Few people would probably agree with this. Given that most people have a network of close friends between 50 and 150 in number, and only about 1 person in 10,000 died from car accidents in 2014, a vast majority of Americans do not actually know anyone who died in a car accident in 2014, but maybe half know a person that knows someone who did. In other words, for most people, a car accident death is nothing more than a sad statistic. People die in all sorts of accidents regularly, and car accidents are just another way people occasionally die.
In 2014, 32,657 Americans died in car accidents. As a percentage of the U.S. population2, this comes out to 0.0102% of the population. This is about one in 10,000 Americans. In 2014, 2,626,418 people died in the U.S. Out of the total number of people that died, only 1.244% died in car accidents. Yes, it is tragic that people die in car accidents, and making safer cars and training people to drive better would probably help to avoid this unnecessary, but realistically, barely significant number of deaths.
Is banning cars really a good option? Probably not. Perhaps we could ban large vehicles that tend to be more damaging in accidents, though these vehicles are involved in a much smaller percentage of accidents than non-commercial vehicles. We could ban red vehicles, as insurance companies have collected statistics showing that red vehicles are more likely to get in accidents than other colors. We could raise the legal age for getting a license, as insurance companies have also collected data showing that drivers under 25 are more likely to get in accidents. While we are at it, we could ban unmarried males from driving, and we could require good grades to qualify to drive, as these are also common risk factors. If banning cars or banning people from driving sounds absurd, it is because it is. Cars don't kill people. Bad drivers kill people. Blaming the cars makes it tempting to harm many people who enjoy recreational driving or even need to drive to make a living (from commuting to work to delivering pizza to hauling freight). The best way to reduce car accidents is to make safer cars and train drivers better.
In 2014, 12,590 Americans died from gun violence3. We should ban guns! We need some serious gun control, because guns are killing over 12,590 people a year! I seriously hope you can year the sarcasm here. Notice that almost 3 times as many people die in the U.S. from car accidents than from gun violence?
Ironically, a lot of people agree with my extremely sarcastic call to ban guns. Given that most people have a network of close friends between 50 and 150, and only about 1 in 25,000 died from gun violence, almost no Americans actually know someone who died from gun violence in 2014 and very few even know someone who knows someone who did. In other words, for nearly everyone, a gun violence death is not even a significant statistic. People die in all sorts of accidents regularly, and gun violence is just another way that people who almost nobody knows die on extremely rare occasions.
In 2014, 12,590 Americans died from gun violence. As a percentage of the U.S population, this comes out to 0.0039% of the population. This is about one in 25,000 Americans. In 2014, 2,626,418 people died in the U.S. Out of the total number of people that died, only 0.479% died from gun violence. Yes, it is tragic that people die from gun violence, and making safer guns and training people to use them better would probably help avoid this unnecessary, but realistically, insignificant number of deaths.
Is banning guns really a good option? Almost certainly not. Perhaps we could ban large assault weapons that tend to be more lethal, though these guns are involved in a much smaller percentage of the already barely existent gun violence than smaller guns. We could ban automatic weapons, but again, what percentage of gun deaths come from automatic weapons? (In fact, automatic weapons are generally not even designed to kill. They are designed for cover fire that merely threatens to injure. They are hard to aim and quite expensive to use, and even when they do hit, they are rarely lethal, as deliberately hitting anything vital is quite difficult.) One of the most dangerous kinds of guns is actually the .22, because the bullet is light enough that it tends to bounce around inside the body, tearing up essential organs, instead of going right through, only damaging things in a fairly straight path. The fact is, guns don't kill people. In more recent years, people with mental illness kill people using guns. Blaming guns makes it tempting to harm many people who enjoy recreational shooting or even shooting wild animals to make a living. The best way to reduce gun violence is to make guns safer (better safety, maybe more kid proof, though accidental shooting deaths are even rarer) and train shooters better in gun safety. It would also help to vet people buying guns to make sure they are not mentally ill, though doing this in a way that is not abuseable may be challenging. Honestly though, if guns are almost 3 times safer than cars, we probably don't need to do anything to make them safer.
The point here is, why are people working so hard to ban guns, when gun violence accounts for less than half a percent of U.S. deaths? Banning guns would almost certainly reduce deaths due to gun violence, but how much of that would just turn into other kinds of violent deaths? (For example, swords and knives are more fatal than most gun and would likely do far more damage in a school.) Many people who are using guns to kill other people are doing it on purpose. If you take their guns away, many of them will find another way, and honestly, it will probably be more effective. People dying in car accidents are not doing it on purpose. This means that there is greater potential for improvement. It also helps that almost 3 times as many people die in car accidents. Eliminating 1/3rd of car accidents would be more effective at reducing deaths than successfully banning all guns (because some people will just find another way to kill).
Here are some other things we should worry about before banning guns:
- Smoking: 480,000 deaths annually (0.15% of population, 18.2% of total deaths)
- Alcohol: 88,000 deaths annually (0.03% of population, 3.35% of total deaths)
- Heart Disease: 610,000 deaths annually (0.19% of population, 23.2% of total deaths)
- Cancer: 591,699 deaths annually (0.19% of population, 22.5% of total deaths)
- Accidents: 136,053 deaths annually (0.042% of population, 5.18% of total deaths)
Of course, banning all of these things is rather impractical, and the money spent enforcing such bans might be better used educating people on the dangers of smoking, alcohol, poor diet, and so on.
The fact is, guns are small beans in causes of U.S. deaths, and there are many countries with gun bans that have more violent deaths per capita than the U.S. (ironically, in some cases, many of these include gun deaths). Yes, death is tragic, especially when premature, but that does not justify a national movement spending absurd amounts of money to try to eliminate an insignificant cause of death. Instead of wasting money supporting gun control, use your money to support something that actually matters, like cancer and heart disease research. Instead of worrying about the 0.5% of deaths that are caused by gun violence, worry about the 23.2% of deaths from heart disease, the 22.5% of deaths caused by cancer, or even the 18.2% of deaths caused by tobacco use. These are the places where your support can make a real difference.
No comments:
Post a Comment