In 1990 for every 24 road injuries there was one fatality.
In 2006 for every 38 road injuries there was one fatality.
More people are surviving road crashes.
Where am I going with this?
What if we replaced road injuries with assaults and concluded more people are surviving assaults? That would mean the murder rate would be dropping irrespective of the assault rate.
In fact that is what is happening. That is what Jim Anderton bases his specious decreasing-violence claims on. The rate of death through intentional injury has fallen. But the rate of serious and grievous assault is climbing.
The same can be seen in the rate of child death due to intentional injury. It has dropped. But the rate of known child abuse has not.
The medical fraternity are getting better at saving the lives of injured people. Whether the injury was the result of an accident or inflicted intentionally is irrelevant.
The argument would be that the injuries from car crashes and/or assaults are not as serious or life-threatening today. That would take some proving. It is more likely that the survival rate is higher regardless of the seriousness of the injury. This is also evidenced in the rapidly climbing number of invalids.
Tuesday, February 19, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment