View Full Version : CDC says Firearms are the Leading Cause of Death for Children
OutofBatt3ry
11-28-22, 19:23
I don't believe this stat...not for a second, even if you count all the 14-17yo assholes shooting each other in the nice parts of town.
Inkslinger
11-28-22, 19:39
I don't believe this stat...not for a second, even if you count all the 14-17yo assholes shooting each other in the nice parts of town.
More disingenuous statistics. That stat is only accurate because of our inner city yuts. They want you to think it’s all precious little innocent children from all walks of life. It’s kind of like when they throw around the total number of gun deaths leading people to believe they’re all homicides. They always leave out that 2/3’s are suicides.
OutofBatt3ry
11-28-22, 19:45
More disingenuous statistics. That stat is only accurate because of our inner city yuts. They want you to think it’s all precious little innocent children from all walks of life. It’s kind of like when they throw around the total number of gun deaths leading people to believe they’re all homicides. They always leave out that 2/3’s are suicides.
If you google the articles, they never even touch on "yute-shootings" because that wouldn't push the narrative. They actually try and blame it on accidental deaths, like 7y/o Billy getting hold of PawPaw's revolver. That's when I just come back around to the "statistics" are so unbelievably unrealistic, some asshole is just getting paid to make them up.
Oh, and the CDC considers 18/19yo adults, children.
Inkslinger
11-28-22, 19:56
If you google the articles, they never even touch on "yute-shootings" because that wouldn't push the narrative. They actually try and blame it on accidental deaths, like 7y/o Billy getting hold of PawPaw's revolver. That's when I just come back around to the "statistics" are so unbelievably unrealistic, some asshole is just getting paid to make them up.
A lie by omission is still a lie. The only people that believe anything the MSM spews out are lazy dimwits. The problem is we’re outnumbered by those dimwits…
Pretty sure they put “children” above the age of 18 in some of their stats. Just like the nanny-gov allows “children” on their parents health insurance to age 26. :rolleyes:
OutofBatt3ry
11-28-22, 20:16
Pretty sure they put “children” above the age of 18 in some of their stats. Just like the nanny-gov allows “children” on their parents health insurance to age 26. :rolleyes:
That's exactly what they do. I didn't pull that from another source. I just took that screen shot from the live website. When you add 18 and 19y/o people to "shooting stats", it greatly skews the data for "children", which I suspect isn't accurate to any degree in the first place.
https://i.imgur.com/qZ0QHf7.jpg
I’m willing to bet the number of jabbed kids who’ve died of myocarditis outnumbers gun deaths, not like we’ll ever get that number confirmed though.
Yeah, after seeing the complete b.s. the CDC put out over the last two years I wouldn’t believe them if they told me the grass was green and the sky was blue.
OMG! We need to get rid of guns for the children. It's all so clear now. Don't you care about the children?
6 gangbanging teenagers shot it out Saturday night in ATL. 12 year old was pronounced dead on scene.
As already alluded to, stuff like that is the bulk of those stats. The majority of shootings I used to run were teenagers.
CDC? I'm pretty sure they lost all credibility after their Covid BS over the last couple of years.
One of the last times "they" were talking statistics of youth carrying guns, they were counting youths as being up to 26 years of age.
Sent from my BE2028 using Tapatalk
FromMyColdDeadHand
11-28-22, 22:11
8,000 kids killed in the last trimester every year. F them.
hotbiggun42
11-28-22, 23:07
I believe it. Look at the highest murder rate of children. Almost all Latin American countries.
Who are illegally crossing our borders by the millions? Yep thats right.
It's still BS. The numbers don't even come close to auto fatalities and accidental drowning.
15 years of responding to shootings in a cosmopolitan community in Northwest Indiana has proven to me that the CDC and their statistics are horribly wrong. Black males that are high school age are the targets AND the shooters. The terrible thing about this is two fold:
1. The CDC and media do not care because their agenda is not fullfilled.
2. The community where the blood letting occurs does not care.
In the mean time, we continue to pick up these dead kids at 0200 in the morning and stand by for tomorrow's retaliation.
The next pandemic...complete with executive orders and emergency authorization powers...for the children.
It's still BS. The numbers don't even come close to auto fatalities and accidental drowning.
All depends how they parse the numbers. "All deaths of children even remotely involving firearms vs deaths of children wearing green pants in a Honda civic involved in collisions at the front left corner" for example.
ETA: If there was a gun in the trunk does it go in the former category? No matter how they may have twisted the numbers it's gonna be "science" now.
"CDC says Firearms are the Leading Cause of Death for Children"
BullShit.
The next pandemic...complete with executive orders and emergency authorization powers...for the children.
That is the only reason for involving the CDC in any firearm study.
Andy
Even if taken at face value, then what? Ban guns, automobiles, and any form of water deeper than half an inch?
Reducing motor vehicle deaths is very complex. It is the subject of a multifaceted campaign involving vehicle design and construction, road design and construction, public outreach and law enforcement. They study and address root causes. They attack contributing factors. They hold people (and corporations) responsible for their own misdeeds. They DO NOT ban cars.
Me: "Hmm. Maybe we should look at and address gun deaths in a similar way."
Them: "No! Ban all evil guns."
Have the drug companies develop a Vaccine for this.
Well, until anyone can cite any data to refute it, you can call bullshit all you want and that's no better than sticking your tongue out and crying "nanny nanny boo boo."
These statistics are raw numbers: All types (homicides, suicides, accidental, etc.), all demographics, all geographics. But we know once you start diving into the numbers the data skews: urban centers, specific ethnicities, specific age range (I bet it's not 5 year-olds making the bulk of those numbers), etc.
The other frustration I have is the CDC does not include any deaths of any children under 1 because that population has specific, non-age adjusted pathologies. OK, fine, but if you want to do that, then make age-adjusted COD for ethnicities, age groups, and locations and let the data fall where it may.
I would also say the overall number isn't that high relative to total number of guns: 5.6/100,000 children with > 300,000,000 guns. So if there are 276,000,000 vehicles the percentage of children who die from auto deaths (roughly 4.6/100,000) is higher than those who die from firearms.
Ain't statistics fun??
Averageman
11-29-22, 09:05
I'm willing to hold gun laws with the same reverance Democrats use with voting laws at this point.
Where was the CDC on abortion.. out of curiosit? I don't recall them clamoring about that.
Where was the CDC on abortion.. out of curiosit? I don't recall them clamoring about that.
I 'think' (obviously cannot prove) that's one reason they wont report data for under 1 YO. Abortion makes their numbers messy. And in 100% of the cases, it would be death by infanticide (homicide).
There are roughly 625,00 abortions a year in the US... so even if the BS CDC stat was true (which I doubt), it would still be small potatoes for child death stats.
There are roughly 625,00 abortions a year in the US... so even if the BS CDC stat was true (which I doubt), it would still be small potatoes for child death stats.
Is that 62,500, or 625,000? Either would be a significant number for the <1 age range (which they exclude).
Where does the CDC say this? I can’t find it anywhere on their website, and the claim would conflict with the data provided on their pages on “firearms”, “violence”, and “mortality”.
I’m calling bullshit. I don’t believe the stat, and I don’t believe the CDC reported it. I do know the kernel of truth that was twisted, though.
Where does the CDC say this? I can’t find it anywhere on their website, and the claim would conflict with the data provided on their pages on “firearms”, “violence”, and “mortality”.
I’m calling bullshit. I don’t believe the stat, and I don’t believe the CDC reported it. I do know the kernel of truth that was twisted, though.
There's a link to a CDC reference at the end: https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/nejmc2201761
The next pandemic...complete with executive orders and emergency authorization powers...for the children.That would be the *last* pandemic.
Sent from my SM-A326U using Tapatalk
There's a link to a CDC reference at the end: https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/nejmc2201761
I’ll read that tonight. Shit like this is why I cancelled NEJM after the Pulse shooting. Lack of basic fact-checking doesn’t help the credibility of a peer-reviewed scientific journal.
I’ll read that tonight. Shit like this is why I cancelled NEJM after the Pulse shooting. Lack of basic fact-checking doesn’t help the credibility of a peer-reviewed scientific journal.
