You're far more likely to die violently in a Red state than a Blue state

Professor Pollkatz debunks Rep. King's claim that Iraq is safer than Washington D.C.:

Comparing Iraqi Civilian Death Rates to U.S. Civilian Death Rates
http://www.pollkatz.homestead.com/files/us_violent_death_statistics_2003.htm

does the "public safety" people (ie: police and fire departments) take such a higher rate of KIAs? For better or worse, that's how the US forces, the mercenaries, and the UK forces are to be regarded, and that's the appropriate way of looking at it.

pnorman

America is a murderous place compared to other industrialized nations and guns are a dominating part of it.

"Compared with other developed nations, the United States is unique in its high rates of both gun ownership and murder. Although widespread gun ownership does not have much effect on the overall crime rate, gun use does make criminal violence more lethal and has a unique capacity to terrorize the public. Gun crime accounts for most of the costs of gun violence in the United States, which are on the order of $100 billion per year."

<http://www.brookings.edu/press/books/evaluatinggunpolicy.htm>

I had no idea the Massachusettian and Oregonians were so into their gunz. Why, they all must be packin' to have such low homicide rates, huh?

Ever been to Fenway Park? There's a billboard on the backside of the place, facing I-90, that is allegedly the longest billboard in the United States. It's owned by this group. They've been pushing legislation and restrictions for a number of years. (Go read the second ammendment...the part every wingnut overlooks is the "well-regulated" clause.) Despite the recent spike in the homicide rate in the City of Boston....Mass's rate is consistently below the national.

as are many blue states. One of the most pro-gun states in the nation is Maine, which also has the nation's lowest crime rate. Vermont is one of only two states in the nation that lets you carry a gun concealed for self-defense without obtaining a license.

Sociological factors other than lawful gun ownership are what determine crime rates in this country...

This little sub-thread reminded me of a bit in that movie. Moore was talking about how many guns we have per capita in the US, and our gun death rate compared to places like the UK or Australia. He went on, though, to point out that Canada has nearly as many guns per capita as we do, but that their gun death rate is something like ten times or a hundred times lower than ours when compared to populations the same size.

Switzerland has lot of guns cause they had a traditional miltia like the USA. Guess what? One of the highest murder rates in Europe. Finland has as many guns per capita as the USA. Lots and lots of guns. Guess what? The highest murder rate in Europe. Remember "Gangs of New York"? How violent and unruly the Irish were in that movie. Today's Ireland has almost no guns and one of the lowest murder rates in the world.

<http://www.guncite.com/gun_control_gcgvinco.html>

Not that the "Mary Rosh"s of this world are likely to understand.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A8884-2003Jan31

but he's right there is a lot more going here than gun availability.

Health care differences (including access to mental health care); relatively homogenous populations vs. incredible diversity of views, backgrounds, social situations, and economic situations; differences in socialization (Canada socializes kids into adult roles better than we do); our inner-city drug problems and the ridiculous paramilitary approaach we take to dealing with it; urban blight and lack of inner-city opportunity; and so on.

If Canada forgets that it's those factors that keep their crime rate low (as they seem to have done since the late '90's), then their rates are going to go up. Just like the "Boston Miracle"--getting the community invested in itself, with the concomitant reduction in crime--has petered out, as Massachusetts switched to trying to police-state its way to lower crime rates; the us-vs-them mentality has crept back into the city, and its crime rates are going up despite ever-stricter controls on lawful gun ownership in the area.

But then I recall reading that the United States government and military are discouraging attempts to get a clear picture of how fast people are getting killed in Baghdad.

Now if we can only get the MSM interested in things like numbers...

ESPECIALLY if you're queer!

They're the ones who shoot first and ask questions later, if they bother to ask the questions. They're taught at an early age that real men are supposed to be such hotheads that a harmless remark that would roll of a liberal's shoulders is enough to cause murderous hatred in a conservative.

figures, which works out to 40,246 Iraqi civilians dead as a result of the invasion/occupation/insurgency since May of 2003 (I know, I know--the Lancet and other expert sources estimate the civilian death toll at around 3 times that figure--but I'll err on the side of caution for the moment). Add to that 2695 total coalition deaths, you get 42,941 dead Iraqis, Americans, Brits, Poles, Italians, etc. since the invasion, or 14,313 per year. On the homefront, the DOJ website puts the U.S. homicide rate currently around 6 per 100,000; given a population of 300 million, that's around 18,000 per year, or approximately 54,000 since May of 2003. So hey, if you're a complete idiot or a shamless wingnut apologist, it looks like America's actually slightly more dangerous than Iraq--until you consider the fact that Iraq, with a population of around 26 million, is less than 1/10th the size of the U.S. To get a clear picture of the scale and pervasiveness of the violence in Iraq, you'd have to imagine what it would be like in this country if, instead of 18,000 homicides per year we had TEN TIMES the Iraqi figure: or 143,130 per year (429,410 since May of 2003). That's an average of 392 murders across the country per day, every day--most of them motivated by politics or ethnic/religious hatred. Factor in the huge numbers of wounded (millions per year), and I think to most Americans that would feel pretty much like the beginnings of an all-out civil war.

Every time this little propaganda whack-a-mole pops up, the person spouting it is implying that the dangers faced by our servicemen-and-women in Iraq are no greater than they would be if he/she was walking down the street in DC or Detroit or pretty much the whole state of California. Ultimately, that's what's most deplorable about these repeated attempts by the wingnut apologists to misrepresent the level of violence in Iraq: it denigrates the bravery and sacrifice of our troops.

I also use the 10x rule of thumb to bring perspective to these appalling numbers.

.. in Eye-rack fer? Just gimme a few hunnert billion to spend in DC ...