Michael J. Phelps writes:
Wright (1983) compare handgun attacks with long bladed knife attacks;
as do Wilson & Sherman (1961 p 643) with findings of:mortality rate for handguns: 16.8% ice picks: 14.3 butcher knives: 13.3
Kleck has made a dishonest selection of data from Wilson & Sherman:
from the same table that the figures above were plucked from:
rifles: 7.7
Unless you think that handguns are twice as deadly as rifles, this should be a clue that something is very wrong. (Another clue, free of charge: 2/15=13.3% and 2/14=14.3%)
[note that these rates don't address untreated woundings, so the 16%
handgun mortality rate correlates well with Cook's 15%]
They also don't address untreated DEATHs, so the comparison is bogus.
More like this
HerrGlock writes:
Oh hell, now I'm going to have to dig up that study. There's a study
done that shows long guns are more likely to have an
accidental/negligent shooting than are handguns. Something along the
lines of 4 to 1.
A handgun is four times as likely
to be involved in an accidental wounding as a long gun.
Dr. Paul H. Blackman writes:
If you just want to look at accidental
death, I would note that most of the decrease in fatal gun accidents
in the US occured before there was an increase in handgun ownership
In the Tennessee Law Review (v61 513-596 1994) Kates et al wrote: