Re: OT /Interesting amusing statistic

[tourman <robercampbell@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Jun 20, 12:49=A0am, Jim <alarmi...@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Jun 19, 5:01 pm, tourman <robercampb...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Jun 19, 1:54 pm, Jim <alarmi...@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > > On Jun 19, 7:56 am, tourman <robercampb...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > > > On Jun 18, 5:53 pm, "Robert L Bass" <Sa...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > "Jim" wrote:
>
> > > > > > Doctors vs Gun owners:
>
> > > > > > Doctors :
> > > > > > (A) The number of physicians in the U.S.. is 700,000.
>
> > > > > > (B) Accidental deaths caused by Physicians per year are 120,000=
.
>
> > > > > > (C) Accidental deaths per physician is 0.171.
>
> > > > > > Statistics courtesy of U.S. Dept of Health and Human Services.
>
> > > > > > So, statistically, doctors are approximately 9,000 times more
> > > > > > dangerous than gun owners.
>
> > > > > The quoted statistics don't take into account the more significan=
t issue of
> > > > > "number of overall incidents." Let us assume that the average doc=
tor sees 30
> > > > > patients per day. Now let us assume that gun owners accidentally =
fire their
> > > > > weapons only once every 10 years.
>
> > > > > If we multiply the number of doctors (700,000) by patients per da=
y (30) and
> > > > > again multiply the result by number of days the average doctor ac=
tually works
> > > > > in a given year (say 200) we have 4,200,000,000 doctor-patient in=
teractions
> > > > > per year. Divide this into 120,000 and we find that you have a 0.=
000028
> > > > > chance of dying from a doctor visit.
>
> > > > > Now take the number of accidental gunshots -- 8,000,000 owners on=
ce every 10
> > > > > years. 1,500 of these accidental discharges result in deaths. Div=
ide 1,500
> > > > > by (80,000,000/10) and we find that the likelihood of death from =
accidental
> > > > > discharge of a firearm is 0.0001875. Thus the chance of dying fro=
m any given
> > > > > accidental discharge of a firearm is nearly 7 times that of visit=
ing a doctor.
>
> > > > > This does not take into account the number of people who die of h=
eart attacks
> > > > > after receiving the physicians' bills. It also does not take into
> > > > > consideration the probability that all of the statistics in the c=
ited report
> > > > > were made up on the spot by the author of the report, just like t=
he ones I
> > > > > just made up. :^)
>
> > > > > --
>
> > > > > Regards,
> > > > > Robert L Bass
>
> > > > > =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D>
> > > > > Bass Home Electronics
> > > > > DIY Alarm and Home Automation Storehttp://www.bassburglaralarms.c=
om
> > > > > Sales & Service 941-870-2310
> > > > > Fax 941-870-3252
> > > > > =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D>
>
> > > > RHC: Although both posts were made "tongue in cheek", it does
> > > > illustrate how the gun hating and other paranoid groups use the sam=
e
> > > > kind of approach to "prove" any number of ridiculous claims about t=
he
> > > > harm of private gun ownership. Distortion of the truth by the misus=
e
> > > > of statistics is the name of the game in both the US and Canada on =
any
> > > > number of issues (not just the gun control issue but definately wit=
h
> > > > the gun control issue). You always have to look at the source of an=
y
> > > > report to get the true "colour" of the facts....
>
> > > > I think one of our long dead Prime Ministers said it correctly when
> > > > faced with a poll showing stats that weren't in his favour..." Poll=
s
> > > > are for dogs to pee on...."-
>
> > > Robert, how is the situation going up your way? Has it quited down or
> > > are they still hell bent on taking away your right of self defense?
>
> > RHC: Right now, the situation is stable but far from good. The long
> > gun registry is still law, but each year the Conservative government
> > (Republican) passes an exemption so you can't legally be charged with
> > a crime for not registering your long guns. However, if the Liberals
> > (Democrats) ever get in power, they will eliminate this exemption
> > allowing the police authorities (who generally are either neutral or
> > anti-gun) to start to harass non compliant but otherwise honest gun
> > owners. It doesn`t seem to bother them at a Federal level that half
> > the provinces in Canada refuse to even comply with the long gun
> > registry at all, due to the largely rural nature of these provinces.
> > Nor the fact that after six years in place, the compliancy rate is
> > abysmal...(estimated at less than 20% nation wide). And the government
> > of Quebec is so damn anti-gun because of the Montreal mass murders of
> > a number of women a few years ago, they would go it on their own if
> > the Federal Conservatives ever did manage to kill this multi-billion
> > dollar long gun registry boondoggle (as they have officially stated in
> > their platform many times....)
>
> > Handguns are strictly controlled (since 1934) to the point of being
> > not available at all unless you are a member of an approved handgun
> > club. I am definately in the minority since I have all the necessary
> > permits allowing me to travel all over Canada and the US for the
> > purposes (only) of shooting in approved competitions (they are in a
> > binder fully 1/2 inch thick..no kidding...and took me years to get).
> > In Canada, there is no right to self defense practically speaking. If
> > you ever shot anyone, even someone trying to break in to your home,
> > you would honestly find yourself in far more trouble than the burglar.
> > All firearms have to be kept in a locked gun safe, and can only be
> > transported (except when actually hunting) in a locked hard shell
> > case, also with a trigger lock installed. So legally, they could never
> > be available in the case of an emergency break in or home invasion
> > anyway...
>
> > Bottom line, most of the time, I feel like a man standing on the end
> > of a plank. Every gangland shooting up here and the anti's go off the
> > deep end, calling for the banning of all legal handguns (some 550,000
> > LEGAL handguns Canada wide including law enforcement) and endless
> > other unnecessary and dire restrictions against all the wrong people
> > Bottom line, it`s not good, but not likely to ever get better given
> > the Canadian anti-gun bias deep within our left wing psyche !! I sure
> > wish we had an NRA type organization up here to keep the loonies at
> > bay but that too won`t ever happen......
>
> > I simply shoulder along going from one IPSC and USPSA Practical
> > Shooting match to another, and try to enjoy the sport without looking
> > too hard over my shoulder. I can say with all honesty, that if you
> > guys had the wonderful medical coverage we all do up here, I would
> > seriously consider moving Stateside permanently.....
>
> > But that`s not likely to happen either....:))-
>
> We're all waiting to see what is inevitably going to happen here, in
> the next few years.
> In spite of a recent favorable ruling by the Supreme Court, it does
> not bode well for law abiding gun owers.

RHC: Allow me to comment on that particular point, but only as an
outsider looking in. Your sentiments reflect those of my shooting
friends in the southern States, but others I have spoken to think it
might be a bit much a bit too soon. There seems to be quite an
overreaction in the US to the fears of an Obama lead charge on gun
ownership. This has caused a US wide run on purchases of guns, ammo
and reloading supplies causing prices to skyrocket. However, many also
feel Obama has a lot on his plate and will likely only get to this
issue long into his leadership run, if ever. Current elected officials
still remember how they lost their seats to a gun owning population a
while ago, and many believe that they will tread very carefully on
this issue.

However, having said that, forewarned is forearmed ! If experience is
any teacher, just look north to see how deceitful anti gun groups and
misguided public opinion fueled by self serving politicians has warped
fair review of the issue, and lead to atrocious restrictions in our
country. I truly believe it is no longer possible to get a logical,
thoughtful review of this issue, due to heightened emotions on both
sides of the issue. Since we as gun owners have been put in that
position, our only response must be to hit them hard with the biggest
hammer we can find - they will listen to nothing else unfortunately.

In the 70's, I functioned as the Secretary Treasurer of the Canadian
gun lobby (such as it was - it was known in those days as FARO
(Firearms and Responsible Ownership). We actively worked with the
highest levels of the government of the day in a fully cooperative way
to assess our laws and suggest changes that would actually work,
keeping in mind the interests of both "sides" of the issue. To make a
long story short, we were met with positive response paying lip
service to positive changes, but nothing but deceit, lies and anti-gun
responses at a legislative level. We learned, lawmakers simply can't
be trusted to make rational decisions based on facts when so many of
them are "closet anti-gunners". The NRA and other organizations like
them are your best hope to safeguard your rights through strong and
united political strength and pressure.

It may be too late for our country, but NEVER let your guard down. Up
here they gave the Order of Canada (our highest honour) to the head of
one of our most deceitful, lying anti-gun groups. After that, even the
most trusting of gun owners gave up hope of ever seeing a fair and
even assessment of our gun laws.......:((