Globally not everything has improved everywhere but generally people are much better in both major and less obvious ways. The global literacy rate in 1980 was 68.8% and by 2020 it reached 86.8%. https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/WLD/world/literacy-rat...
Apropos of nothing we've also got a steady increase in gun deaths.
1.35 fatalities per 100 million vehicle miles traveled in 2022
1.37 fatalities per 100 million vehicle miles traveled in 2021
3.35 fatalities per 100 million vehicle miles traveled in 1980
The data just varies quite a bit 4 years in a row saw increases 1976, 1977, 1978 and 1979 as did a 3 year stretch 1993, 1994, 1995 so do get to upset around a 2 year jump 2020 and 2021 especially when the pandemic explains differences in behavior.
For instance, if you count car deaths by miles traveled, why not gun deaths by number of gun owners?
Also, if you segment by demographics and manner of death it changes a lot.
The central error in their figures is they look at firearm rates instead of handgun rates when handguns are dramatically more likely to be linked with homicides and be considered for gun control. A NYC gun owner is not the same as an Alaskan gun owner especially in areas where owning a firearm is important for safety vs bears.
That site also has many errors, such as Africa doesn’t have higher official rates of firearm deaths though we just don’t have great figures. https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/gun-viole...
They also make some rather odd statements like 1 in 200 firearms being used in a homicide = “The risk of a firearm being used in a homicide is very low”. That rate sounds insanely high to me.
I break down exactly what you mention, there's a nice appendix at the top. I cannot help if you didn't read the whole thing, but don't claim there's an error right after you mention not reading it haha
Here's a direct link to how I break out homicides by murder weapons: https://austingwalters.com/firearms-by-the-numbers/#Murder_W...
Here's a direct link to the breakdown by gun ownership: https://austingwalters.com/firearms-by-the-numbers/#Homicide...
Take a look at the graph of murder weapon by state:
https://austingwalters.com/firearms-by-the-numbers/#Murder_W...
If you're murdered in DC you're more likely to be murdered by someones fists than by a gun. When you compare that to Alaska, you're more likely be murdered in DC by fire arm, fists, knives, etc than all causes in Alaska.
In New York State, you're less likely to be murdered than in Alaska (from any cause, including gun shots).
The point I am trying to make is there isn't the correlation you think there is.
Regarding data, I cite my sources: https://austingwalters.com/firearms-by-the-numbers/#Data_Too...
You can argue with the UN about the homicide rates, that's the data I used.
You’re reading that chart incorrectly, half of DC murders are by handguns. Handguns is the dark blue at the bottom, the hands fists feet rate is the grey at the top of the bar chart.
> What are you talking about?
In 2019 ~2 million rifles and ~0.5 million shotgun vs ~3.5 million handguns were sold yet the murder rate by weapon type is vastly in favor of handguns. It’s like we can treat them as separated categories.
So what we care about is not Homicides per Firearm Owner, but Homicides per Handgun Owner etc. DC wanted a handgun ban, not an all weapon ban because over half of DC murders are by handgun.
But nearly every other similar country to the U.S. does not have any meaningful gun deaths, so there’s no need to normalize because there’s no one else to compare to.
Adjusted for population, that would be around 4000 per year in the US. I’d say that’s a meaningful number even if the US reduced gun deaths to be on par with other developed countries.
That’s about the same number of people who die each year due to chronic kidney disease.
You're not allowed to segment this specific data like that, it's racist.
Indeed this is speculation, but I hope we can agree that the course we are on is a bit risky, and no one seems to know what to do (comprehensively), though many believe that they know (which is far worse than not knowing).
EDIT: in my defense, the parent comment initially was complaining about people downvoting them, so I provided some relevant information to them on the matter. Better not do that again I guess!
I find that an odd takeaway. To me seeing a 60% drop in car fatalities per mile suggests change can be accelerated and we can tackle large scale issues. The Chlorofluorocarbon ban doesn’t mean we are finished solving environmental problems, it means we can actually solve them. Similarly the drop in US CO2 emissions doesn’t mean the problem is solved, just that significant progress is achievable.
As to your edit, I wasn’t complaining about downvotes just confused. I removed the edit because someone responded with a comment about traffic fatalities so I could see why someone might disagree.
I agree 100%, and to me, that's the problem.
>To me seeing a 60% drop in car fatalities per mile suggests change can be accelerated and we can tackle large scale issues. The Chlorofluorocarbon ban doesn’t mean we are finished solving environmental problems, it means we can actually solve them. Similarly the drop in US CO2 emissions doesn’t mean the problem is solved, just that significant progress is achievable.
I agree - neither of these are contrary to my criticism.
Everyone likes to pat themselves on the back, but how well are we (and for me, that includes the well being of all people on the planet) doing on an absolute scale (what is possible)? This is a very odd and unpopular question.