Ha, get a laugh out of this

Originally posted by mahtoosacks

yes the stats ARE there as PROOF that yes, ACCIDENTALLY, doctors are more dangerous than gun owners.

but obviously the doctors arent as efficient as gun owners when it comes to INTENTIONAL deaths.

Did you ever hear of Dr. Mengele? Does Nazi Germany ring a bell? Perhaps you have heard of Dr. Kevorkian? Ever hear of Nerve Gas? What about Aids? How about the Swine Flu? Doctors are the most efficient killers. They are the most silent and hidden killers.

How about another funny thing.

Something like: NOT accidental death caused by a doc vs NOT accidental death caused by guns.

Guns ARE made to hurt, even if you are protecting your life or someone's else.

[edit on 18-8-2009 by IC 1101]

reply to post by groingrinder


touche sir.... touche

yes but you dont have to go to school to hold a gun... which i think breaks the efficiency slider...


maybe it should say that gun owners are accidentally safer? or doctors are accidentally more destructive, unless they chose to be?

i think from here on out, semantics will be the only argument.

With considerable knowledge of the subject, I can state the number of medically related deaths is skewed and disingenuous.

There are a small number of incompetent and often uncaring doctors. But for the most part they deal with the sick and dying to the best of their abilties given the time and resources they have.

In a litigious society like the US, a doctor dealing with a dying cancer patient can be sued for prescribing medication that precipitated an earlier death than might have been expected. Did the doctor kill a patient who was on the verge of dying, implying they would have recovered and lived out a full life?

We can never know what would have happened to patients had they had different care. I'd say the number of deaths caused by doctors is vastly lower than the one posted.


Mike

Why are you comparing the two? Guns and physicians are far from the same thing. Yes the stats are amazing but how many patients were ill before they started seeing the doctor? There are more complicated stories towards the amount of people dying then the people who died from accidental gun shot wounds.

Originally posted by NatureBoy
interesting stats...

now lets consider how many 'gun owners' just happened to be working really hard to perform a delicate medical procedure or choose the right compound to treat a rare or obscure illness when they accidentally discharged their 44 into little suzzy's cranium.

Haha i suppose all the rest of the people killed by guns were on purpose so didn't count right?

A gun is a weapon, pure and simple - they are made to end life.
A doctor is a good guy working hard - they just try to save lives.
Compareing the two is just retarded.

Really it's pathetic how desperate you gun nuts are getting!

its a joke, lighten up.

Originally posted by Studious

Originally posted by 4nsicphd
reply to post by die_another_day

 

Ah, statistics. By cherrypicking the defining parameters, one can make any point that is desired. In this case, the parameter which causes the conclusion is by comparing all deaths by physicians to only "accidental" deaths by firearm.

You're missing the point of the OP's Article.

Though some have used this opportunity to say doctors are more dangerous than guns that is not the primary message of this thread.

The primary point is that it is nonsense to ban all firearms because of accidental deaths due to their improper use. It's proven as nonsense by statistics which show that even doctors, those we entrust to save lives, kill far more people accidentally.
[edit on 18-8-2009 by Studious]

Trying to make a point about something that is so controversial as gun control by using sarcasm is only going to polarize people further. I've noticed that sarcasm is used fairly often on ATS in posts where someone is trying to make a point, and it's only going to piss people off.

If that's the purpose of the post, to piss people off, then that's fine, but if someone wants to make a point and stage a debate, they're going about it the wrong way.

The point wasn't made because the facts WERE cherry picked and sarcasm only pointed out that it was a one sided argument.

Originally posted by NatureBoy
ok here's how i see it...

A house which has a near zero chance of having a gun in it, like mine in the uk for example, someone coming to steal my TV (insured) will know that if he carrys a knife he has a massive advantage - often just being a good fighter and swift runner is enough to enure his escape. 3am i come downstairs to make more tea and crumpets, the guy is startled and backs off, i hold up my hands and say 'hey buddy, i don't want any trouble, just get out my house' he scrambled through the window he entered through and i pass him out my DVD player (insured, i want a new blu-ray to replace it)

A House with a 75% chance of having a gun in it, like yours in montana, same thing happens, i'm coming down to get 6 bigmacs when a burglar is startled - this time however he knew that i would most likely have a gun, he of course made sure to get one too. It's dark all he sees is my hand moving 'hey b..' thinking i'm leveling a gun at him he thinks it's life and death - the fight or flight responce kicks in, his only chance is to kill me first. BOOOOOOM..... all for the want of a old DVD player i'm laying bleeding to death on my kitchen counter.

When home owners are definately armed then home invaders are CERTAINLY armed. It's like an arms race between the crims and the heros.

Ok I have to call BS on this. I live in Alberta Canada. A while back I walked upto my truck and a guy jumped out of it (he was trying to hot wire it). I backed up and he tried to stab me with a flat head screwdriver in his left hand and he hit me multiple times with a mag light flashlight in his right hand. I managed to get the screwdriver away from him and break his nose, which is why he ran away. When the cops and ambulance showed up the 1st police officer told me I should haven't have fought back and gave me the same line you are giving me. The second one told me that these car theft rings are killing anyone who cathces them in the act so that no one can ID them. So if I had told him I want no trouble rather than defending myself I would be dead. The had killed 3 people already that year and my attack was on valentines day.

