Gun Deaths among US Children and Teens Rose 50% in Two Years

[durangodawood]

View attachment 340149
6 April 2023

Gun Deaths among US Children and Teens Rose 50% in Two Years

This is a summary of a Pew Research Centre article, dated April 2023, based on child gun mortality data from the Centre for Disease Control (CDC). Gun deaths includes homicides, suicides and accidental death directly attributed to firearms. 'Child' refers to 17 and under.

• In 2019, 1,732 US children and teens under 18 were killed by gun. In 2021 this increased to 2,590
• This means the death rate (deaths per 100,00) rose 46% from 2.4 in 2019 to 3.5 in 2021
• The 2021 number and rate are the highest since 1999 when child data first became available. 2021 was also a record year for gun deaths among Americans of all ages and a 23% increase on 2019
• 32% of child gun deaths were suicides while 60% were homicide. This compares to 55% suicide and 42% homicide for 18+ adults
• 5% of child deaths were accidental
• In 2020 there were an estimated, record 11,000+ child (under 18) emergency room visits for gunshot wounds
• Boys accounted for 83% of 2021 child gun deaths
• 86% of gun deaths were aged 12 to 17; 7% were 6 to 11 and another 7% were aged 5 and under
• 36% of 12 to 17 y.o. deaths were suicide while 34% of 12 and under deaths were accidental
• 46% of all child gun deaths were Black children; 32% White children; 17% Hispanic; and 1% Asian
• In 2021 84% of deaths involving Black children were homicides while 9% were suicide
• For White children, 66% were suicide and 24% homicide

The article also covers parental concerns by ethnicity, income, urban/rural residence and political persuasion.
Gun deaths among U.S. kids rose 50% from 2019 to 2021 | Pew Research Center

OB

Price of freedom.

 

[Divide]

View attachment 340149
6 April 2023

Gun Deaths among US Children and Teens Rose 50% in Two Years

This is a summary of a Pew Research Centre article, dated April 2023, based on child gun mortality data from the Centre for Disease Control (CDC). Gun deaths includes homicides, suicides and accidental death directly attributed to firearms. 'Child' refers to 17 and under.

• In 2019, 1,732 US children and teens under 18 were killed by gun. In 2021 this increased to 2,590
• This means the death rate (deaths per 100,00) rose 46% from 2.4 in 2019 to 3.5 in 2021
• The 2021 number and rate are the highest since 1999 when child data first became available. 2021 was also a record year for gun deaths among Americans of all ages and a 23% increase on 2019
• 32% of child gun deaths were suicides while 60% were homicide. This compares to 55% suicide and 42% homicide for 18+ adults
• 5% of child deaths were accidental
• In 2020 there were an estimated, record 11,000+ child (under 18) emergency room visits for gunshot wounds
• Boys accounted for 83% of 2021 child gun deaths
• 86% of gun deaths were aged 12 to 17; 7% were 6 to 11 and another 7% were aged 5 and under
• 36% of 12 to 17 y.o. deaths were suicide while 34% of 12 and under deaths were accidental
• 46% of all child gun deaths were Black children; 32% White children; 17% Hispanic; and 1% Asian
• In 2021 84% of deaths involving Black children were homicides while 9% were suicide
• For White children, 66% were suicide and 24% homicide

The article also covers parental concerns by ethnicity, income, urban/rural residence and political persuasion.
Gun deaths among U.S. kids rose 50% from 2019 to 2021 | Pew Research Center

OB

I don't believe the article because it is from the CDC. All the gun people have taught their kids about guns. Maybe it was the young and woke crowd freaking out with guns because their gun education is from Hollywood.

 

[dogs4thewin]

I don't believe the article because it is from the CDC. All the gun people have taught their kids about guns. Maybe it was the young and woke crowd freaking out with guns because their gun education is from Hollywood.

