ForumGarden

That information is surprisingly hard to come by. The Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, for example, has a tally atop its website of “people shot in America.” That number, though, is an estimate, based on the number of gun injuries and deaths recorded by the CDC in 2008 and 2009, the most recent years for which statistics are available. It seems shocking that when guns are in the headlines every day, there’s no one attempting to create a real-time chronicle of the deaths attributable to guns in the United States.



Well, someone is. Since this summer, the anonymous creator of the Twitter feed @GunDeaths has been doing his best to compile those statistics, tweeting every reported death he can find. He was inspired, he told us in a phone interview, by the Aurora, Colo., shootings and simply wanted to call daily attention to the toll that guns take. Now Slate is partnering with @GunDeaths to create this interactive feature, “Gun Deaths in America Since Newtown.”



Gun-death tally: Every American gun death since Newtown Sandy Hook shooting (INTERACTIVE). - Slate Magazine

How Many People Have Been Killed by Guns Since Newtown?

Why, none, Ahso. Surely you know that. :yh_wink

How many have been saved by them is probably more important.

I'd like to remember to keep a running total.

When I started this thread yesterday the number was 393

Today - 409

halfway;1414981 wrote: How many have been saved by them is probably more important.


Do you think the number of lives saved since Dec 14 exceeds the 409 lives lost ? Thats like saying taking preventative medication is more important than eradicating malaria

How many alcohol related deaths occur each year



I wonder how many in your tally involved alcohol?

flopstock;1414991 wrote: How many alcohol related deaths occur each year



I wonder how many in your tally involved alcohol?Why don't you research it if you're curious and get back to us with something of substance?

ETA: Meanwhile, your link is completely irrelevant and your excuse is transparent.

Alcohol Use and Health

There are approximately 80,000 deaths attributable to excessive alcohol use each year in the United States.1 This makes excessive alcohol use the 3r d leading lifestyle-related cause of death for the nation.2 Excessive alcohol use is responsible for 2.3 million years of potential life lost (YPLL) annually, or an average of about 30 years of potential life lost for each death.1 In 2006, there were more than 1.2 million emergency room visits and 2.7 million physician office visits due to excessive drinking.3 The economic costs of excessive alcohol consumption in 2006 were estimated at $223.5 billion.3


Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

OK, I misread the question about alcohol abuse and firearms and just supplied general stats of alcohol abuse.

Ahso!;1414992 wrote: Why don't you research it if you're curious and get back to us with something of substance?

ETA: Meanwhile, your link is completely irrelevant and your excuse is transparent.
Unnecessarily rude.

Prescription drug deaths are off the charts and a national tragedy. Research with an easy google search.

Isn't just one death too many?

AnneBoleyn;1415007 wrote: Unnecessarily rude.Not quite, Anne. This is becoming a deliberate behavior by her and her new friend. They're angry that I've reported prior posts, which is what ownership asked me to do.

halfway;1415008 wrote: Prescription drug deaths are off the charts and a national tragedy. Research with an easy google search.

Isn't just one death too many?Start a new thread on it. This one is concerning guns.

Ahso!;1414992 wrote: Why don't you research it if you're curious and get back to us with something of substance?



ETA: Meanwhile, your link is completely irrelevant and your excuse is transparent.


You don't have to find it relevant to the discussion. I do. And last time I checked this was an open forum.



The number of alcohol related deaths in this country every year is staggering. The number of idiots who drink and drive, drink and pick up a blunt object and beat someone to death, drink and reach for that gun because it makes perfect sense at the moment is probably far greater than is even given credit.



Yet you prefer to get all up in arms because some mentally ill person lost their nut and picked up a gun. You become outraged because there is a death associated with a gun accident... when in fact folks die every day from a multitude of accidental reasons.

flopstock;1415013 wrote: You don't have to find it relevant to the discussion. I do. And last time I checked this was an open forum.



The number of alcohol related deaths in this country every year is staggering. The number of idiots who drink and drive, drink and pick up a blunt object and beat someone to death, drink and reach for that gun because it makes perfect sense at the moment is probably far greater than is even given credit.



Yet you prefer to get all up in arms because some mentally ill person lost their nut and picked up a gun. You become outraged because there is a death associated with a gun accident... when in fact folks die every day from a multitude of accidental reasons.It's a different topic no matter how hard you try to rationalize it. Start a thread on it and see who participates. There's nothing to fear. You're a moderator, if anyone should understand forum decorum it's you. You understand you're being deliberately disrespectful, I doubt you're dumb enough not to.

flopstock;1415013 wrote: You don't have to find it relevant to the discussion. I do. And last time I checked this was an open forum.



The number of alcohol related deaths in this country every year is staggering. The number of idiots who drink and drive, drink and pick up a blunt object and beat someone to death, drink and reach for that gun because it makes perfect sense at the moment is probably far greater than is even given credit.



Yet you prefer to get all up in arms because some mentally ill person lost their nut and picked up a gun. You become outraged because there is a death associated with a gun accident... when in fact folks die every day from a multitude of accidental reasons.


Your logic will always be met with emotion...of which the emotional will use ANY red herring and cry-baby reasoning to further their emotional agenda.

Emotional agendas are dangerous.....they are prominent throughout history.

Looks like we remain at 409 today.

Wow! Big jump to 1242

Ahso!;1415273 wrote: Looks like we remain at 409 today.


Ahso!;1415311 wrote: Wow! Big jump to 1242


Well, that explains everything.

YZGI;1415319 wrote: Well, that explains everything.???

Ahso!;1415273 wrote: Looks like we remain at 409 today.


1/4/13 10:16 am Above says we REMAIN at 409 today.

Ahso!;1415311 wrote: Wow! Big jump to 1242
1/4/13 1:07pm Above says Wow! jump to 1242. Are you saying in 3 hours 833 people were killed by guns in the US?

YZGI;1415321 wrote: 1/4/13 10:16 am Above says we REMAIN at 409 today.

1/4/13 1:07pm Above says Wow! jump to 1242. Are you saying in 3 hours 833 people were killed by guns in the US?No, I'm saying, that the people doing this are apparently still gathering information and updating the tally.

The first post in this thread provides the link and the info on how the information is being gathered.

Deaths since Newtown: 427

Gun-death tally: Every American gun death since Newtown Sandy Hook shooting (INTERACTIVE). - Slate Magazine

Far cry from 1242.

The ends justify the means.

Lying is not really lying if it justifies a deeper agenda.

Just some observations.

halfway;1415336 wrote: The ends justify the means.

Lying is not really lying if it justifies a deeper agenda.

Just some observations. :)Ah, it was changed. Fixed I guess. 1242 is what it said earlier though.

halfway;1415336 wrote: The ends justify the means.

Lying is not really lying if it justifies a deeper agenda.

Just some observations.




:-3

:-2

520

Chicago's extensive gun laws are preventing gun crimes.

Guns Saves Lives

Thanks Tude. Nice perspective.

halfway;1415008 wrote: Prescription drug deaths are off the charts and a national tragedy. Research with an easy google search.

Isn't just one death too many?


If just one death is too many then how come you still allow private citizens to own guns?

Bryn Mawr;1415784 wrote: If just one death is too many then how come you still allow private citizens to own guns?


Do you not understand any wit or sarcasm? Can you not put anything in perspective? The phrase references the knee-jerk reaction and further defiance of logic any time there is a tragedy.

I am quite sure you will not understand any of what I said, so consider that your response will likely go unanswered.

Why is there so much anger on these boards?

halfway;1415786 wrote: Do you not understand any wit or sarcasm? Can you not put anything in perspective? The phrase references the knee-jerk reaction and further defiance of logic any time there is a tragedy.

I am quite sure you will not understand any of what I said, so consider that your response will likely go unanswered.

Why is there so much anger on these boards?


Knee jerk defines a single occurrence of an event leading to an excessive and unnecessary response. What do you call frequently repeated events leading to no response at all?



Where is the anger? I am trying to apply logic to what I see as often emotive and / or diversionary responses. Yes, unnecessary death upsets me but anger has no place in discussion.

“Totalitarianism didn’t come quickly, it took 5 years from 1938 until 1943, to realize full dictatorship in Austria. Had it happened overnight, my countrymen would have fought to the last breath. Instead, we had creeping gradualism. Now, our only weapons were broom handles. The whole idea sounds almost unbelievable that the state, little by little eroded our freedom.” - Kitty Werthmann. Survivor.

Very well stated.

588

halfway;1415336 wrote: The ends justify the means.

Lying is not really lying if it justifies a deeper agenda.

Just some observations.


Sounds just like the republican platform.

If tyranny does happen here (& I know at heart this is the true reason for our desire to possess arms) I'm sorry to say half of us will think the tyrant is on one side & half of us will think the tyrant is the other side.

America. Love it or leave it or sucede it.

AnneBoleyn;1415956 wrote:

If tyranny does happen here (& I know at heart this is the true reason for our desire to possess arms) I'm sorry to say half of us will think the tyrant is on one side & half of us will think the tyrant is the other side.




Sadly, I think you're right. And the people who will profit from this are the same one who profit from every conflict or war -- the guys that sell the weapons and ammunition. Or so it has been for a century or more.

People own guns because it's cultural. The second amendment is nothing more than a convenience at this point.

Ahso!;1415955 wrote: 588643

AnneBoleyn;1415956 wrote: Sounds just like the republican platform. The two parties often sound alike, if you listen closely.