I completely agree. The CDC has lost all credibility, and their unchallenged manipulation of data (i.e., statistics) allows them to lead every public health argument the administration wants to enforce.
And the NEJM? Yeah, them and the AMA went full retard years ago.
FromMyColdDeadHand
11-29-22, 13:18
Is that 62,500, or 625,000? Either would be a significant number for the <1 age range (which they exclude).
600,000+, but the most useful number is the third trimester when the babies are viable. They admit to around1%. So something like 6,000 to 10,000 viable babies- kids- killed.
I completely agree. The CDC has lost all credibility, and their unchallenged manipulation of data (i.e., statistics) allows them to lead every public health argument the administration wants to enforce.
And the NEJM? Yeah, them and the AMA went full retard years ago.
^^This^^ Why would you expect them to say differently? They are part and parcel of the Deep State who exist solely to limit your freedom.
LETS GO CDC
FromMyColdDeadHand
11-29-22, 13:22
There's a link to a CDC reference at the end: https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/nejmc2201761
Yep, racist guns…
https://www.nejm.org/doi/suppl/10.1056/NEJMc2201761/suppl_file/nejmc2201761_appendix.pdf
titsonritz
11-29-22, 13:37
Nuking 6 or 7 zip codes would fix the problem, now how about that fentanyl stuff?
Yep, racist guns…
https://www.nejm.org/doi/suppl/10.1056/NEJMc2201761/suppl_file/nejmc2201761_appendix.pdf
Thanks for that link. That chart speaks volumes.
I try not to see things solely from my own perspective. I readily admit that guns are dangerous and deadly tools. Sometimes those tools are used by terrible people to harm the innocent. Sometimes they are used to commit suicide. Sometimes they are involved in accidental injury and death. Sometimes they are used by good people to prevent or stop harm. But they are by far most often used by law abiding citizens committing no crime and causing no death or injury to people. Hunting and target shooting, etc.
There's a link to a CDC reference at the end: https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/nejmc2201761
If one reads that one, I'm not clear what the issue is with that LTE itself per se. We know the AMA, CDC, etc, will only publish one side of the story, and will never look at it as they should, the negative use of guns + the beneficial use of guns = net effect of guns ad well as Constitutional realities. That's what Lott and other economists had done, and it makes for a very different story. That's why they despise Lott and others. However, I don't see any problems with that write up on its face. It's how people use that which matters. We know a major % of those numbers are teens boy gang bangers killing each other, and criminals gonna criminal. They admit it coincides with covid, and I agree with all of that:
"Regardless, the increasing firearm-related mortality reflects a longer-term trend and shows that we continue to fail to protect our youth from a preventable cause of death. Generational investments are being made in the prevention of firearm violence, including new funding opportunities from the CDC and the National Institutes of Health, and funding for the prevention of community violence has been proposed in federal infrastructure legislation. This funding momentum must be maintained."
Were we'd disagree no doubt is to how to achieve it, and where/how the $ should be thrown in the toilet, err, I mean spent, but I don't disagree with the basic concepts. To give them credit, they didn't even mention passing yet more gun laws as a way to reduce mortality from firearms and hint at more community based efforts which I'd agree with.
Considering the source, not all that bad.
I don't believe this stat...not for a second, even if you count all the 14-17yo assholes shooting each other in the nice parts of town.
You should always supply a source with such a claim/thread.
FromMyColdDeadHand
11-30-22, 12:42
You should always supply a source with such a claim/thread.
On a quick run through the article I think inherent in their data is that this is being driven by violence and illegal activities. I think the key is that the title of the paper and the way it is being presented in the press is that there are kids being killed in mass shootings and that is what is driving us. That is not supported by the data.
On a quick run through the article I think inherent in their data is that this is being driven by violence and illegal activities. I think the key is that the title of the paper and the way it is being presented in the press is that there are kids being killed in mass shootings and that is what is driving us. That is not supported by the data.
In this particular case, that seems the major issue to my read. The source paper tells one side of the story, but that one side is not incorrect either.
So for anyone interested, right from the CDC page.
Unintentional fall deaths
Number of deaths: 42,114
Motor vehicle traffic deaths
Number of deaths: 40,698
Unintentional poisoning deaths
Number of deaths: 87,404
Drug overdose/drug poisoning deaths
Number of deaths: 91,799
Deaths per 100,000 population: 27.9
All poisoning deaths
Number of deaths: 97,034
Deaths per 100,000 population: 29.5
All firearm deaths
Number of deaths: 45,222
Deaths per 100,000 population: 13.7
Drowning is a leading cause of death for children.
In the United States:
More children ages 1–4 die from drowning than any other cause of death.
For children ages 5–14, drowning is the second leading cause of unintentional injury death after motor vehicle crashes.
Exiledviking
11-30-22, 23:14
I read somewhere that Fentanyl far outpaces guns for deaths in young people. But, we can't talk about that because "the border is secure" and Fentanyl is not coming thru the "secure" border.
The above numbers sure seem to support the high number of deaths from Fentanyl.
titsonritz
11-30-22, 23:51
So for anyone interested, right from the CDC page.
Unintentional fall deaths
Number of deaths: 42,114
Motor vehicle traffic deaths
Number of deaths: 40,698
Unintentional poisoning deaths
Number of deaths: 87,404
Drug overdose/drug poisoning deaths
Number of deaths: 91,799
Deaths per 100,000 population: 27.9
All poisoning deaths
Number of deaths: 97,034
Deaths per 100,000 population: 29.5
All firearm deaths
Number of deaths: 45,222
Deaths per 100,000 population: 13.7
Drowning is a leading cause of death for children.
In the United States:
More children ages 1–4 die from drowning than any other cause of death.
For children ages 5–14, drowning is the second leading cause of unintentional injury death after motor vehicle crashes.
Don't cloud the issue with facts and statistics. Guns are bad.
Don't cloud the issue with facts and statistics. Guns are bad.
I didn't even try and fudge the numbers by removing lawful shoots, that is ALL firearm deaths (good, bad or otherwise) and it still is right about there with accidental deaths by falling and half of deaths by poisoning. The only thing that surprised me is total number of drownings seem way down. Usually pools are in the top 3 competing with auto deaths and drug deaths.
So if you do drugs and drive, might as well buy a gun and kill yourself.
I didn't even try and fudge the numbers by removing lawful shoots, that is ALL firearm deaths (good, bad or otherwise) and it still is right about there with accidental deaths by falling and half of deaths by poisoning. The only thing that surprised me is total number of drownings seem way down. Usually pools are in the top 3 competing with auto deaths and drug deaths.
So if you do drugs and drive, might as well buy a gun and kill yourself.
The breakdown used to be like 60% thugs shooting each other, 30% suicides, and the rest misc stuff, much of which is lawful. They have criminals shot by LE in there too I believe. I think the newer breakdown has higher % from suicide, but have not looked. Legit accidental deaths from legit children is (surprisingly) rare, and accidents in general pretty rare considering how many guns are in untrained hands and all.
In my fair city the number of shootings and deaths by shooting have gone up substantially over the past couple years, the biggest victims are black teenagers and young adults. And they weren't shot because they were having arguments playing chess, either. It is due to gang activity.
Working in our ER we might see three kids a year, under 15, from accidental shootings. It is not unheard of to get three gang-bangers a night.
The raw data might be right, but without context the statistics are totally biased and skewed. I do not think that's an accident.
In my fair city the number of shootings and deaths by shooting have gone up substantially over the past couple years, the biggest victims are black teenagers and young adults. And they weren't shot because they were having arguments playing chess, either. It is due to gang activity.
Working in our ER we might see three kids a year, under 15, from accidental shootings. It is not unheard of to get three gang-bangers a night.
The raw data might be right, but without context the statistics are totally biased and skewed. I do not think that's an accident.
Exactly. Sizeable pockets of our cities have become third world, complete with warlords, "child soldiers", and all the other trimmings. Damn mess is even celebrated in pop culture and defended by many on the left. Preaching to the choir here, I know.
These "facts" are just gonna be used as more justification for violating the rights of the law abiding, but leaving the criminals armed to the teeth.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.