Whose to say though that the people aquired them legally or that the shootings were not on purpose as only 1 in 20 were accidents.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

A lot of people do not trust the government to stop at reasonable regulations. What they need to do is do a better job of enforcing the laws already on the books. There are almost always firearm enhancments for example attached to crimes, yet often those are dropped in plea bargains; which are a NEEDED part of our justice system otherwise the courts would be even more overrun than they are now.

...to be fair, I can see both sides of the argument though.

On one hand, yes there is precedent from other countries to suggest that restrictions do run the risk of not stopping at what some would consider "reasonable" (but then there's other nations that have stopped at reasonable, so it's a roll of the dice)


On the other hand, I don't know that I buy the "we just need to enforce the already existing gun laws" as something that would have any sort of meaningful impact in the numbers compared to where we're at now.

Obviously laws pertaining to public safety should be enforced. However, is there really any significant number of cops/courts preemptively catching people with illegally owned firearms, and then letting them go? Most of the enforcement in that regard happens post hoc, after a crime has already been committed.

Short of doing things like "stop & frisk" or just entering the homes of felons and domestic violence perps and doing random searches going on a "fishing expedition" to look through all of the their drawers and closets for guns (both of which would involve taking liberties with the constitution), I don't see how "we just need to enforce the laws we have" is going to move the needle.

Sure we can find some anecdotal isolated incidents of perhaps a judge being too lenient, or a prosecutor downgrading felonies to misdemeanors in plea deals, but is that really the source of the problem of gun deaths? Or is the biggest piece of the pie the fact that it's pretty easy to get a gun in a lot of states?

 

[dogs4thewin]

...to be fair, I can see both sides of the argument though.

On one hand, yes there is precedent from other countries to suggest that restrictions do run the risk of not stopping at what some would consider "reasonable" (but then there's other nations that have stopped at reasonable, so it's a roll of the dice)


On the other hand, I don't know that I buy the "we just need to enforce the already existing gun laws" as something that would have any sort of meaningful impact in the numbers compared to where we're at now.

Obviously laws pertaining to public safety should be enforced. However, is there really any significant number of cops/courts preemptively catching people with illegally owned firearms, and then letting them go? Most of the enforcement in that regard happens post hoc, after a crime has already been committed.

Short of doing things like "stop & frisk" or just entering the homes of felons and domestic violence perps and doing random searches going on a "fishing expedition" to look through all of the their drawers and closets for guns (both of which would involve taking liberties with the constitution), I don't see how "we just need to enforce the laws we have" is going to move the needle.

Sure we can find some anecdotal isolated incidents of perhaps a judge being too lenient, or a prosecutor downgrading felonies to misdemeanors in plea deals, but is that really the source of the problem of gun deaths? Or is the biggest piece of the pie the fact that it's pretty easy to get a gun in a lot of states?

Mearing owning illegal firearms us not what I was talking about. Processing something whether it be guns, drugs whatever is non-violent in fact I believe that NON-violent felons should be able to get their gun rights back after serving their time which is what most states do with voting. Instead I am talking about harsher sentences being handed down when a firearm is actually used in the commission of a crime or maybe even is processed during the commission of certain other crimes ( not talking about having a gun in your car when you are stopped for DUI for example.) Most ( if not all states have enhancements to criminal sentence where a firearm is used, yet those are often dropped in plea deals. ) since most ( not all of course, but most crimes are committed with guns that a person obtained illegally and/or by people who were already forbidden to have a gun such as felons, minors, people here either illegally or without permission to own guns ( most visa holders are not allowed to process guns or illegal drug users none of whom may legally have guns to start with. I am not sure how much can reasonably be done about accessability anyway as those would be the types of people who if they wanted a gun would get them one way or another and as large as the black market is would be near impossibile to put much of a dent in access any time soon (particularly access to people who have no business with guns.)

