RoR: Forum

Well hang on - shouldn't the Dhimmicrats pull out of Iraq? After all it's the Defeaticrats that advocate a withdrawal timetable.

Thanks for posting this Jeff.

Post 1

Thursday, December 8, 2005 - 7:53am

I just wish Washington would "pull out" of us !!

Post 2

Thursday, December 8, 2005 - 8:15am

Phat chance!

Thursday, December 8, 2005 - 11:32am

When you consider that the 80.6 per 100,000 in DC is probably per year (an assumption, I do not have the data), and that 22 months is nearly two years, the Iraq firearms death rate goes do to a little over 30 per 100,000 per year, making DC look relatively worse.

If you take out deaths due to shrapnel from explosive devices (not usually considered firearms, and not generally a factor in DC deaths), the firearms death rate in Irag goes down further. I make this point because the 2000+ figure includes all combat deaths regardless of means used, while the DC figure does not include homicides involving weapons other than firearms (cars, knives, baseball bats, etc.).

However, I have read that the 2000+ American deaths does not include those wounded in Iraq who later die of those wounds outside Iraq.

Sorry if I have bored anyone; I enjoy analyzing statistics.

Regards,
Paul

Post 4

Thursday, December 8, 2005 - 12:38pm

I wonder what the comparison would be if you looked at deaths in that age group from ANY cause, including vehicle accident and recreational causes. It may be that a young man is far safer in Iraq because of his restricted lifestyle. It would be interesting to compare the death rates of men vs women in the two groups. It's possible men's death rate is comparatively less in Iraq, women's is greater.

Post 5

Friday, December 9, 2005 - 2:12am

�That means that you are about 25% more likely to be shot and killed in our Nation's Capitol, which has some of the strictest gun control laws in the nation, than you are in Iraq.�

Unless you�re an Iraqi civilian, of course. But leaving them aside, I think a remedial course in statistics is in order. There are two death rates mentioned here: a 60 per 100,000 for Iraq; 80.6 per 100,000 for Washington DC. Are these rates comparable?

Let�s take Iraq first. There have been 2112 deaths in 22 months. The average US soldier population is 160,000:

2112 / 1.6 = 1320 deaths per 100,000

1320 deaths / 22 months = 60 deaths per month per 100,000

What about Washington DC? It�s had 188 murders so far this year, that is, 11 months. The population of DC is around 550,000:

188 deaths / 5.5 = 34.2 deaths per 100,000

34.2 deaths / 11 months = 3.1 deaths per month per 100,000

I think I'd be taking my chances in Washington.

Brendan

References: http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0108620.html http://www.safestreetsdc.com/

Post 6

Friday, December 9, 2005 - 7:58am

During the first Gulf-War the death rate among US service people dropped dramatically. This was primarily due to the massive number of troops deployed to the mid-east where they could not drink and drive.

Ethan

P.S. We should never forget the thousands of troops wounded and crippled in Iraq, it far outnumbers the dead. They are often forgotten.

Post 7

Tuesday, December 13, 2005 - 1:57pm