this post was submitted on 03 Nov 2023
53 points (100.0% liked)

196

16244 readers
1863 users here now

Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.

Rule: You must post before you leave.

^other^ ^rules^

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago (2 children)

If at least 1 person in the room of 400 is shot per day they'd be dead in just over a year...

Last I checked the population of the US wasn't plummeting, so what else is wrong here?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

Not to detract from the overall message, buuuut....

48,313 gun deaths in US in 2021.

333,000,000 people in US

On those rates 0.05 people in a room of 400 would be shot per year, so 1 person per 20 years.

It'd 1 person every 2 years in a room of 4,000.

Also those mental health numbers are off given the lifetime prevalence of most disorders being around 5%.

2/400 (0.5%) of the population identifying as trans would be 1,665,000 people - which may be plausible but idk, I generally work on the figure of ~4% of any population being LBGTQI.

Poverty numbers are probably bang on.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

"shot" does not mean "killed".

What I can find is roughly 315 people getting shot every day in the US. Out of 333m, that's roughly 1 in 1m daily. In a room of 400 that's 1 per 6.8 years.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 10 months ago (2 children)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago

If anything the people pointing out how others are missing the point, are actually missing the point…

There’s a middle ground between ‘autistically measuring in decimals’ and blowing something completely out of proportion to make a forced point.

People are just getting defensive because it’s an underlying point they agree with (rightly so) and going on attack for anyone calling it out for being disingenuous.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Oh no I see the point, but I'm hardly going to believe a point that's surrounded by obvious mistakes or embellishments

[–] [email protected] 0 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

In this case, being more accurate would have distracted from the overall point.

Granted, attracting the dismissive comments of insufferable pedants and the wilfully obtuse isn't ideal either, but here we are 🤷