Cheeseburger_in_paradise Posted June 12, 2005 Share Posted June 12, 2005 Thought for the day: If you consider that there have been an average of 160,000 troops in the Iraq theater of operations during the last 22 months, that gives a firearm death rate of 60 per 100,000. The rate in Washington D.C. is 80.6 per 100,000. That means that you are 25% more likely to be shot and killed in our Nation's Capitol, which has some of the strictest gun control laws in the nation, than you are in Iraq. Conclusion: We should immediately pull out of Washington, D.C Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chilly Posted June 12, 2005 Share Posted June 12, 2005 Thought for the day: If you consider that there have been an average of 160,000 troops in the Iraq theater of operations during the last 22 months, that gives a firearm death rate of 60 per 100,000. The rate in Washington D.C. is 80.6 per 100,000. That means that you are 25% more likely to be shot and killed in our Nation's Capitol, which has some of the strictest gun control laws in the nation, than you are in Iraq. Conclusion: We should immediately pull out of Washington, D.C 356497[/snapback] Thought for the day: If you consider that there have been an average of 160,000 troops in the Iraq theater of operations during the last 22 months, that gives a firearm death rate of 60 per 100,000. The rate in the United States of America is 33.4 per 100,000. That means that you are 55.6% more likely to be shot and killed in Iraq then in the USA. Conclusion: Using biased statistics from a metropolitan area to try and prove a ridiculous point is retarded. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VABills Posted June 12, 2005 Share Posted June 12, 2005 Thought for the day: If you consider that there have been an average of 160,000 troops in the Iraq theater of operations during the last 22 months, that gives a firearm death rate of 60 per 100,000. The rate in the United States of America is 33.4 per 100,000. That means that you are 55.6% more likely to be shot and killed in Iraq then in the USA. Conclusion: Using biased statistics from a metropolitan area to try and prove a ridiculous point is retarded. 356515[/snapback] Except the majority of the deaths are not firearm related over there but improvised bombs. Hence you are less likely to get shot over there then here. Conclusion: basing your stats on incorrect information is moroic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chilly Posted June 12, 2005 Share Posted June 12, 2005 Except the majority of the deaths are not firearm related over there but improvised bombs. Hence you are less likely to get shot over there then here. Conclusion: basing your stats on incorrect information is moroic. 356517[/snapback] Haha yeah, I was thinking that myself, but I wanted to copy and paste what he said and change a few words to make my point. I couldn't find any statistics on bombing in DC with a quick google search. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VABills Posted June 12, 2005 Share Posted June 12, 2005 Haha yeah, I was thinking that myself, but I wanted to copy and paste what he said and change a few words to make my point. I couldn't find any statistics on bombing in DC with a quick google search. 356519[/snapback] Well just outside of DC a couple year back about 200 folks died in an improvised bombing device. Around 3000 in NYC around the same timeframe. So you admit you are less likely to die of gunshot wounds in Iraq than in the US? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VABills Posted June 12, 2005 Share Posted June 12, 2005 Read my first post again and you'll discover thats exactly what I posted. 356525[/snapback] BTW, did you know that nearly 1/4 of the military deaths over there were do to accidents, and not combat related in any form? Such as getting run over, drowning when falling into the river, heat related deaths, etc... It is just over 400 of the 1700 that are categorized as such. Again, the media doesn't like you to know the facts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chilly Posted June 12, 2005 Share Posted June 12, 2005 Well just outside of DC a couple year back about 200 folks died in an improvised bombing device. Around 3000 in NYC around the same timeframe. So you admit you are less likely to die of gunshot wounds in Iraq than in the US? 356522[/snapback] The information I gave was correct. Getting hit by a bomb isn't the same thing as getting shot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chilly Posted June 12, 2005 Share Posted June 12, 2005 BTW, did you know that nearly 1/4 of the military deaths over there were do to accidents, and not combat related in any form? Such as getting run over, drowning when falling into the river, heat related deaths, etc... It is just over 400 of the 1700 that are categorized as such. Again, the media doesn't like you to know the facts. 356526[/snapback] Yes, I do know that. I still don't see exactly what point you are trying to make however. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted June 12, 2005 Share Posted June 12, 2005 Yes, I do know that. I still don't see exactly what point you are trying to make however. 356529[/snapback] I think his point is statistics suck when they're abused. Comparing crime in DC to low-intensity urban combat in Iraq without understanding (or relating) what the numbers actually stand for is like comparing apples to smal furry woodland creatures... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of BiB Posted June 12, 2005 Share Posted June 12, 2005 I think his point is statistics suck when they're abused. Comparing crime in DC to low-intensity urban combat in Iraq without understanding (or relating) what the numbers actually stand for is like comparing apples to smal furry woodland creatures... 356552[/snapback] However, small furry apples have been known to bomb iraqi snipers in DC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chilly Posted June 13, 2005 Share Posted June 13, 2005 I think his point is statistics suck when they're abused. Comparing crime in DC to low-intensity urban combat in Iraq without understanding (or relating) what the numbers actually stand for is like comparing apples to smal furry woodland creatures... 356552[/snapback] No wonder why I didn't realize why he was arguing with me, thats the point I was trying to make as well. However, small furry apples have been known to bomb iraqi snipers in DC. 356561[/snapback] It seems weird though that grapes haven't to this point gotten involved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wacka Posted June 13, 2005 Share Posted June 13, 2005 And did you knoew in PEACETIME we average 1000 military deaths a year? Accidents, training accidents, disease, murder, suicide, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts