Making a statement in 2024 does not mean you used data from 2024…the year isnt even over, so no the data is not from 2024.

Please quote where I said the data was from 2024.

B) those numbers are from COVID as I have explained already

Covid was 2020. I'm doubtful the 2024 report is based entirely on numbers from 2020. I didn't look, and I doubt you did. But I'm doubtful, as I said.

In any case, it's a tragic statistic regardless of that, and also no matter whether we're cutting off "children" at 18 or 19 - and that's a pretty sickening reason to handwave it away. Deaths are deaths, and these are our youth.

Same with this BS:

Once numbers for 2023/post COVID are released it’ll be back to cars being the number one cause.

Do you not recognize how asinine it is to hinge your argument on this? Let's say it's the number 2 cause of death. Hell, let's say it's the number three cause of death.

We have a problem and all some folks can do is nitpick about irrelevant bullshit that would not detract from the argument even if I accepted all the nitpicks.

Anyhow, I somehow missed this bit of classic internet snark, so you can fuck off with this dismissive and inaccurate ad hom:

Let me guess, you’re like 20-23?

I was getting OUT of the military longer ago than that, which is why I can recognize that 19 is a child in all ways that are relevant to their likely level of maturity, and the tragedy of their deaths, plus be appropriately horrified at the continual resistance to doing anything at all about it.

Good Day, Sir.

Edit -

Not that it matters at all except to folks who want to deflect from the problem, but here's the press release that accompanies that 2024 report.

It cites this source, among others, and I'm sure if I wasn't too lazy to crawl the actual PDF I'd find others: https://wonder.cdc.gov/Deaths-by-Underlying-Cause.html

In any case, if deflection, denial, and ad hom attacks are all you got, I see no reason to continue.

from 15-19 year olds. no, they're not children

Keep shifting the goal post to younger and younger?

If you're even close my age, that's fucking sad man. If you've gotten over the age of 35 and still think it's okay when kids die because they're teenagers, live in bad areas (and are usually minorities), then... how the fuck do you sleep at night?

The mental gymnastics is goddamn impressive.

Is that why they're allowed alcohol in most of Europe at that age?

The age of consent is on average 16, and in lots of countries you may have a light alcohol beverage with a meal if accompanied by your guardians. Just like with your driving licences. A "learner's permit" if you will, because we understand that these are kids on the verge of adulthood, so they're gradually allowed to do more and more adult things. You can have a mild drink with a meal at 16, buy yourself drinks at a bar and purchase wines and milds from stores at 18 and when you're 20, no limits anymore. You can drive a <11kW bike at 16, a <25kW at 18 and any power at 20. Because again, developing, so gradually ease them in so they're ready when they're fully-grown as opposed to being a developing young human being.

People's brains don't even fully mature until they're ~26, but you try to shirk responsibility of children getting slaughtered with an excuse of "well most of them are older kids who live in poor socioeconomic areas, so why would their deaths matter".

Like I said, there's never any science with you people, always the same chants of "not kids", "muh rights" (a right to a gun isn't a human right) and "but then only criminals will have guns" and you never ever read any of the science on the matter.

my whataboutism is still waiting

No shit? You're too thick to read a simple summary from Harvard and you excuse the leading cause of children being guns as "most of them are black teens so they're criminals anyway so who cares", so why would you accept science concerning your shitty "what about"?

Here's a summary of the OXFORD UNIVERSITY study I have linked several times:

Santaella-Tenorio's study (co-authored with Columbia professors Magdalena Cerdá and Sandro Galea, as well as the University of North Carolina's Andrés Villaveces) examined roughly 130 studies that had been conducted in 10 different countries. Each of those 130 studies had looked at some specific change in gun laws and its effect on homicide and/or suicide rates. Most of them looked at law changes in the developed world, such as the US, Australia, and Austria, while a few looked at gun laws in developing countries, specifically Brazil and South Africa.

###"... SPECIFICALLY BRAZIL ..."

So why don't you actually read the fucking thing? Just like I've been saying all along, you're nothing but a willfully ignorant gun nut parroting propaganda you've overheard, and you never ever have a single piece of peer reviewed study to support your regurgitated bullshit.

Also, you want to know about the reasons for South American instability and crime? How about a look in the mirror?

https://www.cepr.net/how-us-guns-destabilize-latin-america-and-fuel-the-refugee-crisis/

In August, the Mexican government sued US gunmakers for facilitating the high gun homicide rate in Mexico. Most people in the US who heard this news were probably confused, not understanding what US gunmakers have to do with homicides in Mexico. If they were to read Ioan Grillo’s excellent book, Blood Gun Money: How America Arms Gangs and Cartels, they would understand completely. They would learn that Mexican law enforcement estimates that 2.5 million guns have been smuggled from the United States into Mexico over the past decade. They might even wonder why other countries in Latin America aren’t also suing US gunmakers

The Americas is the most homicidal region on the planet due, in no small part, to the “iron river” of guns flowing from the United States to Latin America and the Caribbean. The above figure from Our World in Data, based on data from the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, shows that Canada had a gun homicide rate of 0.5 deaths per 100,000 in 2017. In the US, the rate was 4.63, approaching 10 times the rate in Canada, while in Mexico, it was 11.49, more than 20 times the Canada rate. Excluding the Americas, all countries in Europe, and most countries in the rest of the world had lower gun homicide rates than the US. (Some people incorrectly believe that there is a higher rate of gun ownership in Canada than in the US, but the Small Arms Survey reports that in 2017 Canada had 34.7 guns per 100 residents, compared to 120.5 in the United States. The gun ownership rate in the US is more than three times the rate in Canada.)

Although how would you ever read a book on the matter, when a page long summary gives you trouble.