I am not counting suicides in the above paragraph as the vast majority of the time ( again with some exceptions) people who use a gun on themselves have no intent to use it on anyway else which while sad does not really have much to do with gun violence ( especially since as countries like Japan show access to guns (or lack thereof do not really have the impact on suicide rates people would think over all It may have a slight impact, but for the amount of suicides currently committed with firearms is unlikely to have nearly the impact people would like to think

Also, with suicide and really mental health in general, but particularly suicide where the person is the only direct "victim" If someone has no record of mental health issues, passes a mental health screen five ten or even 1 year later ( in the case that you wanted regular screens to be able to keep firearms) something happens and the person falls into a deep depression or as is sometimes the case the person has a mental disorder and no one knows just because a person was mentally sound at the time a firearm was purchased does not mean that months or years later they will still be

 

[rambot]

It's really important that we do NOT blame gun owners on gun violence folks. I mean, it doesn't actually make sense right? Why should the people who own guns be to blame for the rate of accident gun deaths? Don't they know that ALL good gun owners are safe with their guns? And I know that because as soon as a child gets shot THAT's the EXACT MOMENT when you know someone is a bad gun owner. And heck, without a child dying, we'd have NO IDEA someone is a bad gun owner! Regardless of all this, the important thing is that it's not gun owners' fault for accidental gun violence.

We have to find a way to blame the woke transgender mob for gun violence too. I mean they aren't actually hurting children...they are shooting them with gun...because they are evil...

Even me! As a member of this woke transgender mob, I go around shooting teens all the time because I am a liberal and I am so filled with anger. I mean, even though I don't own guns, abhor gun violence, am shocked and dismayed at that callousness of gun activists, I still just can't help myself because I'm woke.


All of this would make sense to people who are so filled with rage against people like me they are blind to reason.

 

[johansen]

without a child dying, we'd have NO IDEA someone is a bad gun owner!

i mean, that's why God lets satan roam around right?

without temptation no one would know who the bad people are...

 

[ThatRobGuy]

It's really important that we do NOT blame gun owners on gun violence folks. I mean, it doesn't actually make sense right? Why should the people who own guns be to blame for the rate of accident gun deaths? Don't they know that ALL good gun owners are safe with their guns? And I know that because as soon as a child gets shot THAT's the EXACT MOMENT when you know someone is a bad gun owner. And heck, without a child dying, we'd have NO IDEA someone is a bad gun owner! Regardless of all this, the important thing is that it's not gun owners' fault for accidental gun violence.

Would you apply that rationale to alcohol control?

Drunk driving accidents account for (per year) in the US
13,000 deaths (10% of them children)
300,000 injuries

Alcohol is also responsible for (or involved in) 40% of all domestic violence incidents.

There's 2 things we can be sure of,
1) there's no 100% safe way to consume alcohol (best case scenario is you're damaging your own liver and kidneys)
2) we don't know who the irresponsible/dangerous drinkers are until they do something bad


So we should probably ban it, and when anyone who objects to the notion that they're complicit by way of simply being a drinker, it should be met with scoff & derision when they claim they're a "responsible drinker".

 

[dogs4thewin]

It's really important that we do NOT blame gun owners on gun violence folks. I mean, it doesn't actually make sense right? Why should the people who own guns be to blame for the rate of accident gun deaths? Don't they know that ALL good gun owners are safe with their guns? And I know that because as soon as a child gets shot THAT's the EXACT MOMENT when you know someone is a bad gun owner. And heck, without a child dying, we'd have NO IDEA someone is a bad gun owner! Regardless of all this, the important thing is that it's not gun owners' fault for accidental gun violence.

We have to find a way to blame the woke transgender mob for gun violence too. I mean they aren't actually hurting children...they are shooting them with gun...because they are evil...

Even me! As a member of this woke transgender mob, I go around shooting teens all the time because I am a liberal and I am so filled with anger. I mean, even though I don't own guns, abhor gun violence, am shocked and dismayed at that callousness of gun activists, I still just can't help myself because I'm woke.


All of this would make sense to people who are so filled with rage against people like me they are blind to reason.

