Ironic that at the bottom of that article there was a reference to a previous article from the same author about children and accidental drowning.Well said!
Compare these two quotes:
"These are just two of several hundred such deaths that will almost certainly occur this year. Guns account for 10 percent of all injury-related deaths among children ages 5 to 14."
"drowning kills more than 1,400 children under 20 in a typical year. And for every child who dies in the water, four others are hospitalized for near-drowning, some of whom suffer permanent brain damage or physical disabilities."
So assuming her numbers are correct, then children are SEVEN TIMES more likely to die by drowning than by firearms accident. Even though there are WAY more firearms in the US than pools.
Yet she says this:
"If it were up to me, there would be no guns in any household with children under 18. Better yet, no guns in any household — children or no children."
She does NOT say this:
"If it were up to me, there would be no POOLS in any household with children under 18. Better yet, no POOLS in any household — children or no children."
Why? Clearly guns can be used to protect life and property and not merely for recreation. Guns are FAR LESS dangerous to children than pools. Nobody really "NEEDS" a pool, right? I have NEVER heard of a parent defending their family from brutal attack with their pool. So why then is her advice so different for guns than pools.
She clearly has hoplophobia. Because she fears firearms, she assigns them a higher risk than pools even though her own words confirm that pools pose the greater risk to children. In other words, she is delusional.
Thursday, August 03, 2006
Hoplophobe Jane E. Brody Follow-Up: "In Other Words, She is Delusional"
1894C had some great insights that shouldn't remain buried in yesterday's "Comments".
Well, maybe we're supposed to hope the intruder falls into the pool...or we're supposed to shove intruders into a pool.
ReplyDelete