AnneBoleyn;1415956 wrote: If tyranny does happen here (& I know at heart this is the true reason for our desire to possess arms) I'm sorry to say half of us will think the tyrant is on one side & half of us will think the tyrant is the other side. "IF"??? I think you've struck the heart of it. We are living under tyranny, and they have divided us exactly as you say. They've set themselves up as two tyrants with the same goals, only differing on who should lead.

Considering what we revolted over, do you think that our forefathers would ever have stood for what this federal government does as a matter of course?



Ahso!;1415971 wrote: People own guns because it's cultural. The second amendment is nothing more than a convenience at this point.
Agreed. I'm glad we have it.

Accountable;1415982 wrote: Considering what we revolted over, do you think that our forefathers would ever have stood for what this federal government does as a matter of course?Some of them might bitch and moan on the internet, but otherwise, yes they would as is evidenced today. Just as there are people today who would have participated in the revolutionary efforts and now live with the reality ow the here and now.

Hamilton would be loving this.

Ahso!;1415988 wrote: Some of them might bitch and moan on the internet, but otherwise, yes they would as is evidenced today. Just as there are people today who would have participated in the revolutionary efforts and now live with the reality ow the here and now.

Hamilton would be loving this.
You clearly have no sense of history (or much knowledge, it seems) or the ability to consider perspective.

Accountable;1415996 wrote: You clearly have no sense of history (or much knowledge, it seems) or the ability to consider perspective.


After researching several of his previous posts, I came to the same conclusion.

I don't make a habit of arguing with fools or responding to their never-ending requests for clarity or red herring approaches. Especially those who's minds are made up and have no chance of accepting anything outside their own biases and beliefs.

"Give me Liberty or Give me Death" and "Don't Tread on Me" are NOT alive and well in the Northeast.

Accountable;1415996 wrote: You clearly have no sense of history (or much knowledge, it seems) or the ability to consider perspective.What? You think all the values that these people had died with them or are instilled in people like David Koresh, Alex Jones or you?

Then you all should unite, take up your arms and get to revolting rather than chatting on the internet.

I'll wait while you gather your evidence to refute what I've said. It might be out there for all I know.

halfway;1415997 wrote: After researching several of his previous posts, I came to the same conclusion.

I don't make a habit of arguing with fools or responding to their never-ending requests for clarity or red herring approaches. Especially those who's minds are made up and have no chance of accepting anything outside their own biases and beliefs.

"Give me Liberty or Give me Death" and "Don't Tread on Me" are NOT alive and well in the Northeast.

That's rich coming from a copy and paste conspiracy theorist.

Really! Why is it you bother "researching" anything I post if you're not going to share it with the rest of us? I doubt you've done much research at all.

Ahso!;1416009 wrote: What? You think all the values that these people had died with them or are instilled in people like David Koresh, Alex Jones or you?

Then you all should unite, take up your arms and get to revolting rather than chatting on the internet.

I'll wait while you gather your evidence to refute what I've said. It might be out there for all I know.If you want to start a thread explaining how the people that revolted over a 3% tax would be happy with 5 times as much, I'll be happy to participate, but I'm loathe to distract you from your railing in this one.

Accountable;1416012 wrote: If you want to start a thread explaining how the people that revolted over a 3% tax would be happy with 5 times as much, I'll be happy to participate, but I'm loathe to distract you from your railing in this one.There are reasons for the percentage of tax going up. Those forefathers you keep referring to would most like figure that out, even today. And if they couldn't, too bad for them, it's a different world than where they came out of.

The money going for taxes assures circulation of the money as opposed to people storing it in the stock market or off shore bank accounts. Unless we want to continue to borrow and create money it must otherwise circulate. Whether that circulation occurs from public or private jobs makes no difference to me other than where and how that money is being directed.

Ahso!;1414872 wrote: Gun-death tally: Every American gun death since Newtown Sandy Hook shooting (INTERACTIVE). - Slate Magazine


Thanks for the great links, Ahso! They were very informative.

Ahso!;1416013 wrote: There are reasons for the percentage of tax going up. Those forefathers you keep referring to would most like figure that out, even today. And if they couldn't, too bad for them, it's a different world than where they came out of.

The money going for taxes assures circulation of the money as opposed to people storing it in the stock market or off shore bank accounts. Unless we want to continue to borrow and create money it must otherwise circulate. Whether that circulation occurs from public or private jobs makes no difference to me other than where and how that money is being directed.


We are taxed to insure circulation???

I have never ever heard the pitch for new or higher taxes to keep citizens from investing in the stock market. That's a good one.

tude dog;1416097 wrote: We are taxed to insure circulation???

I have never ever heard the pitch for new or higher taxes to keep citizens from investing in the stock market. That's a good one.


It's absurd.

Ahso!;1415972 wrote: 643695