 | | Re: *Child* Handgun Death Rate
|
|
(...) What's that supposed to mean? (...) OK, show me. Find the numbers of violent deaths of children for the US and the UK and compare them. I'm not that interested in the number of gun deaths, because dying from a bullet is no worse than being (...) (23 years ago, 18-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: *Child* Handgun Death Rate
|
|
(...) I shall try again: I was thinking more about the real kids that were killed with guns - ie those who were under 16. (...) Why? Do you think I am wrong? Scott A (...) (23 years ago, 18-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: *Child* Handgun Death Rate
|
|
(...) Oh...you mean the other reference was to people under 21 or something and you'd rather be looking at only the younger ones. Gotcha! (...) the (...) better). (...) Well, if I had the stats to know, I'd post them. So I don't know. I suspect you (...) (23 years ago, 18-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: *Child* Handgun Death Rate
|
|
(...) I expect I am correct~ish. Child deaths are rare enough (thankfully) to normally be national news in the UK. I child that was killed buy a gun would be news without a doubt. The last one I can remember was a teenager shot as a burglar 3 or 4 (...) (23 years ago, 19-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: *Child* Handgun Death Rate
|
|
(...) Please note that I was specifically _not_ interested in the gun related deaths as seperate from other murders. Violent deaths is what I'm interested in, not the weapon of choice. Chris (23 years ago, 20-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
