Shootings now third leading cause of death for u.s. Children
 

Kids and Guns: Shootings Now Third Leading Cause of Death for U.S. ChildrenAttachment 69765

Attachment 69766

Thanks for trying to get this Forum back to actual discussion of the issues rather than the constant personal attacks brought by the Trump Sewer Rats.

And WHY is it #3 ???

BECAUSE the minority kids are the MAJORITY now. MORE kids than ever now live in the inner cities...where it's dangerous...and they get shot...as they engage in their tribal (gang) violence. The inner cities are our little piece of Africa. They do there, as they do at home in Africa. Violence rules there and here.

It's only going to get worse. We were #1 and 90% white...now we're #25 and 50% white...the trend is not good.

A few concerns on this article;

Why don't these legal gun owners have trigger locks and safes? Oh, the sources of data are only tracking death / injury, not legal or non legal gun ownership.

Children up to the age of 17...well gang bangers join at an early age don't they? I believe children of the age 15, and up, generally tried as an adult for homicide, but are considered children for this study.

38% suicide! What is making these kids feel so damaged? All the PC crap being pushed over the last 2 decades and the spoiling from parents seems to be wasted effort.

Of course, the OP purpose was to deem guns as BAD, but it seems the children are the real danger.

You did NOT read the article. You base your rant on FALSE EQUIVALENCIES. Only people who are willingly ignorant use these types of argumentation.

The number one cause of death of children is ABORTION. The difference is that a child dying from a gunshot is probably accidental. Abortion is the willful death of a baby.

Sorry, children are actually BORN, fetus abortion is LAWFUL.

Interesting. I suppose you have a liberal definition of "DEATH" also.

So, according to you, death has to fit a certain, defined criteria. Isn't the subject line about the leading cause of death of children?

Being lawful does not redefine "death."

Cambridge Dictionary:
Fetus:
a human being or animal as it is developing in the uterus before birth, after the organs have started to form
So, which is it a human being or an animal?

Ever heard of the term "unborn child" as an example when someone is charged with manslaughter of a pregnant woman?

Show me in my comment that you responded to where I suggested that Abortion was illegal. Remember, legal and being morally right can be two different things. And I did not mention morality either.

I said (without collaborating stats) that the number ONE cause of death of children was abortion. I did not stipulate legal or illegal, or intent. You said that an unborn child is called a fetus. I say that a fetus is an unborn child, which STILL makes it a child. And just to confuse you a bit more, there have been instances documented where an abortion was performed and the baby lived outside of the womb. What is the difference between it being inside or outside? Killing it, is putting it to death. Yes, legally if it is inside and illegally if outside. Maybe that's why the tear it apart before removing it?

Abortion is not killing children. One must be born in order for that person to become legally and medically alive (and religious: the first breath)
Abortion is LEGAL. If you do not believe in abortion, don't have one, but do not inhibit those who do not have your beliefs the right for their beliefs.

NOW lets get back to the original subject at hand: gun violence being the 3rd most prevelent killer of children.....and increasing

Wrong Dufus. But, if it makes you feel better, you can argue with your maker before long. I am assuming that you belong in The Villages if you are on here.

I believe it is spelled "prevalent."

Your fetus IS alive. You are a fool and ignorant if you do not believe otherwise. You might want to search for a different term, but if the baby was not alive, the mother would be in distress and hospitalized. Even a genius like you should know that. Law does not make facts. A law just regulates your actions.

Thanks for the spellcheck.
People who change the subject are not in a position to intelligently argue because they don't have a thorough understanding of the facts involved. Apparently you are one of them
Your opinion is well noted, but, the thread was originally about gun deaths of children.
Let's get back to the original theme.....

Make up your mind. Is it the leading cause of deaths of children, or are you intent on trying to argue for gun control? If so, why not state that in the beginning?

Ok, so guns cause deaths, not people is what you are saying. Just consider it the unlawful postnatal abortion, since you favor abortion so much. That way, we can justify their deaths, like libtards justify the deaths of unborn children.

