Who's an idiot?
In his letter published in the York Sunday News on October 28, Dave Workman confirms my hunch that he doesn't have a very high regard for the truth. Contrary to what he says, I did not suggest in an article published in the York Daily Record on October 7 that he is "an idiot for refuting the lame argument that more police are killed by gunfire than any other cause." He didn't refute the argument, it's not a lame argument, and I didn't suggest that he's an idiot -- I asked whether he's an idiot or a shrewed propagandist who thinks that newspaper readers like you are idiots.
To comment on this letter, click on “Comments” below
Recall that in the article by Mr. Workman that was published in the York Sunday News on Sept. 23, he accused the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence of lying about the statistics contained in a table about police officer fatalities published on the web site of the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund at www.nleomf.org/TheMemorial/Facts/causes.htm. The Brady Campaign did not lie about the statistics. It simply pointed out that the largest single cause of police officer deaths, according to the NLEOMF table, was firearms. That does not constitute "falsehood and hysteria, designed to fool and alarm people." Mr. Workman confused, deliberately or otherwise, "more than any other single cause" and "more than all other causes combined." I said that he "either is too stupid to understand, or thinks that newspaper readers . . . are too stupid to understand," the difference between them.
If Mr. Workman didn't like the way that the statistics are presented in the NLEOMF table, he should have complained to the NLEOMF rather than falsely accusing the Brady Campaign of lying about the statistics.
The NLEOMF presumably had a reason for dividing up the causes of police officer fatalities into so many categories. I haven't asked the NLEOMF what its reason was, and I rather doubt that Mr. Workman has, either. He does make a valid point that deaths in auto accidents, motorcycle accidents and struck by vehicle accidents are all traffic-related deaths. He is correct that 707 traffic-related deaths are more than 582 firearms-related deaths. If the NLEOMF had grouped its statistics the way that Mr. Workman thinks that it should have grouped them, the Brady Campaign would not have been able to claim, correctly, that "more officers are killed with firearms than through any other single cause."
What Mr. Workman fails to mention is that there are two basic types of causes of police officer
fatalities in the line of duty. Some police officers are killed accidentally, and some are killed
intentionally. Virtually all police officers killed by vehicles are killed accidentally,
unintentionally. Those killed by firearms are killed intentionally. Comparing accidental deaths
with intentional deaths is comparing apples and oranges.
There are 955 accidental police officer deaths listed in the NLEOMF table, with the following
causes: auto (478), struck by vehicle (151), job-related illness (133), motorcycle (78), aircraft
(41), drowning (25), fall (22), struck by falling object (8), struck by train (7), bicycle (4),
boating (3), horse-related (3) and electrocuted (2). There are 683 intentional police officer
deaths listed, with the following causes: shot (582), terrorist attack (73), stabbing (15),
beating (11), bomb-related (8), poisoned (2) and strangled (2).
It's significant that more than 85% of the intentional police officer deaths were caused by
firearms. Exclude the 72 deaths caused by the unique events of 9/11, and the percentage rises to more than 95%. It's reasonable to suggest that something ought to be done to reduce the number of firearms-related police officer fatalities. Attempting to ban all firearms, by the way, is not the "something" that ought to be done. I don't know of any reputable organization that advocates the banning of all firearms.
I'm not an organization, reputable or otherwise, and I'm not a member of any organization that takes a position on firearms. But I've noticed that all vehicles have to be inspected and registered each year and that all drivers have to pass written, eye and driving tests to obtain their licenses, even though no vehicles are designed to maim and kill people and exceedingly few drivers get behind the wheel with the intention of maiming and killing people. Many firearms, on the other hand, are designed to maim and kill people, and some firearms users shoot people intentionally. I believe, therefore, that it makes sense for all firearms to be registered and for all firearms users to be tested and licensed. Registration, testing and licensing wouldn't eliminate firearms-related police officer fatalities, but they might reduce such fatalities and might also reduce firearms-related civilian fatalities, of which there were many more than 582 during the period covered by the NLEOMF table. Registration, testing and licensing would not inevitably lead to banning and confiscating, regardless of what Mr. Workman may claim.
The fact that Mr. Workman "used to photograph fatal traffic accidents for the Washington State
Patrol, and there were a lot of them," has nothing to do with the causes of police officer
fatalities, so it is difficult to understand why he mentions that experience so prominently in his
letter, unless he's trying to obscure the fact that traffic-related police officer deaths are
accidental and firearms-related police officer deaths are intentional. So, you tell me, is he an
idiot, or is he a shrewd propagandist who thinks that newspaper readers like you are idiots?
Edward R. Waxman
Springettsbury Township
Leave a comment