Poll of the Day > More Americans are KILLED by LAWNMOWERS than TERRORISTS according to STATS!!!

(+) Yeah! (+)

In a shocking twist, it appears 69 Americans are killed by LAWNMOWERS in the US every year than by JIHADI TERRORISTS, with just 2 dying this way!!

The bizarre statistic won the International Statistic of the Year and was tweeted by Kim K, wife of current rapper whacko, Kanye West.

It was highlighted in a viral tweet by Kim in a response to the migrant ban proposed by Trump

It highlighted the huge disparity between the number of Americans killed each year on average by "immigrant islamic jihadist terrorists and the far higher average yearly deaths from "struck by lightning"..

Judging panel member, Liberty Vittert said "everyone on the panel was particularly taken by this statistic and its insight into risk, a key concept in both statistics and everyday life. When you consider that this figure was put in the public domain by Kim Kardashian, it becomes even more powerful because it shows anyone, statistician or not, can use statistics to illustrate an important point and illuminate the bigger picture"

Do you think Conservatives are over-exaggerating the terrorist threat from immigration?

Lawnmower -

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2017/12/18/17/476F509500000578-0-image-a-29_1513617289500.jpg

Kim K -

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2017/12/18/17/476F50AC00000578-0-image-a-30_1513617300667.jpg
---

Full Throttle posted...

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2017/12/18/17/476F509500000578-0-image-a-29_1513617289500.jpg

I don't know, that lawnmower looks pretty dangerous like it's going to cut me or something.
---

I tend to say shoelaces when I make this comparison - but it still stands
---

not getting into if its over exaggerated by conservatives or not, just going to point out when liberals talk about gun deaths they don't like it when conservatives bring up car related deaths and some claim apples to oranges. or that just because one thing is worse you shouldn't ignore the other. so yeah double standards.
---

Ban the Lawnmover Man!
---

I like the Armed Toddlers stat better.

What this says to me is that kids need to man up and walk to school. Look at all the lives that would be saved by getting rid of buses.
---

mooreandrew58 posted...

not getting into if its over exaggerated by conservatives or not, just going to point out when liberals talk about gun deaths they don't like it when conservatives bring up car related deaths and some claim apples to oranges. or that just because one thing is worse you shouldn't ignore the other. so yeah double standards.

That's not really a relevant comparison. Car-related deaths are brought up in an effort to dismiss gun-related deaths, not as a way to provide perspective on the significance of the associated risks (it's also a pretty flawed argument, given that extensive measures are taken to minimize the risks of driving, and liberals also tend to be stronger proponents of active/public transportation developments to cut down on the amount of driving people do). Here, deaths by lawnmower is presented as a statistic that almost nobody would ever consider to be significant, given that it's quite small. Pointing out that it still constitutes more of a risk than terrorism is meant to illustrate just how small a risk terrorism really is, and to point out the folly of devoting so much hysteria to preventing it.

Blaqthourne posted...

What this says to me is that kids need to man up and walk to school. Look at all the lives that would be saved by getting rid of buses.

Or by putting everyone on a bus. Can't be hit by the bus if you're inside it.
---

Just says Jihadis are incompetent and current security paranoia still is insufficient. You can't stop people throwing themselves under lawnmowers but you can stop terrorists at the gate.
---

adjl posted...

Blaqthourne posted...

What this says to me is that kids need to man up and walk to school. Look at all the lives that would be saved by getting rid of buses.

Or by putting everyone on a bus. Can't be hit by the bus if you're inside it.

At some point you have to board and exit the bus. Can't live your whole life on a bus.
---

adjl posted...

mooreandrew58 posted...

not getting into if its over exaggerated by conservatives or not, just going to point out when liberals talk about gun deaths they don't like it when conservatives bring up car related deaths and some claim apples to oranges. or that just because one thing is worse you shouldn't ignore the other. so yeah double standards.

That's not really a relevant comparison. Car-related deaths are brought up in an effort to dismiss gun-related deaths, not as a way to provide perspective on the significance of the associated risks (it's also a pretty flawed argument, given that extensive measures are taken to minimize the risks of driving, and liberals also tend to be stronger proponents of active/public transportation developments to cut down on the amount of driving people do). Here, deaths by lawnmower is presented as a statistic that almost nobody would ever consider to be significant, given that it's quite small. Pointing out that it still constitutes more of a risk than terrorism is meant to illustrate just how small a risk terrorism really is, and to point out the folly of devoting so much hysteria to preventing it.

Blaqthourne posted...

What this says to me is that kids need to man up and walk to school. Look at all the lives that would be saved by getting rid of buses.

Or by putting everyone on a bus. Can't be hit by the bus if you're inside it.

I really doubt its more of a risk than terrorism. except for where I live where only a dumb terrorist would try shit as the kill count would be too low to accomplish anything much.

and what I mean is i'm willing to bet most lawnmower deaths are user error related somehow where as terrorists attacks you as a citizen have zero control over.

main point of what I posted though was to bring up the fact I hate both sides have double standards

either way its still a risk vs risk argument. even when getting on public transportation you are taking a chance the driver may wreck. just like the supposed risk people take getting on lawnmowers. though I still think thats just people being unsafe in most cases.
---

I'll bring this funny wiki up:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Micromort

I still haven't found a list of cool Micromort numbers, so the few on the wiki will have to do
---

mooreandrew58 posted...

I really doubt its more of a risk than terrorism. except for where I live where only a dumb terrorist would try s*** as the kill count would be too low to accomplish anything much.

and what I mean is i'm willing to bet most lawnmower deaths are user error related somehow where as terrorists attacks you as a citizen have zero control over.

The stats don't lie. You are more likely to be killed by a lawnmower than by a terrorist. You do have more power to avoid being killed by a lawnmower than to avoid being killed by a terrorist, but the point of the stats is that that's perfectly fine. Putting more effort and concern into avoiding terrorism than you would into avoiding a lawnmower accident is completely at odds with the reality of the risks involved.
---

adjl posted...

mooreandrew58 posted...

I really doubt its more of a risk than terrorism. except for where I live where only a dumb terrorist would try s*** as the kill count would be too low to accomplish anything much.

and what I mean is i'm willing to bet most lawnmower deaths are user error related somehow where as terrorists attacks you as a citizen have zero control over.

The stats don't lie. You are more likely to be killed by a lawnmower than by a terrorist. You do have more power to avoid being killed by a lawnmower than to avoid being killed by a terrorist, but the point of the stats is that that's perfectly fine. Putting more effort and concern into avoiding terrorism than you would into avoiding a lawnmower accident is completely at odds with the reality of the risks involved.

I hate the year by year stats for one reason. how many people died at one time in 9/11. when has a lawnmower ever killed that many in such a short period of time. same argument could be made in the guns versus cars arguments. and i'm saying that as someone who supports the 2nd amendment rights. i'm just trying to point out these types of comparisons are just dumb

i'm also not saying we should never let immigrants in just because "omg possible terrorists" but i'm also saying we shouldn't say fuck it not shit we can do about it. I prefer immigrants to be checked for any possibility of being a criminal before they are allowed in.

just googled that 75 die a year to lawnmowers average a year. did the math, and the number that have died from lawnmowers since 9/11 doesn't add up to the amount of people that died alone on that day.
---

its fun to note how they specifically have to manipulate those statistics to exclude things like 9/11, the orlando club shooting and san bernardino.

its also fun to note that lawnmower deaths dont have the societal implications that terrorist attacks do, making the comparison that much sillier

KaptainKiro posted...

its fun to note how they specifically have to manipulate those statistics to exclude things like 9/11, the orlando club shooting and san bernardino.

its also fun to note that lawnmower deaths dont have the societal implications that terrorist attacks do, making the comparison that much sillier

yeah the comparison being stupid is my main point in all I said.
---

Full Throttle posted...

In a shocking twist, it appears 69 Americans are killed by LAWNMOWERS in the US every year than by JIHADI TERRORISTS, with just 2 dying this way!!

I wonder how far of a time-frame they had to go back to distort that statistic. Or maybe they're just excluding all the years we had a major terror attack. Or maybe there was some big secret lawnmower incident that killed more people than on 9/11.
---

mooreandrew58 posted...

i'm willing to bet most lawnmower deaths are user error related somehow

Whoa, whoa, whoa! Have you not watched Maximum Overdrive?!?
---

Blaqthourne posted...

mooreandrew58 posted...

i'm willing to bet most lawnmower deaths are user error related somehow

Whoa, whoa, whoa! Have you not watched Maximum Overdrive?!?

no actually
---

mooreandrew58 posted...

adjl posted...

mooreandrew58 posted...

I really doubt its more of a risk than terrorism. except for where I live where only a dumb terrorist would try s*** as the kill count would be too low to accomplish anything much.

and what I mean is i'm willing to bet most lawnmower deaths are user error related somehow where as terrorists attacks you as a citizen have zero control over.

The stats don't lie. You are more likely to be killed by a lawnmower than by a terrorist. You do have more power to avoid being killed by a lawnmower than to avoid being killed by a terrorist, but the point of the stats is that that's perfectly fine. Putting more effort and concern into avoiding terrorism than you would into avoiding a lawnmower accident is completely at odds with the reality of the risks involved.

I hate the year by year stats for one reason. how many people died at one time in 9/11. when has a lawnmower ever killed that many in such a short period of time. same argument could be made in the guns versus cars arguments. and i'm saying that as someone who supports the 2nd amendment rights. i'm just trying to point out these types of comparisons are just dumb

i'm also not saying we should never let immigrants in just because "omg possible terrorists" but i'm also saying we shouldn't say fuck it not shit we can do about it. I prefer immigrants to be checked for any possibility of being a criminal before they are allowed in.

just googled that 75 die a year to lawnmowers average a year. did the math, and the number that have died from lawnmowers since 9/11 doesn't add up to the amount of people that died alone on that day.

Did the 9/11 hijackers have any criminal background that would have raised a red flag?
And none of them were immigrants. One used a student visa while the others used tourist and business visas.
---

I knew a kid whose dad ran him over with a riding lawnmower. Somehow he only lost 4 toes. The story was featured on that show 911 back in the day.

Ok bye
---

How about snowblowers? Are they killing any of the idiots who put their hand in to try and fix a jam?
---

kind9 posted...

I knew a kid whose dad ran him over with a riding lawnmower. Somehow he only lost 4 toes. The story was featured on that show 911 back in the day.

Ok bye

You know Randy Beaman?
---

Foppe posted...

Did the 9/11 hijackers have any criminal background that would have raised a red flag?
And none of them were immigrants. One used a student visa while the others used tourist and business visas.

That, and the "10-year average" dropped off pretty hard in 2012.

Maybe the low kill count by terrorist were due to stronger stance by current administration? Was that ever considered that new policies may have mitigated such risks? How do you just look and compare statistics without considering the circumstances? Is there a lawnmower uprising that we are neglecting?

"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics." -- Mark Twain
---

why didnt you use the falling out of bed stat. it makes the terrorism argument that much more absurd
---

Zangulus posted...

NightShift posted...

why didnt you use the falling out of bed stat. it makes the terrorism argument that much more absurd

Beds are murdering bastards. Lawn mowers are an innocent victim of societies cruel slavery.

I'd assume that most of the lawmower deaths come from old models that don't have that idiot-lever on the handle.

Zangulus posted...

Questionmarktarius posted...

Zangulus posted...

NightShift posted...

why didnt you use the falling out of bed stat. it makes the terrorism argument that much more absurd

Beds are murdering bastards. Lawn mowers are an innocent victim of societies cruel slavery.

I'd assume that most of the lawmower deaths come from old models that don't have that idiot-lever on the handle.

Never underestimate the power of a piece of twine and stupidity.

Velcro cable ties work much better.

Zangulus posted...

Questionmarktarius posted...

Zangulus posted...

Questionmarktarius posted...

Zangulus posted...

NightShift posted...

why didnt you use the falling out of bed stat. it makes the terrorism argument that much more absurd

Beds are murdering bastards. Lawn mowers are an innocent victim of societies cruel slavery.

I'd assume that most of the lawmower deaths come from old models that don't have that idiot-lever on the handle.

Never underestimate the power of a piece of twine and stupidity.

Velcro cable ties work much better.

Well ladeeda... look at the rich fucker over here. You commit suicide with your fancy high fallutin hook and loop straps. Leave my broke ass and twine be!

At least I'll be slightly classier when I mow my face off.

Hey a Kardashian said it so it must be true.
---

70 years since the last nuclear bomb. So why are we so afraid of north korea and Iran using bombs? according to statistics, the chances of nuclear bomb killing anyone is effectively zero.

Right, because thats not risk assessment work. You cant neglect the potential harm from stats.
---

Amuseum posted...

Maybe the low kill count by terrorist were due to stronger stance by current administration? Was that ever considered that new policies may have mitigated such risks?

The new administration hasn't even been in effect for a year yet. If new policies could have influenced the annual average by a measurable degree, then the average isn't based on a large enough sample size to be remotely meaningful. Bonus points where, if you look at the picture, the date that's covered up by the watermark on the bottom is January 29, 2017. No matter how desperately you want to fellate Trump, surely not even you are not going to suggest that he was able to appreciably influence the year's statistics in nine days. Plus, as Zang said, it's 2001-2011.

So yes, it's been considered, and no, Trump has had no impact on those statistics.

mooreandrew58 posted...

how many people died at one time in 9/11. when has a lawnmower ever killed that many in such a short period of time.

Extreme isolated incidents often get left out of average statistics because of how much of an outlier they are. Nothing like 9/11 had happened before, and nothing like 9/11 has happened since, so letting it inflate averages to inform public perception about the risk posed by Islamic terrorism would be misleading. Especially where airport security has already been dramatically heightened since 9/11 (the reasonableness and effectiveness of which can certainly be questioned, but that's another matter) to prevent anything like it from happening again, meaning the risk is much lower than including 9/11 in the average would suggest.

It's like not counting a hypothetical freak accident where a guy loses control of a ride-on lawnmower and plows into a crowd, killing 150 people. Those would be lawnmower-related deaths, but being such a rare, isolated incident, letting it inflate the annual stats would exaggerate the actual risk posed by lawnmowers.

mooreandrew58 posted...

i'm also not saying we should never let immigrants in just because "omg possible terrorists" but i'm also saying we shouldn't say f*** it not s*** we can do about it. I prefer immigrants to be checked for any possibility of being a criminal before they are allowed in.

The thing is, nobody's saying that immigrants shouldn't be vetted. Plenty of people (the president included), however, are saying that the risk of terrorism is too great to allow any Muslim immigrants in at all. That's clearly false to anyone that looks at the stats on the matter, because the risk just isn't high enough to justify such an extreme measure.
---

Full Throttle posted...

Do you think conservatives are over-exaggerating the threat of terrorists from immigration?

Yes but that's kinda Americas thing so eh.
---

Amuseum posted...

70 years since the last nuclear bomb. So why are we so afraid of north korea and Iran using bombs? according to statistics, the chances of nuclear bomb killing anyone is effectively zero.

Right, because thats not risk assessment work. You cant neglect the potential harm from stats.

Because Muslims aren't nukes. You let a Muslim into a country, 99.9999 times out of a hundred, they're just going to go about their lives no differently from anyone else. You drop a nuke on a city? We do have pretty solid mortality stats for what that can do.

