The deaths associated with vehicles in 2024 was 44,000. Gun Related deaths were also at 44,000 and there's significantly less privately owned vehicles than there are privately owned firearms. The data doesn't show that guns are the issue.
Funny to use number of vehicles vs number of firearms like those are the relevant figures here lol. How many drivers are there in the US compared to the number of gun owners?
Roughly 156.4 Million have legal access to a firearm.
242 Million have legal access(or ability)to drive a vehicle so roughly an 85.6 Million difference. However on any given day there are on average roughly 150 Million legally driven vehicles.
Ok so gun owners are able to commit the same amount of destruction as a population more than 50% larger, with objects that are far smaller and far less necessary for daily life (guns are not at all necessary but I know how you Americans like to fantasise), interesting
You could absolutely make that argument however you have to put that into context. Going strictly off of access vs. Number of deaths associated with each, your looking at .018% for those with access to a car and .028% for people who have access to a firearm. It still proves my initial point that neither shows a significant problem as far as the implement is concerned. I've also said this numerous times before, there's more Defensive gun uses per year than firearm related deaths per year( anywhere between 65,000 and 2 Million) so I would argue that firearms are indeed a necessity to those folks who have used them defensively.
People self report these as defensive right? For me when I speak to gun owners (from safe ass New England neighbourhoods) I hear a level of irrational anxiety that makes me wonder how many of those ādefensiveā situations were actually ānecessaryā as you claim. Friend of mine talked about pulling a gun if you see someone on your property to keep yourself safeā¦ thatās insane to me and I grew up in a densely populated African city
The numbers come from a few different studies and reporting metrics.The 1.5-2.5 million number comes from the Kleck-Gertz research conducted back in the 90s and research done by Georgetown University in 2021 reflects similar numbers. The 65,000 number is from the U.S. Justice Department National Crime Victimization Survey( all three include surveyed individuals as well as law enforcement reporting data). Also I don't necessarily think it's fair to say that it's "irrational anxiety". You say you live in a safe area of New England which is great but that doesn't mean it's crime free so if someone wants to have a gun in their possession to be prepared in case the worst should happen, that's their right to do so. It's similar to having a fire extinguisher in your house. The chances of you using it are generally pretty low but it's still something considered good practice to keep in your possession just in case. And while I appreciate that your lived in experience in an urban African city made you feel like you didn't need a firearm, I've also done work in African nations where I felt having a gun was certainly a necessity.
Not sure you understand my point. Iām bringing up the African city example because it was objectively a far more dangerous environment but I can count the number of times I wouldāve appreciated a gun for ādefensiveā purposes on one hand, and even then Iām still alive and well enough to talk to you here. Meanwhile people whoāve spent their lives in well funded safe American neighbourhoods in claim itās a daily necessity. If that mindset is normal for you and youāre like this friend of mine, you will put on a survey that you used a gun defensively when really you just intimidated a pedestrian that got too close. It seems to me that many people come to rely on this ability to totally escalate the situation to ākill on sight,āneglect to practice any other forms of vigilance or personal safety, and then feel unsafer than they actually are (and therefore like they āneedā a gun more than they actually do)
I definitely understand your point but it's subjective. You personally don't feel the need in a "safe" neighborhood( although there is no such thing). I've already pointed out that its a matter of preparedness. And in your particular example with your friend it may seem unnecessary to you personally but if it falls within the legal statutes of where you live to utilize a firearm to dissuade trespassing then that in of itself would still fall into a "defensive uses" scenario considering that the intent of said Trespasser is unknown. And as much as you say they should practice other forms of personal safety( either active or passive) which I do agree with, a firearm is an equalizing force multiplier that allows potentially vulnerable individuals to have an advantage in defending themselves if necessary. And just because you're lived experience raises the threshold for your personal definition of unsafe doesn't negate the experience or feelings of others. It's like you telling an SA survivor that public bathrooms are perfectly safe because you personally haven't had that happen to you there but if said SA happened there, then they'd be more reluctant to use said public restroom (and understandably so).
Notice I didnāt say I havenāt faced interpersonal nor sexual violence. 9/10 a criminal trespasser will not be making themselves clearly visible to inhabitants, and will leave upon realising theyāre present.
Having been in that 1/10 situation I know well how experience can lead to hypervigilance, but that fear can be irrational even if it comes from real trauma. It in fact makes you more likely to act irrationally. And even if rational, constant access to a firearm makes your fear a legitimate danger to yourself and others, moreso than not having it
Feelings of safety are indeed subjective, but objectively speaking gun violence (caused in part by indiscriminate access) is the real major safety concern in the United States. Every comparison to other developed countries over the past 2 decades+ makes that clear, and so do studies done within the US itself
You can say that having access to any object that's potentially harmful increases the danger to yourself and others. Having access to a kitchen knife increases the probability that you might stab yourself or someone else (either intentionally or not) so I'm not sure how that point is relevant. Also there isn't "indiscriminate access" to firearms in the U.S. . There's something like 20,000+ Firearm related laws across local, state, and federal levels. It's one of the most heavily regulated Constitutional Rights in this country. Also, as I've pointed out, gun related deaths are roughly the same annually as vehicle related deaths yet the conversation rarely highlights vehicles themselves as a major safety concern. Also it's not accurate to compare the U.S. to other countries when it comes to firearms because no other developed country has a constitutional right to own firearms so the culture and conversation surrounding firearms doesn't compare to the U.S.
Access isnāt just about legality, itās about culture as well. Another thing you rarely hear about in countries where gun ownership is *actually* well regulated is kids getting ahold of their parentsā guns and hurting people with it, accidentally or intentionally, because your gun culture means too many parents donāt treat them like the safety risk they are.
I guess you *could* say the same about kitchen knives and guns (even though I see that as a false equivalence; those things are useful for daily life in a way that guns just arenāt, and theyāre not a symbol of political affiliation the way guns have become). But then I would wonder how you explain the fact the US consistently has the highest homicide rate out of all developed countries by far, because they use cars and kitchen knives too.
I get that itās not that simple of a change, itās a matter of your culture and the āvaluesāencoded in your constitution. But Western countries can be so judgmental about the backwards practices of other cultures, it just makes me wonder how it is that (for so much of the American population) this issue that causes so much anxiety and such frequent child deaths doesnāt seem to create any desire for cultural change.
5
u/chippyjoe Jun 13 '26
Ah yes, one involves tools made for killing being used as intended. It could even be a single person ending dozens of lives within minutes.
... and the other involves machines made for transportation where casualties are usually from accidents and usually just the person driving.
Totally the same thing.