Funny Factoid

[eaglesway]

   

   An interesting letter in the Australian Shooter Magazine:"If you consider that there has been an average of 160,000 troops in the Iraq theater of operations during the past 22 months, and a total of 2112 deaths, that gives a firearm death rate of 60 per 100,000 soldiers.The firearm death rate in Washington , DC is 80.6 per 100,000 for the same period.That means you are about 25 per cent more likely to be shot and killed in the US capital, which has some of the strictest gun control laws in the US , than you are in Iraq .Conclusion: The US should pull out of Washington ..."

[WhiteWings]

 :thumbsup:

[annuit coeptis]

Love it.

[WhiteWings]

Love it.

....until you Google for real numbers  :winkgrin:

[eaglesway]

You Are Right!.... I just Googled it. While I found conflicting analysies, the highest possible legitimate comparison was 45.8 per month a month in DC in 2002. The death rate for Iraq included for deaths by bombs and other fatalities, and the highest  rate for total casualties in Iraq per month was in 2007 accurate was 98 per month, including suicides and IED's, etc. That makes it a bit less than 2 to 1, or half again as dangerous to be a soldier in Iraq, as to be a citizen of Washington DC. But, in any case the comparison in the joke is inaccurate- However, the reality is still close enough to highlight the incongruity of our nations need to police the world while destroying itself from within :wink1:

[Molly]

You Are Right!.... I just Googled it. While I found conflicting analysies, the highest possible legitimate comparison was 45.8 per month a month in DC in 2002. The death rate for Iraq included for deaths by bombs and other fatalities, and the highest  rate for total casualties in Iraq per month was in 2007 accurate was 98 per month, including suicides and IED's, etc. That makes it a bit less than 2 to 1, or half again as dangerous to be a soldier in Iraq, as to be a citizen of Washington DC. But, in any case the comparison in the joke is inaccurate- However, the reality is still close enough to highlight the incongruity of our nations need to police the world while destroying itself from within :wink1:

Ha!
Maybe that will change now that handguns are LEGAL in DC.  Until recently, only the criminals had guns.  That's the real joke.

D.C.'s Ban On Handguns In Homes Is Thrown Out
Fenty Promises to Fight Appellate Court's Ruling


By David Nakamura and Robert Barnes
Washington Post Staff Writers
Saturday, March 10, 2007

A federal appeals court ruled yesterday that the District's longtime ban on keeping handguns in homes is unconstitutional.

The 2 to 1 decision by an appellate panel outraged D.C. Mayor Adrian M. Fenty and other city leaders, who said that they will appeal and that gun-related crimes could rise if the ruling takes effect. The outcome elated opponents of strict gun controls because it knocked down one of the toughest laws in the country and vindicated their interpretation of the U.S. Constitution's language on the right to bear arms.

The panel from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit became the nation's first federal appeals court to overturn a gun-control law by declaring that the Second Amendment grants a person the right to possess firearms. One other circuit shares that viewpoint on individual rights, but others across the country say the protection that the Second Amendment offers relates to states being able to maintain a militia. Legal experts said the conflict could lead to the first Supreme Court review of the issue in nearly 70 years.

The District's law bars all handguns unless they were registered before 1976; it was passed that year to try to curb gun violence, but it has come under attack during the past three decades in Congress and in the courts. Yesterday's ruling guts key parts of the law but does not address provisions that effectively bar private citizens from carrying guns outside the home.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/09/AR2007030902416.html