Candace and Cypren have a couple of posts up about guns, and so as a public service I went and found an op-ed by Steven D. Levitt, Professor of Economics, University of Chicago, who writes that swimming pools are more dangerous than guns.
What's more dangerous: a swimming pool or a gun? When it comes to children, there is no comparison: a swimming pool is 100 times more deadly.We've got to stop the swimming pool industry, they don't even have a flimsy amendment to stand on! Studies have shown that swimming pool manufacturers specifically target the most vulnerable members of our society with their deadly product. How many precious little ones must be sacrificed on Poseidon's altar? Won't someone please think of the children?
In 1997 alone (the last year for which data are available), 742 children under the age of 10 drowned in the United States last year alone. Approximately 550 of those drownings -- about 75 percent of the total -- occurred in residential swimming pools. According to the most recent statistics, there are about six million residential pools, meaning that one young child drowns annually for every 11,000 pools.
About 175 children under the age of 10 died in 1998 as a result of guns. About two-thirds of those deaths were homicides. There are an estimated 200 million guns in the United States. Doing the math, there is roughly one child killed by guns for every one million guns.
Thus, on average, if you both own a gun and have a swimming pool in the backyard, the swimming pool is about 100 times more likely to kill a child than the gun is.
Summer fun, or backyard killer?