• rklm@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    36
    ·
    edit-2
    3 days ago

    I wanted to look up the statistics for myself and see what the numbers are, given a room size scaled around 1 person dying from firearm related injury. I chose people dying from firearm injuries because I had a hard time finding a statistic for all people who were shot. If you are aware of better sources for my numbers (or a math error on my part), please let me know. I primarily used sources from the US government, but I recognize that those sources might not be completely transparent right now. Also, I don’t mean for this to undermine the intention of the author here. Every issue mentioned is absolutely a problem in america, regardless of arbitrary comparisons. Also also, transgender people are valid and deserve rights regardless of how many people are shot per year.

    Say you’re in a room with 2,584,401 people. 206,752 don’t have insurance. 273,947 live in poverty. 542,724 are illiterate. 596,996 suffer from mental illness. And every day at least 1 person dies from firearm related injury. But 21,192 are trans so you decided ruining their lives is a priority.

    The population of the US was 341,140,964 on 12/31/24.

    92% had health insurance in 2024.

    10.6% lived in poverty in 2024.

    79% were literate in 2013. (Hopefully there is a more recent source for this somewhere)

    23.1% suffered from mental illness in 2022.

    132 died from firearm-related injury daily in 2022. This is the number from the CDC, which is more generous than gunviolencearchive.

    The number of injuries (including deaths) from the gunviolencearchive puts the daily count at 87 (I am rounding up despite 2024 being a 366 day leap year).

    0.82% identified as transgender.

    • piranhaconda@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      29
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 days ago

      I appreciate the effort to improve the methodology. But the numbers feel too big to be grasped easily, compared to the original.

      Maybe the time frame can be changed? If we bump it to “1 person will be shot to death this year” it would make it a room full of 7080 people and 58 are trans

      Edit: full data set rescaled

      7080 - total

      566 - no insurance

      750 - poverty

      1487 - illiterate

      1635 - mentally ill

      1 - gun death per year

      58 - trans

      • AxExRx@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        3 days ago

        Thanks, I was stuck 330M americans… so almost a million get shot ever day (per the original)… that can’t be right

      • khaleer@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 days ago

        Fine but nobody would care. Alt right enjoyers are way too deeo into “religious” amok to even get touch with reality again, not to mention trying to talk to them with statistics. they just don’t care.

    • sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 days ago

      I appreciate you providing sources, genuinely, though I will point out the way the US officially measures poverty is laughable bullshit.

      https://aspe.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/documents/dd73d4f00d8a819d10b2fdb70d254f7b/detailed-guidelines-2025.pdf

      Yep, thats right, you live alone, and make or otherwise recieve more than $15.6k a year?

      Not in poverty.

      Also, the average paid rent in the US is ~1350 a month.

      https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/average-rent-by-state

      So… 1350 x 12 = 16,200, meaning a person below that is probably just literally homeless or nearly totally reliant on family or friends or the state for housing and food, as they have literally less than 0 money for food, on average, without some kind of assistance.

      I would argue the actual US poverty line needs to be drawn at between where 200% and 300% of the current poverty line is.

    • RBWells@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      3 days ago

      Huh. So 45,625 killed by guns each year, about 1/10th of 1% but since people live longer than a year, I wonder what the lifetime risk is? Surely nowhere near risk of being killed by a car but probably much higher than the 1/10th of 1%.

      • dangrousperson@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 days ago

        The probability to NOT be killed by a gun is 0.999^x, where x is the number of years.

        At 50 years that would be ~95%, i.e. 5% chance to be killed by a gun before turning 50

        At 80 its ~8%

        At 100 its ~10%

  • Global_Liberty@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    25
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    3 days ago

    The room has a >91.25% annual shooting rate?

    I don’t want to brag, but I’ve been living in the United States for 25 years and I haven’t been shot once. If the room resets annually, my odds to this point were 3.55x10^-27. Am I the last American?

          • Pennomi@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            15
            ·
            4 days ago

            325 out of 340 million is less than 1 in a million (per day). So in our 400 person room, (assuming I’m doing the math right) about 30-40 grams of human matter would get shot per day. Which is like, four (or more) eyeballs of weight.

            I’d be extremely concerned if every single day, a random body part of someone in the room was destroyed.

            • SparroHawc@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              4 days ago

              Alternately, if you do it by time instead of size, one person gets shot about every seven years.

          • Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            9
            ·
            edit-2
            4 days ago

            Of those 125 “killed by a gun”, 91 of the “victims” pulled the trigger themselves. There’s about 34 gun murders per day in the US.

            If you’re looking for a population where one person is murdered daily, you need to start with about 10,440,000 people.

            The problem isn’t that people are killing themselves. The problem is desperation. For far too many in our dystopian society, death is the brightest hope that some will ever see. The solution to gun suicide is unfucking this massive shitstained clusterfuck, not depriving the desperate of their 9mm retirement plans.

          • poVoq@slrpnk.net
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            4 days ago

            Why per day? It being trans counted per day?

            That number seems quite realistic when considering it as over the course of a life time, i.e. over the course of your life time you have a 1 in 400 chance of being shot.

  • Pennomi@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    50
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    4 days ago

    One in 400 people is shot every day? Yeah I’m gonna call BS on this one.

    • Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      4 days ago

      If I did the math right, for one person to be shot per day, we’re starting with a population of 10,440,000, not 400.

      • ElegantBiscuit@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 days ago

        I worked the math out to be one person out of 400 shot to death either by murder or suicide every 17.12 years. Definitely not every 21 days, but it is still actually crazy when you think about just how few 400 people is.

        • Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 days ago

          That sounds about right. About 1 in 87 will die from suicide in general. 1 in 57 will OD. 1 in 6 from heart disease; 1 in 7 from cancer.

          1 in 156 will kill themselves with a gun. 1 in 238 will be killed with a gun. (This includes FAFO deaths that could be prevented if people understood that a lethal threat justifies a lethal response.)

    • db0@lemmy.dbzer0.comOPM
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      11
      ·
      edit-2
      4 days ago

      I don’t think it was trying to be factual, but more trying to make a point.

      • Pennomi@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        42
        ·
        4 days ago

        It’s not 3 times lower than that. It’s about 1 in a million, not 1 in 400. That’s 3 orders of magnitude less than the post claims. This is so hilariously wrong it undermines the credibility of the post.

        Which is sad because all these points are really important things to draw attention to.

        • poVoq@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          4 days ago

          Over what time frame? Did you include gun facilitated suicides? And in general getting shot, doesn’t mean getting killed.

          • Pennomi@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            9
            ·
            3 days ago

            Yes, I included suicides and non-fatal injuries, and I used the same “daily” timeframe as the original post.

        • dohpaz42@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          11
          ·
          4 days ago

          You’re focusing on the wrong part of the post. The point of the post is that despite all of these horrible (and for a lack of a better word, fixable) things going on in the world right now, people are wrongly focusing on trans people as a problem.

          Also, there is such a thing as hyperbole, and it doesn’t mean that the point is invalid; instead it’s used to emphasize the point.

          • Pennomi@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            20
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            4 days ago

            If someone can’t make an argument factually, they should not present it as if it’s actual science. This is not hyperbole, it’s lying.

            Posts like this damage the message because it gives the right ammunition to say that we are liars.

            Much better to be scientifically rigorous.

            • dohpaz42@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              6
              ·
              4 days ago

              Not everything needs to meet scientific rigor. If that were the case, you would’ve provided me with at least three scientific studies demonstrating your side of the argument. But you didn’t, because it’s wholly unnecessary for a normal conversation.

              • yarr@feddit.nl
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                2 days ago

                “Being blatantly wrong is fine, as long as you have good intentions.”

                The average person in the USA only makes $140 per year. Well, it’s not really that bad, but it draws attention to wage inequity in the USA.

              • Pennomi@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                10
                ·
                4 days ago

                No, not everything needs scientific rigor, but it’s a false equivalence to suggest we should tolerate blatant misinformation.

                • dohpaz42@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  ·
                  4 days ago

                  If that’s the hill you want to die on, that’s your prerogative, and I won’t fault you for it. I do disagree with you, but I also appreciate your time discussing this with me and challenging my assertions.

      • papertowels@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        3 days ago

        Unfortunately since it’s relying on numbers to make it’s point it would hit a lot harder if it was factual…

  • Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    35
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    4 days ago

    In a population of 400 people, 1 person is shot every day? So, by the end of one year, the population is down to 35 people?

    If we extrapolate to the US population, we end up with 900,000 people murdered per day, or about 330 million people per year. That doesn’t seem quite right.

      • Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        17
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        3 days ago

        Fair enough. So, at the end of the first year, there are at least 365 bullet wounds among 400 people? Every year, 330 million Americans are treated for bullet holes?

        The math suggests I should be surviving a gunshot wound every 16 months or so. That doesn’t seem to match my life experience.

        • BlueMagma@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          3 days ago

          Some people get shot more often than others, mainly those living in poverty because they are forced to live in bad places, also most of them are black and shot by the police frequently

          • Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            3 days ago

            I’m more concerned about the lack of basic arithmetic literacy at this point. There would probably be a fair bit less poverty with a broader understanding of numbers.

            • BlueMagma@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              3 days ago

              Maybe, I’m not sure what would happen if literacy and math skills rose globally.

              After thinking about it for 30s (so my point is not very thought out), I think it would impact poverty, but not for the reason you think, I expect people would vote differently, and that would have an impact on poverty. I don’t think it would reduce poverty because people would spend more wisely, poverty imo is not a lack of management, it is a vicious circle you can’t easily escape.

              • Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                3 days ago

                I think it would impact poverty, but not for the reason you think, I expect people would vote differently, and that would have an impact on poverty.

                That’s actually exactly what I think. A much greater focus on facts and figures. A whole lot less emphasis on feels.

          • doingthestuff@lemy.lol
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            3 days ago

            What is the rate of a black person being shot by police vs a black person being shot by other black people?

        • stray@pawb.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 days ago

          I looked up an actual statistic and it was way fewer than 1/400, so yeah. Though I do think the point about not everyone having the same experience bears thinking on, regardless of the screenshot’s accuracy.

          • Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            3 days ago

            Way fewer is a bit of an understatement. They are off by 5 orders of magnitude.

            It’s roughly 1 in 10,440,000.

            • stray@pawb.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              3 days ago

              The number I got was >200 daily gunshot wounds out of a population of 340 000 000 in the US.

    • SparroHawc@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      3 days ago

      The actual statistic is more like one person out of the 400 getting shot every seven years.

      Which is still pretty sobering.

      • Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        4 days ago

        Are you sure? Based on their argument, I’d say “Mathematical Literacy” is the only priority we should have right now.

        • Hawk@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          3 days ago

          I’d say this shows exactly what’s wrong. People discussing the details (although important details), but the real issues are ignored, almost like the mistakes are made on purpose to sow discord

      • JillyB@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        4 days ago

        It kind of is. The point of the analogy is to make the big numbers easier to grasp. If it’s just wrong, then are the other numbers even close?

      • AeonFelis@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        3 days ago

        The math is a pretty big point, seeing how the post focuses on how few trans people there are compared to the other mentioned groups (the figure for “people shot” is only 1 - but the post claims it happens every day)

  • Jaysyn@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    26
    ·
    3 days ago

    Don’t worry, the fascists will be going after those with mental health issues next.

    It’s already starting.

  • That Weird Vegan she/her@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    3 days ago

    tbf, trans people are gross. Round them up and shoot them all for daring to live their life how they see fit, without harming anyone else. How dare they??

    source: I’m a trans person.

  • sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    edit-2
    4 days ago

    In other news, the Kirk Memorial was basically a Nuremberg rally.

    Wheee yaah… this is not looking good.

    EDIT:

    I would describe this youtuber as an actual, genuine centrist, not a crypto nazi, got a lot of sensible ideas and some ignorant ones… I use him as a barometer for basically non brain poisoned normies who have a college degree and a functioning brain, but also come from a blue collar area and are … more culturally traditional.

    Basically, a guy who is kinda problematic if you do a deep dive, but you could probably have a beer with and be reasonably good to ok friends with.

    And he is in horror, reviewing Miller’s speech.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_KSYjqB_Q-8

    The… original intent of his channel was a travel channel, showing people how US life compares to working and living overseas.

    EDIT 2:

    Large Man here missed this, but I will point out that Miller saying ‘We are the storm’ is an obvious Q Anon reference.

    Like I said, he’s not internet brain poisoned enough to know.

  • yarr@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    Err, that’s a nice little quip but that bit about shooting isn’t even remotely close to reality.

    Example: There’s about 80,000 - 100,000 gun related injuries in the USA per year. That’s about 250 people getting shot each day. However, we are working against a population of ~330,000,000 in the USA. If you take the 100,000 / 333,000,000 = 0.0003. That’s 0.0003 per year per person. So the chance of a person getting shot in a year in the USA is about 1 in 3,330.

    To look at this in another way, the fellow said there’s a group of 400 people and 1 is shot each day. That means in 1 year, nearly everyone in the room would have been shot, and in 2 years some people would be shot twice.

    Look, the USA is pretty disgusting with some issues, but if you want to throw numbers around, at least make them accurate, otherwise it undermines the whole argument.

      • yarr@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        You don’t think it’s important to know the ACTUAL numbers when discussing issues?

        If I said 50 million people were eaten by sharks each year and tried to convince my local town to ban swimming, don’t you think it’s important I get the number right?

        The numbers presented in the original quote were basically off by 1000x. We’re not talking nit-picking here. It’s off by orders of magnitude.

  • ghosthacked@lemmy.wtf
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    3 days ago

    it’s not really about trans being bad moreso that they feel tremendous shame for being the largest consumers of trans porn. A lot of the men on the right are closeted as hell.