Cdc Form 50 34: Fill & Download for Free

According to the CDC, based on 2013 statistics (the most recent ones available), the percetnage of deaths where the primary cause was homicide was:Black, both sexes, all ages: 2.7%Black, male, all ages: 4.5%Black, female, all ages: 0.7%White, both sexes, all ages: < 0.7%White, male, all ages: < 0.8%White, female, all ages: < 0.7%For black males between the ages of 15-34 Homicide was the number 1 cause of death at between 29% and 50%, depending on the age range.Source: Page on cdc.gov

They promote conspiracy theories to support their positions, such as putting forth the idea that Democrats, pushing for gun control, are really behind mass shootings,[1] or that the Democratic Party is trying to implement some sort of Gestapo-like network of children ratting out their parents.[2]They purposely misquote or cherrypick information to support their side. For example:they freely quote Thomas Jefferson as saying (in the first draft of the Virginia Constitution), “No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms”,[3] but don’t quote subsequent drafts where he limits it to within their own homes,[4] nor do they mention that he then completely changed his mind and disregarded it.[5]The NRA and its members quote George Mason as saying, “The militia is the whole of the people” when discussing the “militia” part of the 2nd amendment, but when viewed in context, it’s clear that the discussion wasn’t about guns at all, it was a warning about the upper-class sending the middle and lower-classes into war to fight for them.[6]They trumpet Switzerland as proof that more guns does not equal more shootings due to the number of firearms owned in the nation versus the rate of gun crime,[7] but they don’t also tell you about the strict gun control laws that have caused the low crime rate, such as the blanket restrictions on ammunition sales or even access to your own firearm.[8]They make up facts to support their positions, like this quote[9] from George Washington…which he never said.[10]They disregard any research on guns, no matter how thoroughly done and how universally accepted it is…unless it supports their positions.Gary Kleck’s research, almost entirely debunked across the board,[11][12][13] is still quoted as supporting “2.5 million defensive gun uses per year”, but the Harvard study,[14] following sound research principles showing the actual number to be a minuscule fraction of that is mocked.All research done by the CDC that was carefully conducted[15] is derided,[16]unless of course we’re talking about a study that seemingly supports the NRA’s position, then they universally praise it,[17] [18] even though the findings, just like Kleck’s, are found to be erroneous.[19]A report done on the effectiveness of the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban, written in 2003, which repeatedly says it’s too early to tell if the ban is effective and calls repeatedly for Congress to give the ban more time…is haled as being proof that gun bans don’t work.[20] They also refuse to revisit the data on this ban in any objective way as it may show that it did work.[21]When they didn’t like the results of a study about mass shootings showing the US to be far-and-away the world leader, the NRA-funded CPRC first insisted (repeatedly) that the original researcher refused to release his data (which he had), then conducted their own study, comparing war-torn nations like Afghanistan and Angola to the United States, proclaiming that the US is actually very low on the list.[22]They use fear tactics to achieve their objectives.[23] “…the semiauto-auto ban gives jack-booted government thugs more power to take away our constitutional rights, break in our doors, seize our guns, destroy our property, and even injure or kill us.”[24] They insist Democrats will confiscate any and all firearms.[25]They are entirely hypocritical.In the early 1990s, when deliberations on what would become the Brady Bill (resulting in the NICS background check system and waiting periods), the NRA fought every proposal, attempting to either reject or weaken it. Today, not only do they claim to have always supported background checks, but they're actually taking credit for the creation of NICS.[26]In 1999, when legislation was being put forward to expand background checks to, of all things, pawn shops, the NRA opposed it so much that the voting was almost entirely along party lines, with only 6 Republican Senators voting for it. All were voted out in the next election in favor of NRA-funded candidates.[27] Whenever talk arises to require background checks on private transfers of ownership, the NRA announces their opposition, frequently by claiming such background checks already exist or are unnecessary. However, the NRA will openly declare that they’ve always been in full support of background checks.After the 2013 Washington Yard shooting, Wayne LaPierre insisted that mass shootings are the result of a lack of mental health care,[28] and we should focus our energies there instead of any new gun legislation; however, the NRA had objected to mental health being taken into account for background checks just a few years prior,[29] and supported the removal of using mental disabilities as a factor in background checks in 2016.[30]When Florida passed a law raising the minimum age to own a gun from 18 to 21, the NRA filed suit. [31] The NRA first attempted to sue “in general”, but then attempted to add an anonymous 19-year-old to the lawsuit when they realized they’d have to show somebody was affected by the new law.[32] Why anonymous? “The organization asked that the teen be added to the suit using a pseudonym, to avoid potential harassment….” At the same time, NRA spokespeople were engaged in what can only be termed “harassment” of the teen survivors of the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School shooting in Parkland, Florida.