You absolutely can assess risk from annual stats when the cause did happen in those years. You'd have to completely ignore the principle of cause and effect to not see the flaw in "nobody died from nukes in years where no nukes were dropped on people."
---

adjl posted...

Because Muslims aren't nukes. You let a Muslim into a country, 99.9999 times out of a hundred, they're just going to go about their lives no differently from anyone else.

Don't even. Muslims don't live their lives like anybody else, there's been a lot of polls showing the majority of Muslims want gays to be arrested, women to be property and sharia law to be in effect. We also had a case of a woman being raped 3 times in a row in isolated incidents on the same night because she walked through a muslim area. Let's also not forget that we don't have a christian murdering as part of a crusade (because that's what jihad is) every 6 months.

When you get a high enough concentration of Muslims in an area, you get Tower Hamlets, a council of London annexed by muslims that has vastly higher crime rate because of it.

Islam is damaging to countries based on Christian values so it's absolutely fair to be wary of the people claiming to live by it.
---

Kyuubi4269 posted...

there's been a lot of polls showing the majority of Muslims want gays to be arrested, women to be property and sharia law to be in effect.

And how many of those polls include countries in which gays are already arrested, women are already property, and sharia law is already in effect?
---

adjl posted...

Kyuubi4269 posted...

there's been a lot of polls showing the majority of Muslims want gays to be arrested, women to be property and sharia law to be in effect.

And how many of those polls include countries in which gays are already arrested, women are already property, and sharia law is already in effect?

These are English polls, England doesn't condone that behaviour in the slightest, even less than America.
---

Kyuubi4269 posted...

adjl posted...

Kyuubi4269 posted...

there's been a lot of polls showing the majority of Muslims want gays to be arrested, women to be property and sharia law to be in effect.

And how many of those polls include countries in which gays are already arrested, women are already property, and sharia law is already in effect?

These are English polls, England doesn't condone that behaviour in the slightest, even less than America.

How many English people do you think want gays to be arrested and women to be property? Do I need to remind you that homosexuality was illegal in England a mere fifty years ago?
---

adjl posted...

Amuseum posted...

70 years since the last nuclear bomb. So why are we so afraid of north korea and Iran using bombs? according to statistics, the chances of nuclear bomb killing anyone is effectively zero.

Right, because thats not risk assessment work. You cant neglect the potential harm from stats.

Because Muslims aren't nukes.

But you think lawnmowers have the sentient capacity to cause mass destruction and societal uproar?
---

Amuseum posted...

adjl posted...

Amuseum posted...

70 years since the last nuclear bomb. So why are we so afraid of north korea and Iran using bombs? according to statistics, the chances of nuclear bomb killing anyone is effectively zero.

Right, because thats not risk assessment work. You cant neglect the potential harm from stats.

Because Muslims aren't nukes.

But you think lawnmowers have the sentient capacity to cause mass destruction and societal uproar?

No, I think that lawnmower use can be dangerous, which should prompt a certain degree of caution. This is supported by statistics on lawnmower injuries and fatalities. By comparison, the use of lawnmowers is more likely to result in a fatality than allowing a Muslim immigrant into the country.

Incidentally, literally any person with a weapon (especially a gun) has the sentient capacity to cause mass destruction and societal uproar (see the Vegas shooting for the most recent example), so I'm not sure what point you're trying to make there.
---

adjl posted...

Amuseum posted...

Maybe the low kill count by terrorist were due to stronger stance by current administration? Was that ever considered that new policies may have mitigated such risks?

The new administration hasn't even been in effect for a year yet. If new policies could have influenced the annual average by a measurable degree, then the average isn't based on a large enough sample size to be remotely meaningful. Bonus points where, if you look at the picture, the date that's covered up by the watermark on the bottom is January 29, 2017. No matter how desperately you want to fellate Trump, surely not even you are not going to suggest that he was able to appreciably influence the year's statistics in nine days. Plus, as Zang said, it's 2001-2011.

