By Dean Weingarten
Arizona -(Ammoland.com)- Lavaunti Broadbent was shot and killed during a crime spree in Minneapolis in July of 2015. He is one of the statistics from that year. He was 16 years old. He was attempting an armed robbery when a person with a carry permit shot and killed him.
Most children shot and killed in the United States are in their teens. Children killed in self defense by the citizens they are assaulting, are not separated from the statistics, unless they are killed by police.
The BBC recently ran a story about children and guns. In the first sentence, they say that about 1,300 children under the age of 17 die from gun-related injuries each year. That is not true.
About 1,300 US children under the age of 17 die from gun-related injuries per year, a government study has found.
Researchers at the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) also found that guns seriously wounded about 5,800 children each year.
Boys accounted for 82% of all child firearm deaths while black children were 10 times more likely to be killed by a gun, according to the study.
More than half of these deaths were homicides while 38 percent were ruled suicide.
The study, published in Pediatrics on Monday, also found 6 percent of firearm-related deaths were fatalities from accidental gun injuries.
Just a few paragraphs down, a quote from Katherine Fowler, the leader of the study, contradicts the BBC’s opening sentence.
“Firearm injuries are a leading cause of death among US children aged one to 17 years and contribute substantially each year to premature death, illness and disability of children,” said CDC’s Katherine Fowler, who led the study.
Fowler’s study includes 17-year-olds. This is probably a case of confirmation bias by the BBC, and clever wording from Fowler. It “sounds” younger to say “1 to 17 years” than to say “under the age of 18”.
The study was done for 3 years, 2012, 2013, 2014. Using the CDCs WISQARS database, I compiled the numbers for 2012, 2013, and 2014. The average for those three years were 1,268, close to what is stated. The average number of 17-year-olds was 384.
That is 30 percent of the total. Remove the 17-year-olds, as the BBC did through (most likely) confirmation bias, and the real number would be under 900. It just doesn’t sound as scary as 1,300, does it?
In 2015, the numbers jumped up, most likely due to the Ferguson effect. There were 1,490 total in 2015. Of those, 17-year-olds were 456, or 31 percent.
The Ferguson effect started in August of 2014, but it took some time to build. The term was popularized in May of 2015 by Heather Mac Donald in a Wall Street Journal article. It was in full swing in 2015. The Ferguson effect refers to the spike in homicides occurring in black city centers when the police pull back for fear of being charged with racism and crimes they did not commit.
80 percent of the children who die of gun-related injuries are 13 years old or older. Black kids account for most of the homicides. Homicides are 56 percent of the total. Suicides are 38 percent of the total. Non-black kids account for most of the suicides. All of the suicides are over 10 years old.
©2017 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included.
About Dean Weingarten:
Dean Weingarten has been a peace officer, a military officer, was on the University of Wisconsin Pistol Team for four years, and was first certified to teach firearms safety in 1973. He taught the Arizona concealed carry course for fifteen years until the goal of constitutional carry was attained. He has degrees in meteorology and mining engineering, and recently retired from the Department of Defense after a 30 year career in Army Research, Development, Testing, and Evaluation.
@Heed the Call-up – so you don’t have a problem with birth control you have a problem with abortion>
@Mac, why should I have an issue with birth control? As stated in my prior post, to which you are responding outside of the thread, I did explain my objection to abortion when used as birth control, since birth control is ubiquitous and free to those that can’t afford it. Here is my post, so you may re-read it. I thought what I posted was quite simple and clear to understand. Please explain where you are having difficulty with the comprehension, so I may assist you in understanding. “I have an issue with it used as birth control. With all… Read more »
@Head – read your post and try to make since of it. That why I replied. You started one way then tuned around? Clearer posts would stop any confusion!
Maco, again, you need to re-rad my post. There is no “turn around”. I don’t know how I can be more clear. I don’t believe in abortion as birth control. Please explain where you are getting confused.
@Heed – the sentence ‘I don’t believe in abortion as birth control’ clears it up. Wish you had said that the first time instead of going the long way around. I agree with this stance!
By the age of 8 children have learned the difference between right and wrong. That is the time to give them their first rifle. And NOT a BB gun but a real rifle. Learning to shoot and how to handle a firearm safely begins at 6, with a BB gun at age 7.
This is, of course assuming a real son or daughter with “Parents” capable of teaching their children.
These comments are intended for children with “Parents” with the age and maturity to teach children.
I think that children have learned by the time they are 8 years old the difference between right and wrong. That is the age to give them their first real firearm, not a BB gun but a rifle. I also think that at the age of 6 they begin learning to handle a rifle and by 7 to shoot, well.
GYFG? huh, what’s that?
Billy Bob was spot on ! Where the hell were the parents? they had a great time manufacturing the poor then as many of then do STEP aside and expect Society raise the Bastards and I say Bastards because they have NO parents! IOn most cases the parents are more like siblings! then Parents. They accept NO !@#$%^&*() responsibility for their off springs! one of their kids ghets his /her Fanny wacked like in MY day and the “sibling Parent” wants to sue the Teacher. School district, Principle etc! which of course sets a great example for the kid! Start… Read more »
Wasn’t it the Clinton She Unit that infamously declared “it takes a village”? Yeah, and when kids are raised by “the village” we get the final product quality we see detailed in this article. Part of it is the structure of the welfare system. There is a very old, inviolable rule in government: if you subsidise something, you always get more of it. It works for corn and potatoes, doesn’t it? Ever stop to think it also works for children? The connection? Simple. The welfare system, as presently contrived, pays solo mothers to take care of their children. More children… Read more »
Good points, sir. We all know the party of politics that is fomenting this situation too. The Klan just changed headdress’ and continue to rule over this hapless society of voters in the progressive soup.
Assuming the kid with the gun in the picture is the younger Lavaunti – he didn’t have a chance……
…the a$$wipe with the hoodie – there’s your problem. Great role model for the younger…….SAD. Where’s the parents..?
Conservatives have no problems with such 4th trimester abortions.
I’m a conservative and I have a definite problem with your so-called 4th trimester abortions. It’s a shame and a tragedy that such horrendous violence is perpetrated in mostly liberal, progressively run cities. It’s sad that to see the minority voters continue to vote in and support the very people who are facilitating the bloodbath affecting urban young people. One can only hope and pray that these voters wake up, so onerous rather later, and vote these miscreants out of office.
Conservatives have a problem with abortion, period.
I have an issue with it used as birth control. With all the sex education and access to free birth control, even in schools, there is no reason for “accidental” pregnancy requiring an abortion as a fix. And I an not a Christian, so I have no religious reasons to be against it. I have my own moral convictions. I don’t need a “god” or a religion to tell me what’s right and wrong.
@Gil – there you go leading with your ass again!
If their out on the streets with a gun ,
rifle , shotgun or handgun and under 18 !
you can bet it’s probably stolen or family
member who owns it has no idea the kid
has it. Trouble is bound to follow in some
form . If a kid actually needs a gun for
protection the family needs to step in
and do the right stuff. or get out of Dodge !
You know, I carried a gun a lot from the time I turned thirteen in 1968. Now granted, it was a semi rural area in Fairbanks, Ak; but, I did carry either my H&R 949 or one of my Dad’s Colt Troopers. And no one thought anything of it. Younger people have no idea about the life I and my contemporaries lived. And that is a shame.
My Dad and all his brothers and most of his sisters all had guns since about six… brought them to school on a near daily basis (cheap enterteinment at lunch time, often free meat for supper on the way home). When Dad waa 14 he was the school bus driver, and most of the kids he picked up brought their guns right on the bus. No one could figure out any difference between bringing it on the bus, or bringing it on the horse. Guess what? NO ONE EVER GOT SHOT. Not so of the rattlers, cottontails, coon, small deer,… Read more »
My father and his brothers hunted on the way home from school as well. The teacher had a closet the boys stored their guns in and no one bothered them. Guns were a tool of society then and were used for good purpose more than nefarious activity. Now the gun is maligned as a tool of death and destruction in all the schools, colleges, and universities. Times have changed for the worse. A society as unsympathetic as ours will only suffer more until the right message is provided to our offspring about the importance of firearms in their lives. It… Read more »
Or running down a country road with a 22 or shotgun, strapped to a dirt bike in 1973. It was Tennessee, and even idiots knew you were going squirrel hunting. Instead of, hey that kid has a gun. It was, wonder where he’s going. I bet he knows a good spot. I know this has nothing to do with the article, or subject matter. Then again, it has everything to do with it. Guns aren’t more dangerous now, Our society is afflicted with unnatural fright of anything not understood. What was a right of passage is now influenced by terror.… Read more »
Ignore Gil. He’s a troll.
Children have the same rights to firearms via the 2A as any adult.
Nonsense. Federal Law prohibits anyone under 18 from buying a gun. Only the parents can teach and instruct their child the safety aspect and proper use of a gun.
No, not quite. WHERE in the Constitution do we find ANY reference to age as a prerequisite to the right to arms? Those Federal laws regulating and restricing any aspect of gun ownership are all contrary to the Constitution. Further, parents are not the ONLY ones who can or should teach proper use of furearms. True, it is the FATHER’s God-assigned responsibility to TEACH his children. That only means he needs to see to it is is done, and well. Uncles, cousins, friends, neighbours, cal all teach and instruct concerning arms. I’ve taught six and eight year olds rifle marksmanship.… Read more »
@Gil – get out of mom’s basement and get a life. Children do NOT have the same RIGHTS. You have to be 18 (16 in some states) to buy a long gun. 21 to buy a pistol. The only child like thing in your post is your mind!
