In Medical Triumph, Homicides Fall Despite Soaring Gun Violence

[Triathloncoach]

It's in today's Wall Street Journal. Headline Front Page

"The reported number of people treated for gun shot attacks from 2001 to 2011 has grown by nearly half."

Essence of the article. Gun Violence is way up, but homicides have still fallen because of significant improvement in medical care in the past 10-15 years People aren't dying like they used too. And it's not because people are now worse shots.

Interesting stuff.

And The Wall Street Journal is about as Conservative as they come. Very Republican.

 

[RamRoddoc]

http://www.democraticunderground.com/117290821

The numbers (raw?) surely homicide (?) and exclude those shot in the commission of crime/crimes (even by police), the population has increased as well since 2001 and the age base has probably shifted. That and the as the job/employment rate has increased it often will reflect an increased crime rate in many instances.

The anti-gun regulars are going to use this as another reason to push for more gun control legislation.

I thought the overall numbers were falling when taking in account the variables and population growth? Did I miss something or is this just more timed propaganda?

 

[RamRoddoc]

So this is from a joint effort of Howard-Hopkins Surgical Outcomes Research Center, a joint venture between Howard and Johns Hopkins University. I'm curious if this is from the public health departments? More information to follow on that question.

I just had an epiphany, the FBI stats reflect reported crime is dropping based on population. A theory is that with the huge increase in legal concealed carry, more criminals are being shot, thus increasing actual shootings (good ones) and halting, reducing or delaying that criminal's actions. Also I think we are getting better at tracking this more accurately than before so we are capturing more data. Our medical response system is constantly being tweaked and trauma teams are saving folks that in the past would have expired.

One should note that two separate issues are being tied together. One "homicides" are falling. I think we all know what a homicide is. The other stated as "gunshot attacks". Notice the word "attack" and not homicide. This is a common bait and switch tactic of the anti-gun crowd to sway perception with carefully presented "facts". I would bet money that the second number "gunshot attacks" also include the police attacks on criminals as well as honest citizens defending themselves by "attacking" their attackers.


Working within the prison system I at one time saw quite a few prisoners with retained bullets/shot pellets. Some from several separate shooting encounters on more than one occasion were seen. Also different sources were seen (not just weapons) such as police, citizen and other criminals doing the shooting (typically drug money issues). I saw lots and lots of prisoners with scars, most from knife wounds.

The screech will be "as more guns are allowed, thus will more shootings and more medical care-think of the cost!” For me as long as the right people are getting legally shot I really don't have a problem with that.

It's just a theory and objective "unbiased" screening of data could separate good shooting, bad shooting and questionable shootings that could provide a clearer review of what is really going on. I’d really like to see the data they used. I have been on CDC’s web page and the FBI and it’s an over whelming amount of information to sift through.

Expect this data to be manipulated to grease the orders and policy upcoming. There is too much thunder going on to not expect some rain. Oh and the John Hopkins public health department is also known as the John Hopkins, Bloomberg School of Public Health who receives support from the Joyce Foundation. Bloomberg of MAIG and the Joyce foundation have strong views on guns and want to educate us all.

http://webapps.jhu.edu/jhuniverse/academics/schools/bloomberg_school_of_public_health/

So that doesn't mean that just since John Hopkins public health department is supported (both in mind and money) by both Mayor Bloomberg and the Joyce foundation that they have any influence over a clearly "joint venture" right? That might bring into question one's integrity and character.

Howard County General Hospital's (HCGH's) Board of Trustees, John Hopkins has agreed to assumed HCGH's debt of $57 million in 1998. Source: http://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/press/1998/MARCH/howard.html

Nah, nothing to see here........ not like there is any threat or anything.... no avenue of approach or specific reasoning for the timing is there?

http://www.theoutdoorstrader.com/threads/266193-The-Threat

 

[Corso]

great info guys

 

[RamRoddoc]

Even more benefits with a merger for Howard:

To assume the Hospital's debt of approximately $57 million
To fund the Hospital's 5-year Strategic Plan of about $25 million
To fund the Hospital's 5-year capital replacement plan of about $20 million
To fund a new private, non-profit foundation with approximately $40 million

I want to see exactly where they obtained the data, who collected it and just how much of Joyce foundation and Bloomberg dollars supported the departments financially.

Anyone with Wall Street Journal access may want to post similar questions to the readers.

 

[Laxguy59]

good info RamRoddoc