this post was submitted on 22 Oct 2025
397 points (97.8% liked)

Cool Guides

5997 readers
2 users here now

Rules for Posting Guides on Our Community

1. Defining a Guide Guides are comprehensive reference materials, how-tos, or comparison tables. A guide must be well-organized both in content and layout. Information should be easily accessible without unnecessary navigation. Guides can include flowcharts, step-by-step instructions, or visual references that compare different elements side by side.

2. Infographic Guidelines Infographics are permitted if they are educational and informative. They should aim to convey complex information visually and clearly. However, infographics that primarily serve as visual essays without structured guidance will be subject to removal.

3. Grey Area Moderators may use discretion when deciding to remove posts. If in doubt, message us or use downvotes for content you find inappropriate.

4. Source Attribution If you know the original source of a guide, share it in the comments to credit the creators.

5. Diverse Content To keep our community engaging, avoid saturating the feed with similar topics. Excessive posts on a single topic may be moderated to maintain diversity.

6. Verify in Comments Always check the comments for additional insights or corrections. Moderators rely on community expertise for accuracy.

Community Guidelines

By following these rules, we can maintain a diverse and informative community. If you have any questions or concerns, feel free to reach out to the moderators. Thank you for contributing responsibly!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
JCSpark@lemmy.ca
397
What you're likely to die from at every age (lemmy.dbzer0.com)
submitted 1 week ago by Stamets@lemmy.dbzer0.com to c/coolguides@lemmy.ca
91 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Its only misleading if you are not capable of realizing a person can shoot themselves or another person.

Calling it simply a firearm means that a firearm caused the death.

Thats it.

If you automatically read context into that, context that is not there, that's either a you problem or a literacy problem.

Also:

https://www.thetrace.org/2025/07/gun-homicide-suicide-data-link-study/

Over the course of five decades, the data showed that the strongest association between an increase in homicide rates and elevated suicide risk occurred in rural communities and among white populations. A one-point increase in the overall homicide rate correlated to a 3.6 percent increase in the suicide rate the following year, according to the study. The correlation was even more stark between firearm-related deaths: For every one-point rise in the firearm homicide rate, there was a 5.7 percent increase in firearm suicides.

tl:dr, firearm homicide and suicide rates are well corellated with a time lag.

We can say that a big problem is simply too much access to too many guns and say that with data as well.

“These results would suggest violence prevention is suicide prevention, and that we can reduce suicides by reducing violence in local communities.”

“We know that suicide and homicide in some ways have a lot of the same drivers,” said Dr. Emmy Betz, an emergency physician and public health scholar at the University of Colorado who specializes in firearm suicide prevention. “Poverty, lack of access to reliable housing or food, relationship stressors, and domestic violence can all increase the risk of suicide or homicide.”

The... so obvious it hopefully doesn't have to be stated... but apparently it actually does... part, being:

It is significantly easier to kill either yourself or another person with a firearm, than without one.

Its even easier than via using a car, in the US.

Plenty of people kill themselves and others in car accidents or otherwise using/involving a car... but the above graph is as agnostic to intent, to victim/perpetrator with cars as it is with guns, but for some reason, you don't bring that up, that doesn't need to be specifically clarified.

[–] krashmo@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

If people assumed that deaths from car crashes were usually intentionally inflicted on others, as they do with firearms, then yes, I would expect you to clarify that most car crashes are accidents when citing statistics about them that are not specific enough to convey that information on their own. If you think clarity in these matters is unimportant then you are in no position to be lecturing me about the proper use of statistics. Thanks for being a dick though, that's super conducive to meaningful discussion.

[–] sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

You literally just could have said:

For clarity, in this graph, 'Firearm' means any death caused by a firearm.

Instead of asserting disingenuousness on the part of the graph or article with more context it was pulled from, which I provided a link to.

That would be how to discuss this constructively, vs antagonistically.

Perhaps you have... evidence for your naked assertion related to the prevelance of assumptions/interpretations around specific terminology/vocabulary, in certain contexts?

As a counter to your personal interpretation... beyond having a career as a data analyst, I've also had a bit of and off an on hobby of shooting, at gun ranges.

I can very much tell you that the gun immersed culture has... very different (and often much more precise) understandings of all terminology that is any way related to firearms, than people who have essentially zero experience or familiarity or proper training with firearms.

And, in the US... quite a lot of people are far more dedicated to firearms as a hobby or even lifestyle than in... probably anywhere else in the world, per capita.

We do have more privately owned guns than people here, I can't say I'm aware of any other country with that kind of a statistic... maybe Afghanistan? Syria?

Switzerland maybe? But... their gun laws work in a way that I really think in an ideal world, the US could somehow move toward, much more restrictve than the US, but much less restrictive than many other countries.

[–] krashmo@lemmy.world 0 points 1 week ago

I told you that the statistic was presented in a misleading manner and clarified the correct context which is exactly what you're now suggesting I should have done. If you inferred anything else from my original comment then that's on you.