Printable View
Beyond just producing some ( more ) statistics, what i the point of the study anyway ?
My take away from the article ( haven't read the study ) is that the info as presented would suit those wanting to further restrict, demonise and alienate firearms owners and users while backing calls for harsher laws to achieve this. Until I know better I think, yeah, I am worried about what this study aims at and the motives of the authors.
It's simple, pin some fake overinflated cost against the use of firearms in NZ - then leverage this to justify further restricting them.Quote:
Originally Posted by 30.06king
Here's an interesting comparison for you. According to the Cycle Action Network NZ averages 9 cyclist deaths per year (presumably none are suicides or assaults). The stats from the gun study say there were 48 accidental deaths over 19 years, averaging 2.5 deaths per year. So there you go, bicycles are more than three times more deadly than guns and should be banned.
Then if we look at injuries, they say 2115 injuries over 19 years averaging 111 per year. NZTA stats say 611 in 2023 alone, HOWEVER... ACC say there were 28059 road cycling injury claims in 2023. But it gets worse, mountain biking added around another 33% in claims costs - so it's likely total cycling injury claims were around 40000 in 2023. 111 versus 40000.
Cycling is 3.6 times more deadly than firearms use in NZ, Cycling is 360 times more injurious than firearms in NZ.
Yes my thoughts on this is that firearms use/misuse is probably responsible for two fifths of fuck all harm compared to probably any other way that New Zealanders can find to hurt themselves. The intentional misuse via assaults is never going to change and by their own words seems to be trending up. After all of the changes and money spent in recent years, how can this be?
The ignored Elephant is they are quite happy to pay to kill people through assisted Death for some very dubious reasons.
No crying about the years lost then.
Hypocrite's
Wouldnt pay to put tabacco and alcahol deaths in there would it, all legal stuff approved by the people who know best
I reckon any mainstream sporting activity (rugby, netball, soccer etc al) that you care to name would result in a higher annual hospital cost. But that is not relevant to the discussion.
Quite likely some of our chats on here will make an appearance.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tahr
Written by ja :)
Won't be the first timeQuote:
Originally Posted by Bol Tackshin
Unfortunately it still won't make some think before they type...
Sent from my SM-S936B using Tapatalk
Slight correction - you have to jump through some hoops to meet the requirements to be approved for assisted dying. It's not easy or straight forwards - and some people start the process for assisted dying but find themselves unable to complete the process due to failing the cognition requirements due to their health condition and cannot continue. These people are then kept alive in some cases quite severe medical interventions despite being very ill, in pain and both in some cases. Not the same at all...Quote:
Originally Posted by pennyless
I would however compare it to people getting on the piss and doing stupid things, or doing things like the "run it straight" and getting severe injuries with permanent effects or even the good old rugby or smoking arguments. Even motorcycle stats - these are all recorded as motorcycle under ACC which is why road registered motorcycle levies are so high. I really do question the inclusion of criminal-act stats in the overall firearms totals though - even the inclusion of Govt-held firearms injuries into the total is a bit questionable for me. Apples with apples...
Then you get the "workplace" injures from firearms such as the gentleman injured in the recent Piopio incident - these should not happen at all and I would wish him a speedy and complete recovery for doing his job and almost paying the ultimate price.
Get used to a lot more articles like this, in fact there will be a flood as the new Arms Act is introduced to Parliament in the next few weeks. It is a two-way street and there is no guarantee that Firearms Owners/Users are going to benefit from it at all. It is a heaven sent chance for the Anti-Gun Brigade and a big percentage of them inhabit our Parliament. Personally when it's all done and dusted I think we will have Western Australian style Gun Laws. Listen to the squealing then.
Or a crim getting ACC for injuries resulting from crime. Yet a genuine worker who pays levies often gets declined.Quote:
Originally Posted by No.3
The fact that this survey failed to differentiate between lawful and unlawful causes of harm shows that it is biased and can be disregarded without further engagement
After finding that costs go up from illegal firearm possession then the recommendation is more laws?
Bolt that barn door nice and tight cos the horse has just fucked off over the horizon
Quote from the article "Eighty-hundred-and-nineteen of the deaths canvassed were self harm, while 147 occurred from assaults. Another 48 deaths were ruled accidental.", like what does that actually even mean?
The new study shows 1000 people died as a result of firearms in an 18 year period, then magically eighty hundred (8000?) and 19 did. No rational thinking person can take any of this seriously. Oh, right, there are a lack of rational thinking people nowadays.
Colfo is complaining about the anti-gunners, a massive minority compared to the 240 K LFO's in the country, the anti gunners are not the issue, they are entitled to their points of view, the issue is the media and it always has been.
Publishing such erroneous data and relying on the fact that numpties will only read the big numbers and associate it with guns = bad. This has been happening for decades.
The solutions to getting the guns out of the hands of the populace has already been decided, we are just along for the ride unless we can get a cohesive group together to rebut this, by power with numbers. Looking at the various points of view in this thread, that is pretty much impossible. The divide and conquer has already worked and the only slope we face is down.
Then again, I guess this is far to political to be talked about on potentially the largest shooters NZ forum, why would we try and decide things politically in open discourse when we can just wait for the inevitable then whinge about it for a few decades before slowly dying off?
Going wildly off-topic in fine NZHS forum tradition and thinking about @Preacher@'s excellent signature exhorting men to give the girl from the asylum a chance, I bet that blokes will be queuing up to date this one
There's something about a femme fatale , although this one is probably as dumb as a bag of hammers
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/...-dean-kahukiwa
Some men like to live dangerously