Recent comments

  • Kings Canyon National Park   6 years 9 weeks ago

    Yikes, that guy is a bit grumpy. It is a beautiful shot. I can't wait to see this park. One of the best things about this site is the ability to share pictures, thoughts, ideas, etc. regarding our one common bond, a love for our National Parks. As an amateur photographer but seasoned hiker, I'm glad to have found a site like this on which people's experiences run the gamut. It is wonderful to get a multitude of views of so many beautiful places. --Dorothy

  • Free Shuttle Buses Will Make It Easier To Visit The South Rim of Grand Canyon National Park   6 years 9 weeks ago

    That's great and reminds me of the buses to Zion. No more fighting for a room in Grand Canyon itself 6 months in advance. However, is there going to be a special bus lane? The line waiting to get in can get pretty jammed during the summer. The only thing worse than waiting in a traffic jam would be waiting in a bus in a traffic jam.

  • Violent Deaths in the National Parks   6 years 9 weeks ago

    Frank wrote: This is all meaningless. What is really telling is the quote from Anonymous above, "You have to go out seven decimal places on a calculator to determine what percentage of Park visitors got killed in 2007."

    Actually, it's not telling at all, not in the least place because neither Anon nor you cited any kind of figures to provide a frame of reference. You mention Los Angeles as a comparatively dangerous place, so let's look at that.

    In 2006, 1,012 reported homicides occurred in Los Angeles County; the California state government's population bureau estimated the resident population of the county to be ~10.3 million as of 01-Jan-2007. Going by these figures alone, you would (to paraphrase Anonymous) "have to go out four decimal places on a calculator to determine what percentage of Los Angeles County residents got killed [i.e. were victims of homicide on Park grounds] in 2006." But that's not a fair comparison, because we're only looking at the resident population, and not counting visitors to LA County. According to LA Inc., there were 25.4 million "overnight visitors" to LA County in 2006. If you add up the residents and the "overnight visitors," you "have to go out five decimal places."

    However, LA Inc. arrives at its number of "overnight visitors" by counting hotel stays. The figure therefore does not take into account "overnight visitors" who stayed with friends or family, and more importantly, it does not take into account residents of neighboring counties (Orange, Riverside, San Bernadino, Ventura) who visited Los Angeles County to work, shop, visit a museum, go to dinner or what have you, and then go home at the end of the day or evening. And to make an adequate comparison with "Park visitors," you almost certainly have to count that sort of visitor to LA County as well. In fact, in the case of "day trippers" from neighboring counties, you may have to count them multiple times, i.e. for every time that they set foot in LA County. Commuters in particualr wouldreally ratchet up the number of "visitors," as they would typically "visit" up to 250 times a year! See, I strongly suspect that when the NPS claims there were 273 million "visitors" to National Parks in 2006, they really mean visits; in website terms, they're counting "page hits" rather than "unique visitors." By which I mean that if a single individual visits five different National Parks in a given year (or visits one Park five times), that one visitor will counted five times in the NPS's statistics. I don't believe that the NPS has the means (nor the inclination) to gather and process the information required to differentiate between five people making one visit and one person making five visits. Think about it; 273 million people is over 90% of the US population. Sure, those visitors include non-US residents, but if we look at the LA County visitor statistics, we see that "international visitors" comprised between 1/5 and 1/6 of "overnight visitors." Even if, for the sake of the argument, we assume that 1/5 of visitors to National Parks in 2006 were non-US citizens resident outside the US, do you think it's credible that over 70% (4/5 * 90% = 72%) of the US population made one or more visits to a National Park in that year? Personally, I'd be highly surprised if that were the case.

    The long and short of it is that while one might "have to go out seven decimal places on a calculator to determine what percentage of Park visitors got killed [i.e. were victims of homicide on Park grounds] in 2006," it is not inconceivable that that same statement might be equally applicable to the entire population of residents and visitors to LA County, especially if commuters, diners, club-goers, etc. from neighboring counties are counted as a "visitor" every time they enter LA County.

    How about we try approaching the comparison from the other direction? Typically, violent crime rates are calculated by number of incidents per 100,000 head of the resident population. The LA County homicide rate for 2006, based on 1,012 reported incidents in a resident population of ~10.3 million would have been ~10.2. Problem is, the National Parks system doesn't have a resident human population, or at least, not one that bears any relationship to the number of people in the National Parks system at any given time. But at least we can make some approximation as to how many people are present, on average, in National Parks on any given day, which gives us something that resembles a resident population. Taking that 273 million visits figure and dividing it by 365, we can conclude that the average daily population of the National Parks is ~747,945. There were 9 cases of murder/manslaughter that occurred in National Parks in 2006, so (9 / 747,945) x 100,000 gives us a homcide rate per 100,000 head of the population of 1.2. That's significantly lower than the LA County homicide rate, but many rural areas of the US probably don't have significantly higher homicide rates on average (I say "on average" because in a county with a population of 50,000, say, the difference between a homicide rate of 0.0 and one of 2.0 for a given year is literally a single homicide).

  • Free Shuttle Buses Will Make It Easier To Visit The South Rim of Grand Canyon National Park   6 years 9 weeks ago

    Excellent!! I am impressed that this idea came to a reality. Disney World had it right years ago, and the park systems are finally catching up. In Walt Disney World, once you arrive and park your car, there is absolutely no need to move it again until you are checking out. Finally, I will have that same advantage for the South Rim of the Grand Canyon. Let's face it, parking is a NIGHTMARE on the South Rim, and I all for avoiding that stress especially if the alternative is free.

  • National Park Quiz 2: Straddlers   6 years 9 weeks ago

    Sabbatis, this is fascinating stuff. As I may have said already, Kurt and I have been talking about drafting a Traveler article focused on the national park name-game nonsense and the associated administrative labyrinth. You've given us some excellent fodder, and for that we're very thankful. Are you willing to critique our first draft?

  • NPS Retirees Oppose Carrying Guns in National Parks   6 years 10 weeks ago

    Wow! Kurt, these stats are most alarming and frightening. It will be no wonder with these hard cold facts that the NRA will distort this report to benefit the holy-then-thou gun lobby. My first encounter with a gun slaying was when I worked at the local hospital years ago as a surgical tech. The young slain peace officer was in his thirties and did leave a wife with two kids. I will never forget that blood stained blue uniform with bullets holes drilled into it. Never! Until this day, I will always swear off the NRA as an organization that glamorizes gun and bullets which places less emphasis on gun safety and more on gun sales. RicK, I definitely think Kurt's FBI facts speaks well for it's self: A better armed America is not safer.

  • NPS Retirees Oppose Carrying Guns in National Parks   6 years 10 weeks ago

    Rick, good to see you back at the Traveler, although I'm sorry it took the gun issue to bring you back.

    That aside, if you could provide a link to your FBI data that'd be helpful. Here are some other numbers, from the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence:


    Gun Deaths and Injury - The United States Leads the World in Firearm Violence

    • In 2004, 29,569 people in the United States died from firearm-related deaths – 11,624
    (39%) of those were murdered; 16,750 (57%) were suicides; 649 (2.2%) were accidents;
    and in 235 (.8%) the intent was unknown. [5] In comparison, 33,651 Americans were
    killed in the Korean War and 58,193 Americans were killed in the Vietnam War.[6]

    • For every firearm fatality in the United States in 2005, there were estimated to be more
    than two non-fatal firearm injuries.[7]

    • In 2004, firearms were used to murder 56 people in Australia, 184 people in Canada, 73
    people in England and Wales, 5 people in New Zealand, and 37 people in Sweden.[8] In
    comparison, firearms were used to murder 11,624 people in the United States.[9]

    • In 2005, there were only 143 justifiable homicides by private citizens using handguns in
    the United States.[10]

    You can find the entire report here.

    One thing I find interesting in your data and the above is that, if I interpret your numbers correctly, there has been an increase in murders by roughly 2,400 from 2004 to 2006. Now, I'm not suggesting that the rise in murders is associated with law-abiding citizens with gun permits. Indeed, if you believe the Brady numbers, in 2005 just 143 justifiable homicides could be attributed to private citizens with permitted weapons, so private citizens don't seem to be that involved in gun play.

    But some might argue that arming more Americans with weapons isn't decreasing murders but is leading to more suicides, accidental deaths, and accidental shootings that didn't lead to a death. Plus, as the Brady Campaign points out, more and more youth are being killed because of our gun culture:

    Gun Violence - Young Lives Cut Short

    • In 2004, nearly 8 children and teenagers, ages 19 and under, were killed with guns
    every day.[11] (My emphasis)

    • In 2004, firearm homicide was the second-leading cause of injury death for men and
    women 10-24 years of age - second only to motor vehicle crashes.[12]

    • In 2004, firearm homicide was the leading cause of death for black males ages 15-34.[13]

    • From 1999 through 2004, an average of 916 children and teenagers took their own lives
    with guns each year.[14]

    • Each year during 1993 through 1997, an average of 1,621 murderers who had not
    reached their 18th birthdays took someone's life with a gun.[15]

    And, as Brady points out, the mere existence of a gun in the home leads to more shootings:

    Guns in the Home - A Greater Risk to Family and Friends

    • For every time a gun is used in a home in a legally-justifiable shooting there are 22
    criminal, unintentional, and suicide-related shootings.[16]

    • The presence of a gun in the home triples the risk of homicide in the home.[17]

    • The presence of a gun in the home increases the risk of suicide fivefold.[18]

    How do those numbers square with your contention that a better-armed America is a safer America? I don't doubt that there are plenty of criminals out and about with illegally obtained guns. But from the above statistics, it doesn't seem to me that the answer is simply to arm more folks.

  • While Bison Are Driven Back into Yellowstone National Park, Questions Over Management Continue   6 years 10 weeks ago

    Betty,

    Buffalo Field Campaign has a table every summer at Tower Fall where they give out information; however, it's not enough. I know of a school group that will be going in trying to advertise what's happening. Nearer to the park in Montana, we've gotten our new group, Buffalo Allies of Bozeman at http://www.buffaloallies.org, going. Obama spoke in Bozeman yesterday, and I didn't have nearly enough flyers to give out - they went flying out of my hands.

    We truly need to do more to inform visitors. Even locals seem woefully uninformed; many think this is a hunting issue (when in fact none of the groups I know about opposes bison hunting per se - what they oppose is bison hunting where there is no habitat for bison; they oppose a canned hunt on Yellowstone's border). So, there's a lot of work to do here close to Yellowstone let alone the rest of the country.

    Some in my group - including myself - are going to Gardiner tonight for a Bear Creek Council meeting. This is a grassroots group that has generally been allied with those who have supported the bad deal made with the Church Universal and Triumphant north of the park and was a recent signatory to a letter about the bison haze west of the park - with the same groups, as well as Defenders of Wildlife. While we don't think we're going to change minds necessarily on the deal, I think it's more important to develop a working relationship with a group of people living right on the park boundary - who could be leading the effort to inform the traveling public on what's been happening with Yellowstone's buffalo. Anything I can do to support them - and grassroots organizing in general - I will, even though we have strong disagreements over the deal.

    But, we'll need help keeping this in the news. It really takes the efforts of others making news about this to keep it there. If you are visiting the park and have a message for the traveling public, we can do our best to amplify that in the media. Buffalo Field Campaign cannot do it alone; they truly need others to be speaking out and informing others.

    And, Kurt, thank you for keeping this issue on your site and providing a forum for both points of view on the recent deal. By the way, we've posted the details of the deal on our Web site - see http://buffaloallies.org/node/39; it's even worse than it sounds.

    Jim Macdonald
    The Magic of Yellowstone
    Yellowstone Newspaper
    Jim's Eclectic World

  • NPS Retirees Oppose Carrying Guns in National Parks   6 years 10 weeks ago

    The anti-gun gang hysteria never ceases to amaze me. "We're afraid that people with permits might have guns and we won't know it!. Eeewwww!" Why don't you whine about all of the gun-carrying criminals you pass every day? For your information, since gun -banners never do the research, as of the 2006 FBI data, there were appx 14,000 non-suicide firearm deaths in the U.S. Of that number appx 7800 were committed with handguns. The trend in firearm deaths is that typically around 70% are committed as a result of criminal behavior by actual criminals who didn't bother to get a background check or permit for the stolen gun they used. Law-abiding citizens used guns more than a million times each year to stop crimes. Concealed carry permit revocation rates are typically less than 1% and usually for non-violent behavior. Except Philthadelphia which has a revocation rate of more than 10%. It's not a gun problem it's a Philthadelphia crime problem But that new $45 million sports complex sure helped take a bite out of crime, eh? Stop the anti-gun bigotry. You have absolutely no proof that citizens with concealed carry permits will change your national park experience. Except to make it safer. Yes, safer. Because criminals now might think the next person they try to rape, kill or rob might actually be able to defend themselves. Don't ell me about the park rangers because we all know when you're on a 10 mile hike you never see one ranger. People complaining about this don't have a clue what it means to have their lives threatened and being defenseless.

  • While Bison Are Driven Back into Yellowstone National Park, Questions Over Management Continue   6 years 10 weeks ago

    Please keep this issue in the news. As spring turns into summer, too many people are going to forget about this "crying shame" ! I hope some organization can keep the word out to visitors of the Yellowstone NP and nearby areas this summer. Intense pressure from the "tourists" will make a difference as it hits the almighty dollar factor !

    This situation is a national disgrace and needs to be solved once and for all, while we still have some of these magnificant wild animals left.

  • National Park Quiz 2: Straddlers   6 years 10 weeks ago

    Actually, Bob, the National Park Service only counts Klondike Gold Rush NHP once towards the total of 391 National Parks. I refer you to Page 3 of this PDF file for Reference:
    http://www.nps.gov/pub_aff/refdesk/classlst.pdf
    Although this Park has two superintendents, and hence, two entires in the Index, the National Park Service counts it as a single Unit. But hey, if the National Park Service can count the tiny slice of Glacier Bay around the East Alesk River as a separate "Unit" of the National Park System - why not count as a single National Park two units separated by 1,000 miles!

    Or, if we want to really confuse the NPT readers - consider the National Capital Parks, which counts as one of the National Park System's famous 391 Units. As it turns out, this "Unit" of the National Park System is sub-divided into two administrative jurisdictions with two separate superintendents, one for "National Capital Parks - East" and one for "National Mall & Memorial Parks" (the latter was formerly known as "National Capital Parks - Central".) These two superintendents, meanwhile, actually have jurisdiction over at least 15 Units of the National Park System! The superintendent for National Capital Parks-East has jurisdiction over Fort Washington Park, Greenbelt Park, and Piscataway Park which all count towards the 391 Parks total, as well as areas like Anacostia Park, Baltimore-Washington Parkway, Oxon Cove Park, and the Suitland Parkway which do not count towards the 391. At the same time, the superintendent of National Mall & Memorial Parks has jurisdiction of the FDR, Lincoln, Jefferson, Korean War Veterans, Vietnam Veterans, and World War II Memorials, as well as the Washington Monument, Constitution Gardens, Ford's Theatre NHS, and the Pennsylvania Ave NHS, all of which count towards the 391 -- and just to confuse things further, also over the "National Mall" (technically that green space between the Washington Monument and the Capitol Building), which counts separately towards the 391 too. On the other hand, the superintendent of National Mall & Memorial Parks also has jurisdiction over the DC World War I Veterans Memorial, the George Mason Memorial, the Japanese-American Memorial, and the Ulysses S. Grant Memorial - all of which don't count towards the 391. Go figure!

    It remind me of the old phrase - "the only rule is that there are no rules!" Anyhow I hope this helps....

  • Is Your Backcountry Safety Net A Personal Locator Beacon or Cell Phone?   6 years 10 weeks ago

    I just finished reading"The Last Season" , the story of Ranger Randy Morgenson's disappearance in King's Canyon N.P. If anyone would like to know just what all an SAR entails, this is a great education. Locator beacons are a great tool that can save life, time , and resources when used responsibly. But if you are the kind of slacker who would just lean on your "technology", you should realize every rescue mission endangers the lives of the people who come to save you. People, I might add, whose main jobs are probably way underpaid and not neccessarily geared toward search & rescue. As usual, people need to have that increasingly rare thing know as common sense. Be responsible for your own life.

  • Park Service Retirees Urge Interior Department to Halt American Revolution Center   6 years 10 weeks ago

    Lest we forget, Valley Forge was a state park until the Bicentennial when the state decided it was cheaper to let the federal government have it. It's surrounded by hotels, shopping centers and houses.

  • Would a Change in Gun Laws Be a Threat to National Park Bears?   6 years 10 weeks ago

    Timothy Treadwell thought very much like these anti-gunner peaceniks. Now, he is dead.
    Bears, lions and wolves are all wild animals. Not cute cuddly, warm and fuzzy pets like your cartoons and fairy tales depict.

    And then there is the recommended defensive bear encounters advise by the NPS. To, play dead or in the event of a black bear or your tent is invaded by bears, always fight back. Fight back ? With what? Fight back and pull back a stump ?
    Please. How did so many liberals ... get to be in charge of our National Park System ?

    Editor's note: This comment was edited to remove a gratuitous aspersion.

  • Is Your Backcountry Safety Net A Personal Locator Beacon or Cell Phone?   6 years 10 weeks ago

    Although I hope I never need it, I plan to carry something like a SPOT along with all my other backpacking stuff. There are just too many times when help is too far away and we must rely on ourselves and our preparation. To assume that we can "push the button" if we get into trouble is not very smart. "One-in-a-million" situations CAN occur; be prepared.

  • Kings Canyon National Park   6 years 10 weeks ago

    Ahhh - King's Canyon is great, but this picture is just Kitsch.

  • NPCA: Health of Everglades National Park Requires a Longer Bridge Along the Tamiami Trail   6 years 10 weeks ago

    The Miccosukee Tribe does not support the Skyway project as it will have adverse impacts on their life, businesses, traditional camps, and cultural resources. This is an environmetal justice issue as well as an environmental one. Please see their website for more information: http://www.miccosukeetours.com/

  • Book Review: Let's Go See:All 50! -- Visiting the 50 States Journal   6 years 10 weeks ago

    Dorothy,

    Thank you for your kind words about the journal. It is feedback like yours that make it a truly humbling yet fulfilling experience. The journal is currently being carried by 133 retail outlets spanning 33 states, and it has only been available since November 2007. If interested, I can provide you with a location nearest to you so that you can inspect it in person.

    Once again, thanks,
    Stephen Martin

  • Book Review: Let's Go See:All 50! -- Visiting the 50 States Journal   6 years 10 weeks ago

    Dear Bob,

    I am greatly honored by your extensive review of the All 50! journal. Thank you for your time and insights. Interestingly, you have captured the struggle we had in developing the final product as far as deciding precise content. In the end, it was decided to add less in order to allow more input by the owner. In other words, the owner of the journal can truly make it his own simply by inserting items that interest him. As you mentioned, the journal is not meant for navigating precisely, but it can be altered in such a way as to be meaningful to those who wish to use it that way. Your mention of the colored pencils is exactly how I enhance my own personal journal.

    Once again, the thrill experienced by seeing the mention of the review on the home page, then actually reading the entirety of it within was awesome. Thank you!

    Sincerely,
    Stephen Martin

  • National Park Quiz 2: Straddlers   6 years 10 weeks ago

    Sabattis, I think maybe you sorta painted yourself into a corner on this one, revealing the terribly complicated nature of devising completely unambiguous quiz questions. Here is how you phrased your question:

    Two National Parks are located [in] two different States - even though those States do not share [a] border. Name the Parks!
    No problem with the Gulf Islands National Seashore. That's one. But here's the rub with the Klondike Gold Rush National Historical Park. In tallying national parks (arriving at a total 0f 391), the Park Service counts the Skagway-based Klondike National Historical Park and the Klondike Gold Rush Seattle Unit National Historical Park as two separate units. That means that one can argue that they are really two separate national parks oriented to the same theme (the Klondike Gold Rush). If that were not true, why would each be listed separately in the master index, and why would each have its own website and its own Superintendent (Karen Beppler-Dorn in Seattle and Robyn Burch, Acting Superintendent as of August 2007 in Skagway)? OK, I will admit that it makes a lot of sense to consider them as just one park, but a good argument can be made for the alternate interpretation. Do you still consider your question completely fair?

  • National Park Quiz 2: Straddlers   6 years 10 weeks ago

    Sorry..... Good point - here's the answer to my "bonus" trivia question. The first Park is Klondike Gold Rush National Historical Park, which has two Units, one in Seattle and one in Skagway, Alaska. The Klondike Gold Rush played a major role in the development of Seattle as a major city, so the Seattle Units makes for a very interesting addition to this Park. The second Park is Gulf Islands National Seashore - which includes beautiful white sand beaches in western Florida and in southern Mississippi, but doesn't include any sites in Alabama.

  • National Park Search and Rescue: Should the Rescued Help Pay the Bills?   6 years 10 weeks ago

    First, I believe that I have received good information at/from all the national parks I have visited on the subject of safety and preparation for the areas I travel. Perhaps this is why the vast majority of the people in the story sustained no injuries.
    Next, I'm not convinced that an additional usage fee or insurance is the best answer. people may add additional risk with the feeling of be insured. also with fees wouldn't this open up liability for the effectiveness of the SAR.
    My last comment is about the money, $4.7 million. I question is this an actual amount of out of pocket by the NPS, or is a portion donated in non paid time and expenses. I used to be with a mounted search group in the Northwest.

  • Explosives, Possibly Dating to 1930s, Found in Sequoia National Park's Crystal Cave--Updated   6 years 10 weeks ago

    EOD Gad has a point. Why think this this thing to death like all other government jobs just take care of it and move on. financially, our parks are stretched to the limits and under funded.

  • Coal-Fired Plants Obscuring National Park Vistas   6 years 10 weeks ago

    Lone Hiker:Good input and I find your arguments most informative. Although, I don't have your expertise in the field or specialty (was it physics?) in some aspect of hard science but I do remember the scientific community complaining back in the 1980's how difficult it was to drum up money for research and development towards alternative energy projects. I agree our past history doesn't reflect well on are gluttonous appetite for more coal, gas and oil. But, I can remember Dr. Jensen's work (1970's) at NASA in atmospheric research pointing up to the sky that we're slowly burning things up; then Al Gore puts an exclamation point on his work with his profound book- An Inconvenient Truth.

    There have been red flags dropped for decades regarding our ill-behaved consumptive attitude towards "more is good" capitalist theme. Instead, some get mocked at for thinking "small is beautiful" and that it's a bad virtue to do so. I do point the finger very heavily at the Bush & Cheney administration for foot-dragging, especially when the world awaits for our critical input to help resolve one of the most potent crises of all...global warming! Looks like we went for the easy fix or the band-aid approach for years and now it's pay back time. We wait until the last drop (and price) of oil is right, or the Arctic Wilderness is totally exploited, the National Parks lined with utility companies (and the smoke haze that blocks our view) then we knee jerk and act. Hopefully, young Chance F.'s generation doesn't have to build us 25-foot seawalls to keep the ice caps from flooding our U.S. coastline. I guess we are "simply children" after all Lone Hiker, spoon-fed and pampered till the grave and smothered to death by Big Oil.

  • Violent Deaths in the National Parks   6 years 10 weeks ago

    Tim,

    If you could cite the sources of your statistics that'd be helpful.

    Here's a blurb from a story that ran last year in the Observer newspaper in Great Britain. It's a disturbing portrait of how others see us:


    Guns, and the violence their possessors inflict, have never been more prevalent in America. Gun crime has risen steeply over the past three years. Despite the fact groups such as the National Rifle Association (NRA) consistently claim they are being victimised, there have probably never been so many guns or gun-owners in America - although no one can be sure, as no one keeps a reliable account. One federal study estimated there were 215 million guns, with about half of all US households owning one. Such a staggering number makes America's gun culture thoroughly mainstream.

    An average of almost eight people aged under 19 are shot dead in America every day. In 2005 there were more than 14,000 gun murders in the US - with 400 of the victims children. There are 16,000 suicides by firearm and 650 fatal accidents in an average year. Since the killing of John F Kennedy in 1963, more Americans have died by American gunfire than perished on foreign battlefields in the whole of the 20th century.

    Studies show that having a gun at home makes it six times more likely that an abused woman will be murdered. A gun in a US home is 22 times more likely to be used in an accidental shooting, a murder or a suicide than in self-defence against an attack. Yet despite those figures US gun culture is not retreating. It is growing.

    And here are some statistics from the Brady Campaign To Prevent Gun Violence:


    Gun Deaths and Injury - The United States Leads the World in Firearm Violence

    • In 2004, 29,569 people in the United States died from firearm-related deaths – 11,624
    (39%) of those were murdered; 16,750 (57%) were suicides; 649 (2.2%) were accidents;
    and in 235 (.8%) the intent was unknown. [5] In comparison, 33,651 Americans were
    killed in the Korean War and 58,193 Americans were killed in the Vietnam War.[6]

    • For every firearm fatality in the United States in 2005, there were estimated to be more
    than two non-fatal firearm injuries.[7]

    • In 2004, firearms were used to murder 56 people in Australia, 184 people in Canada, 73
    people in England and Wales, 5 people in New Zealand, and 37 people in Sweden.[8] In
    comparison, firearms were used tomurder 11,344 people in the United States.[9]

    • In 2005, there were only 143 justifiable homicides by private citizens using handguns in
    the United States.[10]

    You can find the entire report here.