The Economist on Gun Deaths

Interesting, because not a damn thing about how many total deaths there were globally in that time span. Its ok, I looked it up. 

Starting in 1990 there were per the chart, 45 million deaths. In 2016 there were about 55 million. Average out the totals over that span and you arrive at about 50 million per year on average.

So 50m × 26(years) = about 1.3 billion deaths between 1990 and 2016. 

>6.5 million

>1.3 billion

Thats .05% of all death. 

.05% 

Welp, in old news, people are stupid 😂😂

Most people are going to die in terrible pain as a crippled old person. You should be so lucky to have a quick gun death.

My grandma just passed yesterday from Alzheimer's/vascular degeneration. It was rather painful for her and she essentially starved to death cause the degeneration hit the point where she couldnt eat or sleep. 

I shudder to think that kind of death is a potential for me given both her and my grandpa had Alzheimer's. Liver and Kidney failure got my grandpa ultimately though. Still, i would honestly rather prefer a quick death then a slow painful one. 

Thats beside the point though, the point of this was to show how absurd statistical leading to conclusions is getting when it comes to media. 

just in case people don't get the irony here a large part of those numbers are things that are preventable

"The impact of residual factors such as healthcare alone would have resulted in a 15.3 percent decline in global deaths. This influence has been even greater for communicable, maternal, neonatal and nutritional diseases — alone it would have resulted in a 30 percent decline in deaths."

but we focus on the 0.05% seems rather twisted priorities.

But in the U.S. the

Nearly 75 percent of all deaths in the United States are attributed to just ten causes, with the top three of these accounting for over 50 percent of all deaths.

(many of which are preventable and risk can be lowered easily)

#10 is suicide

murder is not in the top 10

Well these "save lives" studies all have one thing in common. They don't differentiate between saving a baby's life or saving 1 week of life from a 95 year old.

Well,  communicable and non-communicable diseases are generally preventable and account for a vast majority of deaths. But humanity as a whole is doing alot to combat that as is, and our reaponse times to (N)CD's has gotten lightning quick. For example, Ebola. The area it hit was not capable of coping with the outbreak, but within a short time, that area was blanketed with disease control and medical professionals. 

Its hard to say much substantial can be done that already isnt in terms of that. And people have to feel like they are in support of a rightcheous cause, hence the focus on guns. 

I mean, the article itself states

Right away which is a specious view of history that ignores that the advent of guns, and the industrial revolution that allowed the relatively cheap manufacturing of them, wholly tipped the scales to the advantage of the people, and not the state. This advent played a crucial role in accelerating colonization into the realm of total infeasibility(its too expensive and too much effort to control nations as colonies). 

These are the same kinds of people who will tout Marxist principles all the while ignoring even Marx saw an armed populace as necessary to achieving his principles being adopted universally 🤔

But most lefty's these days have more in common with Facists given there is a general tendency in both leftism today and Facism, to elevate the State to the position of God and hold the state as the ultimate arbiter of pretty much everything  🤔

I disagree, Antifa is predominantly Anarchists and Communist/Socialists. They are consistent on that often the advocacy of such groups calls for an ending to the state. There are many similarities, but the differentiator of total state control sets them at odds necessarily with Facism.

I see it as similar to Shia and Sunni sects of Islam. Despite being similar in all but a few relatively minor details, this vast similarity in beliefs hasn't prevented them from being at each other's throats for quite a long time and being mortal enemies of one another 🤔

Antifa aren't Facists, that is erroneous to posit. It however, would also be erroneous to posit that they *are not* fruit borne from the same tree 🤔

from what I have heard from members is they have some fascist ideals, they advocate shutting down why they don't agree with by almost any means including violence, perhaps this is just pure totalitarian but I believe they are pro hate speech laws under penalty of the state.  perhaps there is too much overlap, but I do think they are much of what they claim to hate.

Facism is in part totalitarian, Totalitarianism is not in itself Facism. Same goes for Nationalism and Socialism, the other primary characteristics of Facism. 

Note, "racism" is excluded because racism is not an inherently necessary characteristic to Facism. Despite the exemplars of Facism such as Nazi Germany, being racist. This racism itself though, was predicated upon Marxist classsism wherein bourgeois(wealthy) = evil, proletariat(poor) = good. 

Hatred of Jews was more a result of that ethnic/relgious group being the literal 1% of top income in Germany, and globally, much the same as today, a vast disproportiond of wealth and influence. Basically, when you already have the opinion that the wealthy are evil, its not gonna be too long before the dots are connected to Jews being a disproportionately successful and influential group 🤔