Nice thread.
It's hard to believe that some people think people who owns guns are nuts, although some people are but not because of the guns they're just nuts who own guns and that's why we have guns, so we can protect ourselves from them.

how many doctors do you think accidentally shot one of their patients with a gun?


just sayin ... the stats could overlap they're not necessarily mutually exclusive

I believe the scholar homer j. simpson once uttered "Oh, people can come up with statistics to prove anything. 14% of people know that. "

i mean i'm totally against the OPs stance, but i still think people aren't arguing his point correctly.

he's not stating that doctors kill more than guns (or maybe he is) but i think the thing he was trying to get accross is:

if the argument for getting rid of guns is that they kill x amount of people
then we should get rid of doctors because they kill x+1 amount of people

he's just saying that those that want gun control like myself have a weak argument. if i'm wrong OP call me out on it

It is not really the fact that so many people own guns actually. I realize that this is not going to change.

What really troubles me are all those gun owner are proud of owning them, display them like some sort of superiority syndrom or inferiority complex (like the caveman brandishing a spear) or as an expression of their aggressive personality. They cling on to their guns not because of what it does, rather what it represents..the illusion of safety and power. A gun will never buy back the freedom the government is stripping away.

I know if I had a gun I wouldnt brag about it and let alone be proud of owning an item that is only good at ending lives and puting my family at risk of accidents or the envy of robbers after a weapon.

The negligence of gun owner should be brought to bare on their shoulders.

The negligence of Doctor should be brought to bare on their lobbyist, for not getting their finacial liability cap, lowered even more.

Originally posted by Hastobemoretolife
This takes the cake.

Proud "gun nut" right here. I think the facts clearly speak for themselves.

No they do not. This is about accidental deaths by guns. This rules out all the people who are killed by guns o on purpose. This discounts all the murders and killings that were caused by gun nuts like you pulling the trigger on purpose

reply to post by TheOracle

One of the worst feelings in world is to need gun and not have one, or to have one, but out of bullets.



[edit on 18-8-2009 by googolplex]

Originally posted by mr-lizard


Amount of people killed deliberately by guns? Countless...

Amount of people killed deliberately by surgeons? Probably not many.

unless of course we are talking about abortion doctors, or the Jack Kavorkian's out there...
but I bet they dont count in your example, correct?


[edit on 18/8/09 by TrailGator]

Originally posted by NatureBoy
reply to post by Hastobemoretolife

 

Different tools for different jobs. Is what it comes down too.

A screw driver to drive screws, a telephone to make phone calls, a gun to kill people. indeed.

The fact is people kill people, whether it be piano wire, bare hands, baseball bat, cars, meat cleaver, knives, etc. guns are just one of those tools, blaming an inanimate object for death is akin to saying spoons make people fat.

Piano wire designed to make music notes.
Baseball bat designed to hit baseballs.
Car designed to transport people.
Meat Cleaver designed to prepare food.
Knife designed as a general work tool for shaping wood.

However indeed, many knives are designed to kill, the human hand is most likely evolved to be a weapon, but also a multipurpose tool.... Guns have only ONE function to end life.

No one makes a gun for chopping down trees, for potting up houseplants or gathering twigs for the fire. It is a weapon pure and simple.

Some other things which i believe are weapons; pikes, swords, polearms, pykles, cannons, missiles, bombs, nukes, etc, etc.... This is why we have the world 'weapon' it describes things designed to kill! Calling a gun a 'tool' is just stupid.

Guns make it more likely that people will be killed, they make it easy for peope to kill - unfairly easy. A child angry at a local doorman for refusing to let him into the club could go get his brothers gun from under his bed, standing twenty feet away he could kill that man and no one could do anything to stop him (apart from shoot him first which isn't always easy) - guns while i admit don't actually go and kill people of their own accord (like murder robots will when we invent them soon, i say ban those too) they do make it far, far too easy for someone to end a life - the harder it is the less likely it will happen.

Of course they're designed to kill people. If someone is robbing your house and going to kill you, don't you want a gun that will actually stop the intruder? Are you going to use a Nerf gun? Killing innocent people is wrong, but there is nothing at all wrong with self defense.

reply to post by die_another_day


Curious though, how many are killed by guns total, both accidentally and on purpose..?

And are doctors not often dealing with people who have life threatening illnesses?

When you laugh at something like accidental deaths, you should seek mental help.

Originally posted by joe82
Nice thread.

It's hard to believe that some people think people who owns guns are nuts, although some people are but not because of the guns they're just nuts who own guns and that's why we have guns, so we can protect ourselves from them.

The difference between a responsible gun owner and a gun nut is that a gun nut is more than willing to use their gun

Originally posted by Chovy
When you laugh at something like accidental deaths, you should seek mental help.

I don't believe is laughing at the deaths, but the irony, of the comparision.