disagree about the relative degree of each. Sure. Advanced safety features in cars probably cost a lot to develop, too, and I'm sure there's a lot of people wh…

Safety of whom? I care about the safety of the person using the gun for self-defense. The "safety" features compromise the gun for its intended usage.

Re: A gun is now more likely to kill you than a car is in the U.S

#70

Post by lkbm »

vor_ wrote: post #25
throwaway90999 wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most of the perceived absurdity comes from disingenuous framing of the issues. Here are some examples: Over half of all quoted gun deaths are suicides. [edit: removed mention of suicide survivability as I don't have a reference handy. But remember: The most likely person to shoot you is yourself.] Let's remove suicide from the discussion and talk about violence. The primary driver for violence is socioeconomic. The U…

> Let's remove suicide from the discussion and talk about violence. Why? This is the second time I've seen that suggestion in these comments, and I don't understand why suicides should not be counted as gun deaths.

When I accidentally shoot someone and they die, they would be alive if I hadn't had the gun.

When I intentionally shoot someone and they die, they would likely be alive if I hadn't had the gun.

When I intentionally shoot myself and I die, I would likely have found another effective suicide method and died anyway without the gun.

Killing someone with a pill is not something you do in a fit of rage. Killing someone with your car could be, but only if you're driving and they're in the road (ideally not in a car of their own).

Killing yourself is quite easy to do using non-gun methods, without any additional planning or prep time.

In short, take my gun away, and I can still commit suicide, but it's much harder for me to kill others or accidentally kill myself.

Post reply on HN