Not that I am aware of. But the man who ran against him for the Presidency in 1952 and 1956, Adalai Stevenson, did. When he was 12 he accidently shot a little girl in the head with a rifle he found in his father’s attic.
Sorry, his first name was spelled Adlai.
On a related note, statistical analysis of life expectancy clearly shows that no-one has ever died at or above the age of 135.
Therefore, if you can make it to 135, all evidence indicates you are immortal.
Oh, for crying out loud. I just realized, KarlGauss that we are talking about different studies. The link I posted to describes problems with a study done by Kellerman in 1986.
Reference 6 is that study you linked to.
On the topic of statistics, sheer boredom during a long drive (I was a rider, obviously) I cracked open Sunday’s Parade magazine, something I’m usually loathe to do if there’s so much as a nearby sugar packet to read instead.
Anyway, Ms. Savant’s column had an unusually interesting blurb on statistics.
The question was, given the example of “crimes with weapons” rising from 5% to 10%, statistically, did the crime rate double or did it rise five percent?
The answer, of course, is that both are true.
Thus, Lies, Damned Lies, and Statistics. The NRA might say “crime only went up a mere 5%” while Handgun Control would invaribly say “the crime rate doubled!”
As I recall from reading the Kellermann study many years ago- and I’ll fully admit to not being perfectly clear on it anymore- Kellermann used only actual shootings. Meaning 100% of his sample base involved situations where the gun was fired.
The study, boiled down (again, correct me if I’m wrong) basically said that, of those shootings, forty-six times more were situations where the shooter and shootee knew each other, than where they were not.
But, it made little or no comparison to non-shootings, non-brandishings or homes that contained guns which had never been used against anyone.
In other words, out of the people who actually shot somebody, chances are they knew the person they shot.
And due to the sampling method, that’s about all that could be extrapolated from the data- since it was not compared to non-shootings or non-uses of firearms, spin-doctoring the results to say that having a gun in the house is “46% more likely to kill a family member than an intruder” is a gross misrepresentation and largely factually incorrect.
I’m not being facetious with the “non uses”- as I recall, again, he only used actual shootings, with no comparison to the number of households that contain firearms (over 150 million, I’m told) or the number of privately-owned firearms in general (pushing 250 million.)
You are misinterpreting the statistics. They are far worse than that. As I said earlier, the Kellerman study in The New England Journal of Medicine said that a gun kept in the home is 43 times more likely to kill a member of the household or a friend that it is to kill an intruder. For every intruder killed, there are 43 deaths of family members or friends. (43 times more likely does not mean 43% more likely.)
According to the FBI, that is not “a gross misrepresentation” nor is it “largely factually incorrect.” I have provided reputable and reliable sources for my information. In addition to The New England Journal of Medicine and Scientific American, I suggest that you might want to read the link that I provided for Shodan. It is about research done at the Harvard Firearms Research Center. The information will be published in book form later this year.
I am not allowed to cite it here, only to link to it:
http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/hicrc/Firearms.htm
I can name a lot of people who have been killed by guns or who have killed someone with guns. I cannot name anyone who has killed an intruder.
I do know indirectly someone who shot and killed a trespasser in his yard. He was tried for murder.
I think this statement is easily supportable. Compare the number of intruders killed by guns nationally with the number of ‘family members’ killed by guns nationally, and you get the idea.
Of course, the statement in and of itself is pretty much meaningless. A baseball bat in the home is more likely to kill a family member than an intruder. A carving knife in the home is more likely to kill a family member than an intruder.
Why? Because we kill family members far more often than we kill intruders, regardless of the weapon used.
Pepsi Classic, if you are genuinely interested in learning more about the Kellerman study, I strongly suggest you check out this link, and this one.
From the first link:
Exactly!!
It is almost impossible to find any examples of accidents or children being shot or shooting anyone when children are raised with guns, with loaded guns in the house, and when children are taught safety. It may occur, but is extremely rare.
Most accidents and tragedies occur because children are not taught safety, parents hide them, and never show children how to safely handle them.
I too know someone who killed his best friend when he was 18, he shot his best friends head off with buckshot from a 12 guage shotgun - his parents not once ever showed him how to safely handle guns and did not teach him to respect the danger of guns.
Most accidents and child tradedies occur because children “find” or pick up a dangerous tool that they have not been trained to handle. I wouldnt trust Adlai Stevenson, or any 12 year old who was not taught safety by his parents, not even if he picked up a chain saw or grabbed the family car keys!
AS I said before , anyone who has guns, poisons, car keys, kitchen knives, hammers, power tools, scissors, electric outlets, electric appliances and bathtubs both in the house, etc. best keep them ALL!!! locked up, else teach your children to respect or handle them safely, or you will be very regretfull the rest of your life.
There is no excuse for ANYONE letting a 12 year old have access to any dangerous tool kept in the home that he was not properly taught to leave alone or how to handle it - even if they are the parents of Adlai Stevenson.
Your answer seems a little disingenuous, Susanann. Nevertheless…
And out of that long list, only one item is produced for the purpose of killing or wounding people.
I asked earlier if anyone else had ever had a gun held on them. I have – three times.
And I have had students removed from my classroom with loaded handguns twice. I have taught murders – I lost count after 8. All of them murdered with handguns.
Don’t have any use for them, myself.
Susanann: AS I said before , anyone who has guns, poisons, car keys, kitchen knives, hammers, power tools, scissors, electric outlets, electric appliances and bathtubs both in the house, etc. best keep them ALL!!! locked up, else teach your children to respect or handle them safely, or you will be very regretfull the rest of your life.
That one item(guns) that you are mistakingly focusing on, while ignoring other causes which are far more dangerous, according to the National Safety Council has one of the lowest rates for causes of accidental death, with a death rate of only 0.3http://www.nsc.org/
http://www.tysknews.com/Depts/2nd_Amend/injury_facts_nsc.htm
The fact is that all of the items I listed are very dangerous in the hands of children who are not taught how to handle them and left alone to play with(and I didnt even mention matches).
You, and everyone else, need to realize that most children are killed by other things than guns, and that if you are a responsible parent, nearly all of these deaths by any means could be avoided if you practiced safety concering ALL!! of these items.
Swimming pools and bathtubs (350 drowning deaths), cigarette lighters (90 deaths) cause more deaths to children under 5 from than guns (34 deaths). Some people believe that a gun may be used for self defense and can save lives, but bicycles, bathtubs, poisons, and cigarette lighters are not necessary to save any lives and are not necessary in the home, but they are very dangerous to children, more dangerous to children.
http://home.speedsoft.com/theashes/koppel.html
10 times as many children die in bathtubs than from guns.
10 times as many children die from poisons than from guns.
Good parents can avoid injuries and deaths to their children by realizing all of the dangers that might cause death, and by being safe and teaching safety.
-People like rapists and muggers?
You assume that the one using a gun to kill or wound only does so to an innocent or bystander. The innocent or bystander can- and often is- the one using it on the attacker.
-Does that mean no one does?