New research from a gun control group backed by former Mayor Michael Bloomberg finds the federal government is underestimating the number of children killed in unintentional firearm deaths.
The report from Everytown for Gun Safety looked at a one-year period beginning in December 2012, and found at least 100 unintentional shooting deaths in that time, or almost two a week. That’s 60 percent more than reflected in federal data.
via Feds underreporting accidental child gun deaths, study finds | TheHill.
So there is a conspiracy among certain parts of the criminal investigative process to hide those evil accidental children’s death by firearms. And how exactly do they accomplish that? Sweeping under the rug? Losing paperwork? “Crashed” hard drives? Nope:
“When a child dies or is injured because a gun is left unsecured in a home, it’s not an accident,” said Shannon Watts, founder of Moms Demand Action.
The report finds that local and state coroners and medical examiners tend to err toward classifying deaths as intentional homicides when intent is unclear, thus underreporting unintended shootings.
“Our analysis confirms that the official data significantly undercount the scale of the phenomenon,” according to the report, entitled “Innocents Lost.”
Wait..what? These are the same idiots that have been screaming about how awful is that accidental shootings are called that instead of having Law Enforcement/ District Attorney press charges, but when they are tagged as intentional homicides they complain too?
Somebody please help me understand the mental process they use instead of logic. Do they need those deaths to be classified as accidental to keep their marketing alive? Because I could swear that intentional homicides are way much nastier and collects more prison time than a simple accidental shooting.
Do they need those deaths to be classified as accidental to keep their marketing alive?
Yeah, pretty much. Their next big gig will probably be pushing safe storage laws. Notice, too, they claim “60% more than..” Sounds much scarier than “36 more than official records”. (that number is assuming they’re looking at unintentional firearm fatalities age group 0-13).
I think they consider anyone under 25 a ‘child’
Why stop there? I have parents. (I’m 60, but there are still two people in the world who consider me “their child”.)
They need those deaths to be whatever they say they are for whatever their current marketing campaign is.
They need each of those deaths to count twice to maintain their relevance: once as an accident and once as intentional.
Also amusing is the similarity of their argument to the global warming debate. “Reality isn’t measuring up to our predictions, therefore reality must be wrong.” That’s what passes for “logic” in their minds.
During the Million Moron March, they were insisting that 23 year old gang bangers were “children killed by gun violence.” When I challenged one of them on the statistic, she replied, “Everyone is someone’s baby.”
Can’t argue with that. Can’t humanely club them like seals, either.
personal opinion.possible reason for homicide category. if the person who had the gun was a felon they are committing a crime. if a child picked up the gun and killed themselves it could be defined as homicide because it happened during the commission of a crime.
They want them classified *both* ways so they count double.
Mike, they claimed that 20-year-old Marines in war zones were “children killed by gun violence”.