The concept of child rights being separate from adults is a 20th century invention. For almost all history children were expected to work on the farm, handle when they were deemed capable and some cases even went to war alongside adults. Elsewhere folks will complain as to why most young adults are immature these days.
20th century customs slowly became “law”…BUT… b4 the early 1900s many US youngsters were armed by dads and trained to use firearms for hunting and defense..had to be. Mid 20th century South where I grew up: My dad taught me to shoot, beginning at age 7 ish..and I later taught my 2 boys the same way…beginning at age 6. Under adult supervision I [and then MY kids] learned gun handling and gun care easily. First w a single shot .22 rifle and then progressing up to a .410 single shot shotgun and then pistols and revolvers as we learned. Along… Read more »
The National Safety Council says that drowning is the biggest cause of death with children from 1 to 5 years old.
@Fred the Advocate, GFYG is no student of history or student of Constitutional decisions. The SCOTUS has found many times that children do not have the full panorama of Civil Rights, as adults do.
@Gil, the only immature kids are one’s like you or who are parented by people like you. I took my kids (and now my grandkids) out and showed them how to use and respect firearms. Something punks like you can’t seem to master!
Gil, your interest in young boys is appalling! It only goes to show what the left’s final solution is. Your sick, get help.
Don’t project your creepiness onto me DP. If anything you can get your Conservative crony friends to end child marriage in the U.S.
Gil… sometimes, you amaze even me (and by now I’m familiar with your insanity)…
Our Founding Fathers consistently and carefully (in the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and the Federalist Papers) used the term “the People” to refer ONLY to individuals – never to groups – who were [among other requirements, such as being citizens] old enough to serve in the militia (16 at that time). The 2nd Amendment was not directed toward children… in fact, it was not directed toward ANY citizen at all, and serves only to restrict government(!) activities.
Uh oh – what happened to the notion that 2A is not longer about militias? The 2A has now been ruled to about individual rights and the militia part is outdated. Elsewhere I looked children have access to the 1A so by the same extension they also have the right to keep and bear arms.
Despite the contention that “You can’t fix Stupid,” I ask that you reach up and turn your brain to the “ON” position, and pay attention to reality for once. The militia is absolutely NOT what the 2nd Amendment is “about” (as you so deftly put it). And the “militia part” is not “outdated,” it is simply no longer the argument [excuse!] for gun control that for many years Liberal cuckooclocks desperately wanted it to be. The mention of “militia” in the precedent clause – not in the primary body – is … get this clearly… merely one justification [among several]… Read more »
Actually the 2nd Amendment was about the militia. There really wasn’t a standing army in the US until after the Civil War. Before that the militias were found in every city and State(Colonies). The militias trained every month and used their own weapons. A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State ( the militias were the people with their own weapons training to fight in a cohesive unit) the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed (the individuals, people should be allowed to own their weapons).
Wouldn’t your time be better spent out of your parents basement and making a difference in this world. Everytime you post one of your ridiculous comments, you provide further evidence of being a paid troll. Just curious, are you male or female?
that Second Ammendment only mentions militia in passing as one reason for the right to arms accruing to all people. Militia are not causative or foundational. That is an explanatory clause, not a foundational clause. Remove the militia mention entirely, the Second and its demand to GOVERNMENT at all levels to leave our God given right to arms alone remains.
@Gil – I think the expression is if I had a dog the looked (acted in your case) like you I’d shave it’s ass and make it walk backwards. In your case you show your ass anyway!
Plenty of accounts of folks younger than 16 serving in the militia. Further, younger children (not actively having trained with their local militia) remained at home with what was known as “The Alarm Guard”, the “last defence” for their homes and towns. Those “too old to fight” were also part of that Guard. There are accounts of some VERY young children taking signficant action that directly aided in the defeat of the British Regulars. Of course, the long arms of that day were a real handful for even a strong man, thus their regular use by a puny kid was… Read more »
gill, this is the FIRST TIME you have said anything even approaching correct on this forum… technically you are correct…. AGE is not a given qualifying condition on the exercise of one’s right to arms. Fact is, many “children” as young as 14 served in their local militias, often bearing arms along with the older ones. BUT your obvious implication is dead wrong… you seem to hold to the perverted idea that anyone using a gun to cause anyone else harm is a “good” thing… and thus favour the use if arms by the very young.. to do things like… Read more »
I knew a guy like you once, Gil. He was never at ease with his neighbors, or the other parents where his child was schooled. Anyone with a perceived difference with his philosophical view, had to be called out, and addressed immediately. You could always count on him, to be in attendance at any forum to play the devil’s advocate. He really stood out in a small Southern town. But strangely, no one hated him for it. He was suffered and endured. His child, was always treated with the utmost respect. He spent the last 7 years of his life… Read more »