Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[bigb]

An interesting letter in the Australian Shooter Magazine this week,

   
       
 "If you consider that there has been an average of 160,000 troops in the

        Iraq theater of operations during the past 22 months, and a total of

        2112 deaths, that gives a firearm death rate of 60

        per 100,000 soldiers.

The firearm death rate in Washington , DC is 80.6

        per 100,000 for the same period.      That means you are about 25 percent more likely to be shot and killed in the

        US capital, which has some of the strictest gun control laws in the US ,

        than you are in Iraq .

[Left Foot]

This might be interesting. Any data in the article measuring what the rate was in DC before strict gun control was implemented? How about death rates in Iraq in general (including civilians) where guns. grenades etc. are all over the country. After all, u.s. troops in Iraq are specifically trained to use weapons in combat, travel around in armored vehicles when not in fortified bases and have overwhelming fire poser. How about rates in other cities in the country. Or, how about the same data applied to England and cities in England where very strict gun controls apply to the whole country.

Perhaps interesting as a marketing campaign, but maybe not for any other reason. And, BTW, I own a gun and wouldn't want to give it up. However, lame arguments against gun control don't help that much.