Actually, no it does not have to be a child, nor do people actually have to kill anyone for them to be violent. You can be violent short of a gun. In fact, some crimes are considered violent even if the crime itself that particular action was not violent. For example rape is often considered a violent crime even if the rapist raped the person while he or she was asleep or passed out drunk where no ACTUAL violence was used. Same thing with robbery it is the taking vs force OR fear, there is no requirement that a gun ( or any traditionally deadly weapon for that matter to be used for something to be a robbery.

There are also drug users if someone uses or is addicted to drugs he or she is not lawfully permitted to have guns. This is the case even if the addict is not violent and for that matter alcohol counts ( as it relates to the addiction part which assuming someone is 21 and is not on certain types of probation there is nothing illegal about drinking alcohol and if the person is not driving or in public there is nothing illegal about being drunk off their behind either, and yet if someone is known to abuse alcohol he or she is not legally supposed to have a gun and in states that still require a permit to carry tat is one thing they look at on a person's record is any (particularly recent history) a person has had involving alcohol .

Also, most gun owners are NOT violent there would be MUCH more violence if that were the case.

 

[dogs4thewin]

Would you apply that rationale to alcohol control?

Drunk driving accidents account for (per year) in the US
13,000 deaths (10% of them children)
300,000 injuries

Alcohol is also responsible for (or involved in) 40% of all domestic violence incidents.

There's 2 things we can be sure of,
1) there's no 100% safe way to consume alcohol (best case scenario is you're damaging your own liver and kidneys)
2) we don't know who the irresponsible/dangerous drinkers are until they do something bad


So we should probably ban it, and when anyone who objects to the notion that they're complicit by way of simply being a drinker, it should be met with scoff & derision when they claim they're a "responsible drinker".

ironically that was tried and did not even last a generation (20 years )1919 to 1933) before it was repealed because it failed SOOO badly

 

[RestoreTheJoy]

View attachment 340149
6 April 2023

Gun Deaths among US Children and Teens Rose 50% in Two Years

This is a summary of a Pew Research Centre article, dated April 2023, based on child gun mortality data from the Centre for Disease Control (CDC). Gun deaths includes homicides, suicides and accidental death directly attributed to firearms. 'Child' refers to 17 and under.

• In 2019, 1,732 US children and teens under 18 were killed by gun. In 2021 this increased to 2,590
• This means the death rate (deaths per 100,00) rose 46% from 2.4 in 2019 to 3.5 in 2021
• The 2021 number and rate are the highest since 1999 when child data first became available. 2021 was also a record year for gun deaths among Americans of all ages and a 23% increase on 2019
• 32% of child gun deaths were suicides while 60% were homicide. This compares to 55% suicide and 42% homicide for 18+ adults
• 5% of child deaths were accidental
• In 2020 there were an estimated, record 11,000+ child (under 18) emergency room visits for gunshot wounds
• Boys accounted for 83% of 2021 child gun deaths
• 86% of gun deaths were aged 12 to 17; 7% were 6 to 11 and another 7% were aged 5 and under
• 36% of 12 to 17 y.o. deaths were suicide while 34% of 12 and under deaths were accidental
• 46% of all child gun deaths were Black children; 32% White children; 17% Hispanic; and 1% Asian
• In 2021 84% of deaths involving Black children were homicides while 9% were suicide
• For White children, 66% were suicide and 24% homicide

The article also covers parental concerns by ethnicity, income, urban/rural residence and political persuasion.
Gun deaths among U.S. kids rose 50% from 2019 to 2021 | Pew Research Center

OB

Sounds like some parents need to get heavily involved and do some work.

• In 2021 84% of deaths involving Black children were homicides while 9% were suicide
• For White children, 66% were suicide and 24% homicide

 

[rambot]

Would you apply that rationale to alcohol control?

Drunk driving accidents account for (per year) in the US
13,000 deaths (10% of them children)
300,000 injuries

I would apply it to drunk driving yes.

Alcohol is also responsible for (or involved in) 40% of all domestic violence incidents.

"Responsible" is not the word to use. "Contributing factor" is what you're looking for. There are many times people drink and don't beat the snot out of someone they love. Dare I say, the most often.

There's 2 things we can be sure of,
1) there's no 100% safe way to consume alcohol (best case scenario is you're damaging your own liver and kidneys)
2) we don't know who the irresponsible/dangerous drinkers are until they do something bad

1) In small amounts, it's safe and your organs can process it just fine.
2) Ha. I gotta tell you, I don't find it overly hard to find the dangerous drinkers. Or at least, when I was a bit more of a partying fellow with lots of time on my hands.


I would posit that, since alcohol is something that goes into the body of the person using it....that perhaps it's not as valid to compare it to something like a gun where the person using it, uses it for the purpose of putting it into someone else. Perhaps it's splitting hairs but it speaks to bodily autonomy.

So we should probably ban it, and when anyone who objects to the notion that they're complicit by way of simply being a drinker, it should be met with scoff & derision when they claim they're a "responsible drinker".

 

[Brihaha]

Sounds like some parents need to get heavily involved and do some work.

• In 2021 84% of deaths involving Black children were homicides while 9% were suicide
• For White children, 66% were suicide and 24% homicide

Right on. Or the parents are too busy working for a living to effectively raise children. Either way, not all people should procreate.

 

[Occams Barber]

I don't believe the article because it is from the CDC. All the gun people have taught their kids about guns. Maybe it was the young and woke crowd freaking out with guns because their gun education is from Hollywood.

The article is written by the Pew Research Centre - one of the most highly regarded social research organisations in the US.

The data is mainly from CDC data bases.

OB

 

[RestoreTheJoy]

Right on. Or the parents are too busy working for a living to effectively raise children. Either way, not all people should procreate.

Well, with this horrible economy where young people need 3 jobs to make it, yeah, we definitely need some serious changes. Parents need to get back to raising their own kids, not outsourcing that because no one can be home.

 

[rambot]

Actually, no it does not have to be a child, nor do people actually have to kill anyone for them to be violent. You can be violent short of a gun. In fact, some crimes are considered violent even if the crime itself that particular action was not violent. For example rape is often considered a violent crime even if the rapist raped the person while he or she was asleep or passed out drunk where no ACTUAL violence was used.

I'm sorry. I gotta tell you that this is really not an approriate distinction and, I'm going to guess suggests that most women who have actually experienced rape will say that it's a violent act, even if no violence is taking place.

Also, most gun owners are NOT violent there would be MUCH more violence if that were the case.

I'm not saying they are. But they DO keep electing people and MANY of them keep fighting against even sensible gun control measures. I KNOW folks like thatrobguy and are I on the same page of what that means but let's be honest; there are many people NOT like that poster.

 

[dogs4thewin]

I'm sorry. I gotta tell you that this is really not an approriate distinction and, I'm going to guess suggests that most women who have actually experienced rape will say that it's a violent act, even if no violence is taking place.


I'm not saying they are. But they DO keep electing people and MANY of them keep fighting against even sensible gun control measures. I KNOW folks like thatrobguy and are I on the same page of what that means but let's be honest; there are many people NOT like that poster.

that was my point in most states it is considered a violent crime with the enhancements that come with that even if it was not done in a violent way or by force. On the other hand, some crimes are only considered violent for the purposes of sentencing if that particular example was violent

 

[Brihaha]

Well, with this horrible economy where young people need 3 jobs to make it, yeah, we definitely need some serious changes. Parents need to get back to raising their own kids, not outsourcing that because no one can be home.

There is no escaping the fact many parents would rather be at work than home trying to raise their kids properly. Or already sitting at home glued to their interwebs.

The economy is not that bad. Especially considering we endured a Trump presidency and a covid pandemic back to back.

 

[rambot]

Well, with this horrible economy where young people need 3 jobs to make it, yeah, we definitely need some serious changes. Parents need to get back to raising their own kids, not outsourcing that because no one can be home.

Companies need to pay wages that allow for a stay at home parent.

 

[MForbes]

(I believe 9/11 was an inside job).

Please take those beliefs to the Conspiracy Theory forum here on CF. You will feel right at home there.