As far as I know, not one of my guns has taken the life of a child. However, a couple are military surplus so it is conceivable.

Perhaps we should have more auto control laws.
"An additional 2.35 million are injured or disabled.
Over 1,600 children under 15 years of age die each year.
Nearly 8,000 people are killed in crashes involving drivers ages 16-20.
Road crashes cost the U.S. $230.6 billion per year, or an average of $820 per person."

How one answers the moral question is predictable as to how they will answer the empirical question.

children are born, fetus is aborted lawfully

Sounds like the manner in which Nazi's answered accusation of the holocaust, we were following legal orders.

Basic 101 biology teaches amoeba are a single cell living creature. So to intentionally destroy one you are killing a living creature. a fertilized egg is more complicated and certainly a fetus

everyday scientist are finding earlier signs of heart beat, brainwaves , development of sensory nerve endings on their skin meaning they feel pain sooner than previously thought.

People are sacrificing the permaent on the altar of the immediate...meaning I should not have to take responsibility for my mistakes or poor planning. meaning they are interfering with mother nature. China's one child policy backfired

the plaintiff in Roe Wade admitted she made a mistake and worked the remainder of her life as an anti-abortionist

Abortion is murder

Personal Best Regards:.

Again, people who change the subject (ad hominem) are those incapable of actually discussing the original theme. Perhaps you should actually READ the link in the post to give you some idea of the nature and scope of the problem.

Thread summary, sperm like Tal and Boy should have been swallowed. Also, there should be provisions for them never to get a gun.

Until the LAW of the land is overturned, it is the right of someone who does not believe in your opinion, to have an abortion. YOU do not have the right to infringe on the others' rights. Your arguments are opinions, not facts.

So when the law gets overturned, and it will, then did people complicit in abortion kill innocence's then or when the law changes?

the irony of the statements you are making, I cannot ignore. You are here because a woman thought you a blessing rather than a burden

Personal Best Regards:

Not true. You wish to use the Law as reason for murder. Or, if that offends you (and it should) you wish to use the law to justify abortion. You wish to use the law to justify your opinion. No one is disputing the law that you wish to argue. We are just stating correctly that babies are killed by aborting them, regardless of your justification. Saying it is the law and accepted, does not change the fact that someone is being killed by the action. It only makes it justifiable homicide by another name. So, if you feel angered by the debate, you should.

As a matter of fact, you were remiss in explaining that your statement regarding children killed by guns did not include the very few that were killed by gun under the age of one year old (if any). As a matter of fact, you are hard pressed to even uncover a stat that shows any babies killed under one year of age. A lot are killed in auto accidents though.

You wish to debate gun control. Do it, but do not hide your intent by trying to vilify guns under the guise that so many children are killed each year by guns. More children are killed by cars or other accidents, such as prescription pills left out, or poisons, or drowning, etc.

Little did she know....ironic.

So, by ignoring a problem with gun deaths by rationalizing it because other things cause their deaths too, it is ok with you....

Unrelated comparisons (ad homonym) are arguments made by those who cannot substantiate a position on the theme at hand.

It is a tactic used by trolls who hide behind that facade to mask their ineptitude

No, the problem is with people like you, not the responsible majority.

Go ahead....show me the facts that YOU are in the "responsible" majority.

>crickets sounding<

just as i thought....a braggart without facts, oh, wait, that is the definition of a Trumpeter!

Sorry, did you ask a stupid question again, while I was gone? You want me to prove to you that I am in the responsible majority? First off, proving to you would be a useless waste of time. You wouldn't realize it if it punched you in the kisser.

Ok, I have owned guns since I was a teen and have not shot anyone that did not need shooting. That's responsible. No, I did not kill any children that I know of. That makes me responsible.

But seriously, I don't give a rat's @ss what you think, and am just passing my time with you and giving it about as much thought as passing wind.

You are a gun sissy that says she hates guns until one is used to save your useless life, or put food on your table. Oops, you are probably a vegan too.

