A new study shows that the number of children wounded or killed by gunshots has been climbing in recent years, and that states with high gun-ownership rates also tend to have lots of childhood firearm injuries.
While such a conclusion may seem obvious, epidemiological research in this field has been lacking because of pressure from some members of Congress to limit federally funded gun research for the past two decades.
The new report out today by a Boston medical student and his advisor at Harvard Medical School provides some intriguing, and disturbing, trends. With nearly 7,500 children wounded and 500 killed each year, they found that the big problem is actually handguns.
“Our data shows that handguns are responsible for more hospitalizations and in-hospital deaths than any other firearm type,” said Arin Madenci, a surgical resident at Brigham and Women’s Hospital who conducted the study while a student at the University of Michigan School of Medicine. “While public health resources and policies have largely focused on military-style semi-automatic assault weapons, it may be more crucial to intervene on handguns.”
Madenci and Christopher Weldon, professor of surgery at the Harvard Medical School, compared household gun ownership and childhood gun violence across the 50 U.S. states. They used figures from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, a database of personal health data maintained by the Centers for Disease Control in Atlanta since 1993.
Between 1997 and 2009, hospitalizations from gunshot wounds increased from 4,270 to 7,730, while in-hospital deaths rose from 317 to 503. The report is being presented today at the American Academy of Pediatrics conference in Orlando.
The title of the piece, "More Guns in U.S. homes, More Kids Getting Shot" fails to take into account the other reports which say gun ownership is actually going down. The theory behind that one is that fewer gun owners own more guns, in other words the average number of guns owned by people has risen. Interestingly, as that's happened, so has an increase in child shootings.
The news is actually much worse: More than 2,700 children and teens are killed with guns every year. "500" represents only those who died in a hospital...
ReplyDeleteBut the goal was to find a stat that was on the rise, that's probably why they weren't citing overall numbers.
DeleteWhat, that "503" is not an overall number because it's only the "in-hospital" deaths? You find some tricky spin job in that, do you?
DeleteSsgmarkcr had a couple posts showing you how overall numbers are decreasing. So yeah, the "in hospital" deaths is a spin job to show a figure that is increasing.
DeleteThe article offers no links to sources and goes into no detail about ages and methods of data collection. As always, Mikeb, you love a study that reaches your approved conclusion, but can't stand it if the answer doesn't fit your narrative.
ReplyDeleteYou hate facts that prove you wrong, Greg. I don't blame ya.
DeleteAs Greg says, mentioning a study and not citing the source doesn't allow for examination of the data.
ReplyDeleteWhen you look at the data on the CDC website firearm deaths of children by firearms has declined from 2977 in 200 to 1337 in 2010. The numbers for gun injuries are much more chaotic, with 8092 in 2001 down to 5675 in 2012. However during that time there were two instances in 2006 and 2008 where injuries jumped into the 9,000 range.
It's disgraceful that you're satisfied with those numbers.
DeleteNo one is "satisfied" with those numbers. What we are saying is that we want to see the sources and methods and get all the facts. The facts don't support your conclusion.
DeleteMike, no one has said either set of numbers are acceptable. However, when you put forth conflicting data without any explanation as to why it conflicts with a fairly well respected data source, it makes it look like someone is making stuff up and hoping no one will notice. This detracts from your side's argument and credibility.
DeleteWhere are your numbers on children being killed by gun shot? Do your numbers show there is no problem? Whatever the numbers, isn't one to many?
DeleteThat "isn't one too many" argument doesn't fly. The kind of police state required to achieve your stated goal would damage far more lives, but then, children would still die of something--state sponsored murder, if nothing else.
DeleteAgain, you dodged the question. I asked where your numbers are, if you claim Mike's numbers are bogus. Do your numbers show no problem at all?
DeleteAnonymous, don't be tedious. Sarge posted the numbers that we're talking about here.
DeleteThose numbers show there is a problem. So I must assume you are unwilling to try anything to curtail that problem. Or worse, you don't think there is a problem, even though the numbers you use show there is a problem.
DeleteNo response. Got it.
DeleteGun loons are fact deniers and could care less about the death of children, most of which could be avoided. A truly a despicable crowd.
ReplyDelete