• Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      11 months ago

      If I did the math right, for one person to be shot per day, we’re starting with a population of 10,440,000, not 400.

      • ElegantBiscuit@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        I worked the math out to be one person out of 400 shot to death either by murder or suicide every 17.12 years. Definitely not every 21 days, but it is still actually crazy when you think about just how few 400 people is.

        • Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          That sounds about right. About 1 in 87 will die from suicide in general. 1 in 57 will OD. 1 in 6 from heart disease; 1 in 7 from cancer.

          1 in 156 will kill themselves with a gun. 1 in 238 will be killed with a gun. (This includes FAFO deaths that could be prevented if people understood that a lethal threat justifies a lethal response.)

    • db0@lemmy.dbzer0.comOPM
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      11
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      I don’t think it was trying to be factual, but more trying to make a point.

        • poVoq@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          11 months ago

          Over what time frame? Did you include gun facilitated suicides? And in general getting shot, doesn’t mean getting killed.

        • dohpaz42@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          11
          ·
          11 months ago

          You’re focusing on the wrong part of the post. The point of the post is that despite all of these horrible (and for a lack of a better word, fixable) things going on in the world right now, people are wrongly focusing on trans people as a problem.

          Also, there is such a thing as hyperbole, and it doesn’t mean that the point is invalid; instead it’s used to emphasize the point.

            • dohpaz42@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              7
              ·
              11 months ago

              Not everything needs to meet scientific rigor. If that were the case, you would’ve provided me with at least three scientific studies demonstrating your side of the argument. But you didn’t, because it’s wholly unnecessary for a normal conversation.

                • dohpaz42@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  If that’s the hill you want to die on, that’s your prerogative, and I won’t fault you for it. I do disagree with you, but I also appreciate your time discussing this with me and challenging my assertions.

              • yarr@feddit.nl
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                11 months ago

                “Being blatantly wrong is fine, as long as you have good intentions.”

                The average person in the USA only makes $140 per year. Well, it’s not really that bad, but it draws attention to wage inequity in the USA.

      • papertowels@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        11 months ago

        Unfortunately since it’s relying on numbers to make it’s point it would hit a lot harder if it was factual…