Yeah, violence against another is the ONLY way you can think you prove yourself right. Bullies think that way, psychotics think that way.....which one are you? probably both.

I did not say that, you, obviously are so defensive that you go off the deep end with your paranoia.

Well then, why did you respond?

Again, bullying does nothing to substantiate your opinion, other than makes you sound as dumb as you are....

I guess you forgot the question you asked me. I'll let your lack of comprehension slide for now. If I would have realized that you were related to Tal, I would have been kinder in my response. Although, I thought I was using kid gloves anyway, but.........some folks are a bit sensitive.

I expect that you consider yourself to be prolife?

Is the opposite considered pro-death?



Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk

So am I.

No its just a question....

So if you are prolife, what are your positions on WIC and Medicaid?

Rhetorical I guess...


Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk

Now, now Dirt.....

Copuff - You keeping warm out there on the peak? 38 today, 41 tomorrow...maybe you should retreat back to TV to thaw out?


Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk

That's >14,000 up! I'm only at about 6,200 it was in the 70's today!

Should be back in late September as I don't want to risk the October snows!!

5,790 injuries to guns and 1,297 deaths per year out of over 73,000,000 million children under the age of 18.

Someone figure out the percentage and then explain to me how this is a huge problem.

Of course, the death of every child is a tragedy and we would love for the number killed or injured by guns to be zero, but that is totally unrealistic.

I'd be interested in knowing where the majority of these deaths and injuries take place. If it's anything like the overall statistics on shootings and gun deaths, 90% of them happen in a few of our biggest cities. It's worthy to note that those cities have the strictest gun control laws.

Not necessarily a correlation, but if we eliminate those few big cities from the statistics, the children in the rest of our country are very safe.

The reason that we don't have more automobile control laws is exactly the same reason that we don't need more gun laws.

It's the reason in my last post. While 8,000 people dying in car accidents is tragic, the number is minuscule as a percentage of the 330,000,000 citizens in the addition to the other people that live and visit here.

While it's certainly a problem for those that do lose their lives and their families, it's not s major problem for the country as a whole. If we're going to have cars, we have to understand that there are going to be accidents and deaths. We have to agree that a certain number of accidents are acceptable if we are not willing to give up the convenience of owning and driving cars.

It's the same for guns. As long as we agree that we have the right to defend ourselves with guns, we're going to have to accept the fact that there are going to be some accidental injuries and deaths caused by people using them.

As far as I'm concerned as long as the government can't guarantee that every criminal will not have a gun then we should be allowed the same weapons that bad guys have to defend ourselves. If the government can't say that for 100% sure, they can protect me then I feel that I have the right to protect myself.

They happen in the inner cities...mostly committed by blacks and Hispanics.

The cities also have most of the minorities.

You mean if we eliminate the minorities from the inner cities the rest of our country IS pretty safe...except in the black/Hispanic parts of those small towns.

If we eliminate the minorities from ALL of America's statistics...we shoot right back to the #1 spot. The minorities have been dragging us down for the past 60 years. They'll continue to drag us down as their numbers increase.

Freedom...is messy.

35,000 people died in car crashes, 13,000 people were killed in the US by firearms in 2015.

This thread essentially began as a concern for children and indeed children should be guarded as a protected species.

the article refers to the number of accidents causing injury or death to children as a result of gunshots.

One poster made reference of the number of unborn babies aborted each year...and the response was "its not a baby until its born".

I read a story about a woman who wanted to terminate her unborn baby at 28 weeks. the remedy was an injection of digoxin to stimulate a heart attack. The woman was then sent to a hotel overnight in order to receive the second injection the following morning.
That night the baby began to stir from the injection and the mother felt every movement . she was then reluctant to return but coerced by the doctor to receive the second and final injection.

One poster made reference to the number of auto accidents that kill or injure people.

Opponents of guns want gun control

Opponents of abortion want an end to Roe v Wade.

Some want stricter enforcement laws to reduce accidents

All lives matter

Personal Best Regards: