Mind blowing statistics... (1 Viewer)

[Claude M]

30 Million people died in the Chineese famine from 1959-1961.
linky poo:

http://www.res.org.uk/society/mediab...uary/yang3.asp

 

[John_Bonner]

Not possible. You'd blink 160 times per minute.

84,000,000 / 365 = 230,137 blinks per day
230,137 / 24 = 9,589 blinks per hour
9,589 / 60 = 160 blinks per minute
160 / 60 = 2.7 blinks per second

 

[Kirk Gunn]

Isn't that why the call him Blinkin' ?


Sorry - obscure reference to a bad Mel Brooks movie... (actually I thought it was quite funny at times)

 

[BrettB]

Pulp can move, baby!

Probably supposed to be 8.4 million.

 

[MarkHastings]

Maybe the 84,000,000 times accounts for both eyes

But that still means 1.35/sec

 

[SteveA]

That has to be false. The median salary in the U.S is around $40k, meaning half of all workers make more than that.

That statistic might have been true 20 or 30 years ago.

 

[ChrisMatson]

And what about the 8 hours of sleep each day that you are not blinking (REM is not blinking).

 

[MarkHastings]

So to recalculate:
8,400,000 / 365 days = 23,013 blinks/day
23,013 / 16 hours (approx. being awake per day) = 1,438 blinks/hour
1,438 / 60 minutes = 23 blinks/minute
23 / 60 seconds = .38 blinks/second (or approx. 1 blink every 3 seconds)

That seems to make more sense.

 

[Jeff Perry]

You live in an exception country. Britain's Murder Rate at Highest Level

Australia is also an exception country.
So are Finland and Sweden.
And New Zealand.
And Jamaica.

With so many major countries having no success with strict gun control laws, are you sure they're still the 'exception'?

 

[ChrisMatson]

I believe that the point is that guns make it easier to kill. If all the guns in the world magically disappeared, there would be fewer murders.

From the above "Britain's Murder Rate" link:

 

[MarkHastings]

I don't know, wouldn't the next easiest way to kill a person take over as the 'easy' way to murder people?

The point being, people who use guns to kill probably use a gun because of the 'ease'. Not having guns won't deter them because they'll just find the next easiest way to do it and that will become their method.

I guess it's kind of like finding out that '7 Elevens' get robbed the most, so getting rid of all '7 Elevens' will rid your town of crime, but the fact is that all of those crooks who are robbing the '7 Elevens' will just turn their attention to all the 'Dunkin' Donuts' and the number of crimes will still be the same.

 

[ChrisMatson]

Yes, but the numbers would not be the same. If all motorized automobiles suddenly disappeared, people would not travel as much. Sure, the next easiest way (bicycle, horse, etc...) would then be the most popular method, but I don't think people would log as many miles. If it isn't as "easy" people will tend not to do it as much.

I am in no way advocating the banning of guns, but I am suggesting that the prevalence of firearms tends to drive up the murder rate.

Does any private citizen need an "assault weapon" for self-protection or hunting?
No.

Should a violent criminal who was just released from prison be able to go to a gun show and buy a gun without any type of background check?
No.

Do gun laws prevent all violent criminals from getting guns and killing people with them?
No.

Do gun laws (locks, background checks, waiting periods, assualt weapon bans, etc...) possibly prevent some violent crime and accidental shootings?
Yes.

 

[Leila Dougan]

Chris, buddy, you sure like standing on the edge.

 

[Dustin Harrison]

Thanks for clearing that up, I thought it seemed kinda low.

 

[Brian Perry]

I thought it was closer to $30k, but I guess it depends on what types of jobs one is including/excluding.

 

[andrew markworthy]

Jeff, thanks for those examples - they reinforce my argument.

What you failed to note was that the reports are in the main talking about changes in the baseline rate. That ain't the same thing as the actual rate. And note that where there have been increases, gun usage is nearly always to blame.

I'm not saying anything about gun control or how anyone should run their country, just that you can't escape the fact that accessibility to firearms and murder go hand in hand.

By the same token, being rich and having access to a wide variety of foodstuffs is associated with levels of morbid obesity. This doesn't mean I'm making a statement in favour of making french fries illegal.

 

[Brandon_T]

As if I hadn't already wished for my entire life that I was Right handed.

Brandon

ps. Can I convert to Righty?

 

[Jeff Perry]

Can't argue with you there, Andrew. So long as we both understand that accessibility to firearms doesn't change because some politician passes a law.

Also, I just realized this conversation may be looked down upon here, so let's get back to statistics (but thank you for the intelligent discussion on the subject! )

Salaries: Median adjusted gross is only $28,117, according to the IRS. Top 10 percent is $92,754, top 1 percent $292,913. Bottom 10 percent is $5,121. So far 193,798 people have an AGI of $1M or more. California alone accounts for 30,843 of those.

 

[ChrisMatson]

Should we discuss who benefits most from tax cuts?

 

[andrew markworthy]

I agree 100% - heck, we have enough problems in the UK where we have way tougher gun laws. I know that one of the reasons often given in the USA for having guns is in case a foreign power invades. Can I, on beahlf of my people assure you guys that we really truly have forgiven you for dumping the tea in Boston harbor, and *honestly* we've no plans to invade.