I am getting quite tired of hearing from ‘do-gooders’ about the horrors of gun ownership. They spout statistics such as, “There are over 32,000 gun deaths in the United States each year!”. But, what they either do not tell you, are or oblivious to, is the truth to those statistics.
Of those 32,000 gun-related deaths each year, nearly 60% of them are suicides. You cannot logically use suicides as a reason to outlaw guns because the availability of a gun is typically not indicative of the suicide rate; look at Japan – a country where there are very few guns, yet they have a suicide rate almost double that of the United States.
Of those 32,000 gun-related deaths each year, about 3% of them are accidental deaths. Those are truly tragic, no argument there. There needs to be more education on the safe handling of guns.
Of the remaining 11,840 gun-related deaths each year, nearly 80% of those are gang-related (CDC Statistics). That leaves about 2468 non-gang, non-suicide, and non-accident related. And some number of those 2468 are law enforcement-related, i.e. a cop shooting a criminal in the commission of a crime.
So, in the overall big picture, less than 2468 gun deaths that are avoidable happen each year in the United States, a country of some 330,000,000 people. That is LESS THAN .001 percent of the population – an infinitesimal small number!
That said, any life lost is heartbreaking, be it 1 or 1000. So, if the intent is to save lives, if it’s TRULY to save lives, then we have to start at the largest life-endangering problems we have, do we not? What we should be doing is putting an end to the production and sale of alcohol. Over 75,000 people die per year due to alcohol abuse. Let’s see, 75,000 people per year vs. 2468 people per year. Hmm. Does it not make more sense to outlaw alcohol than guns if the intent is to save lives?
Or, perchance, is the intent to save lives AS LONG AS IT DOES NOT INTERFERE WITH THE DO-GOODER’S LIFESTYLE OF CHOICE? Obviously, if someone doesn’t care about gun ownership or “assault rifle” ownership (“assault rifles”, you know, those scary black military look-alike weapons), they’re going to be more apt to agree that we need to outlaw them simply because it won’t interfere with their lifestyle. But, if someone wants to ban alcohol even in the name of saving lives, these anti-gunners will scream bloody murder because they do not want anyone to interfere with their lifestyle and they’ll even tell you that they are responsible drinkers thus it should not be even considered, The irony of their claim just ZOOMS right over their heads!
Yes, banning alcohol SHOULD save many, many more lives than banning guns will. No one NEEDS alcohol, so it should be a no-brainer. But very few, if any, will advocate for this because it’s truly not about saving lives … it’s about saving lives as long as it doesn’t affect the anti-gunners.
(BTW, I don’t believe banning alcohol will save many lives any more than banning ‘assault weapons’ will. This just shows that the anti-gunners’ argument is simply a “take away yours, not mine” argument).