Quote:
Originally Posted by KA24DESOneThree
That link is to a report that's completely and totally disingenuous and the link truly pisses me off every time it's posted.
A child is not 18. A child is not 19. A child is a pre-pubescent human. The goalposts were moved and almost literally everyone grabbed it and ran. It specifically says "among children and adolescents," but child means "pre-pubescent" and adolescent means "in the process of transitioning from a child into an adult."
NPR specifically and pointedly drops the "and adolescents," as have multiple other news organizations. To me, that changes the tone of the conversation from one of journalism to one of opinion.
Homicide is in the top three leading causes of death for 1-4 year olds. It is not in the 5-9 and 10-14 range. For 1-4, it's accidents, congenital malformations, deformations, and chromosomal abnormalities, and assault. For 5-9, it's accidents, cancer, and congenital malformations, deformations, and chromosomal abnormalities. For 10-14, it's accidents, suicide, and cancer. https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/child-health.htm
More than 1,000 0-14 year olds will die in car crashes this year.
Plenty of teenagers can defend themselves because they have stolen guns. Surprise, those are also the teens who are getting killed. If you want to get these kids (used colloquially) to stop killing each other, you have to fix the root causes of the violence. We're at least one generation away from correcting the violence once we correct the root causes of the violence. |
so let us add the word "adolescent" back into the topic, and the conversation still is stupid and outrageous:
actually, looking at your link, homicide is 4th for the 5-9 group:
https://wonder.cdc.gov/controller/da...26D162700D2444
and 4th for the 10-14 group:
https://wonder.cdc.gov/controller/da...1CA2616F0D9444
part of the problem with data is that it is limited. part of the problem is that for years, the data had no info with the word "gun" in it.
part of the problem was that for years, Republicans threatened to stop funding the CDC unless it stopped funding research into firearm injuries and death. this started in 1996 and only restarted after 2019.
so for years, politicians talked past each other with NO ACTUAL DATA on what gun violence looks like in the context of public health, and so everyone was talking out of their asses and data was only as good as the sources providing it.
"follow the science" is what people like to say. I guess if you don't fund the science and blame non-government research as biased, then everyone can twist the data to their own benefit.
can't have an honest debate about preventing gun violence when you can't even study the issue via the federal government...