So yes, it's been considered, and no, Trump has had no impact on those statistics.

mooreandrew58 posted...

how many people died at one time in 9/11. when has a lawnmower ever killed that many in such a short period of time.

Extreme isolated incidents often get left out of average statistics because of how much of an outlier they are. Nothing like 9/11 had happened before, and nothing like 9/11 has happened since, so letting it inflate averages to inform public perception about the risk posed by Islamic terrorism would be misleading. Especially where airport security has already been dramatically heightened since 9/11 (the reasonableness and effectiveness of which can certainly be questioned, but that's another matter) to prevent anything like it from happening again, meaning the risk is much lower than including 9/11 in the average would suggest.

It's like not counting a hypothetical freak accident where a guy loses control of a ride-on lawnmower and plows into a crowd, killing 150 people. Those would be lawnmower-related deaths, but being such a rare, isolated incident, letting it inflate the annual stats would exaggerate the actual risk posed by lawnmowers.

mooreandrew58 posted...

i'm also not saying we should never let immigrants in just because "omg possible terrorists" but i'm also saying we shouldn't say f*** it not s*** we can do about it. I prefer immigrants to be checked for any possibility of being a criminal before they are allowed in.

The thing is, nobody's saying that immigrants shouldn't be vetted. Plenty of people (the president included), however, are saying that the risk of terrorism is too great to allow any Muslim immigrants in at all. That's clearly false to anyone that looks at the stats on the matter, because the risk just isn't high enough to justify such an extreme measure.

once again your missing my fucking point. my only point being that these comparisons are stupid and one should have no bearing on how we consider dealing with the other.
---

mooreandrew58 posted...

once again your missing my f***ing point. my only point being that these comparisons are stupid and one should have no bearing on how we consider dealing with the other.

They should, however, inform how paranoid people are about the risks. People are afraid of flying, when in fact driving is orders of magnitude more dangerous. Ergo, people should be more afraid of driving than of flying. Similarly, people are afraid of Islamic terrorists (to the point of wanting to ban Muslims from entering the country), when there are many things that present a much more immediate threat that should command greater fear.

It's not really about dictating what should be done to solve the problem (though given finite resources, it does make more sense to allocate those resources toward solving greater threats), it's just saying that it's stupid and logically inconsistent to be afraid of something while not being afraid of something else that's more dangerous.
---

adjl posted...

mooreandrew58 posted...

once again your missing my f***ing point. my only point being that these comparisons are stupid and one should have no bearing on how we consider dealing with the other.

They should, however, inform how paranoid people are about the risks. People are afraid of flying, when in fact driving is orders of magnitude more dangerous. Ergo, people should be more afraid of driving than of flying. Similarly, people are afraid of Islamic terrorists (to the point of wanting to ban Muslims from entering the country), when there are many things that present a much more immediate threat that should command greater fear.

It's not really about dictating what should be done to solve the problem (though given finite resources, it does make more sense to allocate those resources toward solving greater threats), it's just saying that it's stupid and logically inconsistent to be afraid of something while not being afraid of something else that's more dangerous.

I don't mind informing people of risks. just saying its kind of stupid saying this is riskier than that so you shouldn't worry about that.

and once again i'll say i'm betting money most lawnmower accidents are user error. so its not something you should so much be afraid of the risk over, just something you should consider when you mow your lawn. at the end of the day though one problem is up to the people themselves to worry about the other is the government's problem as not shit we the people can do about it ourselves.

now if people where dying to lawnmowers over something they had little to no chance of avoiding like say lets use it blowing up as an extreme off the top of my head example. then yeah i'd say it might a be a problem worth really worrying over. but it still wouldn't mean we should completely ignore other issues especially when they are so completely unrelated issues.
---

The title of this topic should be "More people are killed by their own stupidity than an intentional act by someone else".

You can't fix stupid, but you can try to stop terrorists.
---

Full Throttle posted...

Do you think Conservatives are over-exaggerating the terrorist threat?

FTFY
As a general rule and clear party line, yes, obviously.
---