[33] [34] [35]After the Las Vegas shooting, the NRA supported legislation to ban bump stocks…that is, until legislation was proposed. Their position then shifted to saying they would only support an executive order banning them; the sole reason for this is to allow for easily reversing this in the future. After the recent ban was signed, the NRA announced that they don’t support it because it didn’t allow for “grandfathering” in those currently owned…showing this was entirely lip service.They fight every measure designed to make guns safer, despite claiming that gun safety is a major reason for their existence. In 2000, the Clinton administration and Smith & Wesson reached an agreement to make S & W firearms safer; S & W agreed to install safety devices, better screen who purchases their weapons for sale, agreed to limit bulk handgun orders, and to make “smart gun” technology available in 3 years.[36] The NRA called for a boycott of S & W[37] that almost bankrupted the company (they were only saved by being sold to a new parent company who refused to abide by the agreement).[38]They repeatedly insist that there is never a right time to discuss laws that may make guns safer, or harder to have access to, or easier to take from those who are dangerous. In fact, they insist it’s never the right time for legislators to discuss firearms…unless it’s to remove laws.[39] [40] [41] [42] [43] [44] [45] [46]They blame gun-free zones for all mass shootings, even when it’s absolute nonsense.[47][48][49] When Gabby Giffords was shot in Tucson, Arizona, Wayne LaPierre himself insisted that she was the victim of a gun-free zone, when she had been shot in a grocery store parking lot where a number of people were actually carrying concealed firearms.[50] The NRA insists that the Aurora, CO movie theater was caused by it being a gun-free zone, which was disproved in court.[51] In fact, this idea of gun-free zones being targeted is a well-debunked myth.[52] [53]They are now, essentially, a money-laundering operation for Russian political donations to US Republican candidates. The NRA themselves admit to taking in political donations from Russian addresses. [54] [55][56](EDIT 9/27/2019: A Senate investigation has just completed, showing that the NRA and Russian nationals had an even more cozy relationship than initially thought. It is now established that Russia was pumping a considerable amount of money into the NRA’s political action fund, and the NRA was brokering meetings between US and Russian government officials and businessmen in exchange for money. There were also considerably more illegal/unethical activities happening that were leading to NRA officials investing in Russian businesses.[57] [58] [59] [60])They say horrible, despicable things, oftentimes completely contradicting with reality. Their current, official spokesperson recently said, “Many in legacy media love mass shootings. You guys love it.”[61] She also recently insisted that a man illegally shot by a cop in his own home could have protected himself by owning a gun.[62]I think that’s a pretty decent list.NOTE: comments on my answers are not the place for pet diatribes. I will delete comments that aren’t pertinent to the question and answer, as well as any comments that promote misinformation or bigotry.*** EDIT 11/19/2018 ***So, a guy claiming to be the son of Neal Knox, as well as another NRA-fan, have made multiple disjointed remarks that:Neal Knox wasn’t speaking for the NRA when he wrote that (my first point and footnote)Knox wasn’t employed by the NRA at the time he wrote thatThe line highlighted in my link is out of context.Well, let’s start with #2. Knox was employed by the NRA from 1977 to 1982 as a lobbyist, then from 1991 to 1997 as a board member.[63][63][63][63] Knox wrote the cited article in the fall of 1994.[64][64][64][64] So, yes, he was employed by, or at least affiliated with, the NRA when he wrote it.(oddly, the guy claiming to be Knox’s son doesn’t even seem aware of his father’s role[65][65][65][65] )Was he speaking for the NRA when he wrote it? Well, he was on the Board. He was the “First Vice President” of the NRA in 1997.[66][66][66][66] He was officially “skipped” in succession for President when Charlton Heston was given the title,[67][67][67][67] which means he was a pretty big deal in the NRA. He has been referred to as “the real power at the NRA”,[68][68][68][68] the “torchbearer of the NRA”[69][69][69][69] and its “most powerful leader”.[70][70][70][70] In 1995, an NRA board member was quoted as saying, “[the NRA Board members] owe their total allegiance to Neal Knox …”.[71][71][71][71] He did frequent interviews on behalf of the NRA. He wrote a steady stream of articles on behalf of the NRA. So, yes, he was a spokesperson, denying that is just silly.As far as context, well…you read the entire page, then decide.I also notice nobody’s disputing numbers 2–11….*** EDIT 11/19/2018 ***I seriously had a guy tell me in a comment that I didn’t provide my sources.We’re currently at 48 footnotes.I just don’t understand….*** EDIT 11/29/2018 ***Added a few more items…and even more footnotes!*** EDIT 12/5/2018 ***Thanks for the cited sources but there is much opinion and little fact here.[72][72][72][72]I just don’t understand. As of this writing, 18 of my citations go directly to statements from NRA leaders and spokespeople. Another bunch, 17, are to actual research studies, legal documents, and historical records. The links to news sites are almost entirely discussing specific incidents. I see no opinion pieces whatsoever, aside from those written by NRA leadership and spokespeople.I truly don’t understand some of these people….Footnotes[1] Neal Knox[2] NRA Leader Warns That Democrats Want to Build a Socialist Cloud Database of Parents’ Spanking Habits[3] Founders Online: I. First Draft by Jefferson, [before June 1776][4] Founders Online: III. Third Draft by Jefferson, [before June 1776][5] Founders Online: VII. The Constitution as Adopted by the Convention, [29 June 1 …[6] What America is getting wrong about three important words in the Second Amendment[7] NRA-ILA | Gun Control Advocates Target Peaceful Switzerland[8] Gun laws in Switzerland - Wikipedia[9] Image on quoracdn.net[10] Spurious Quotations[11] Contradictions of Kleck[12] National Criminal Justice Reference Service[13] More Guns Do Not Stop More Crimes, Evidence Shows[14] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1730664/pdf/v006p00263.pdf[15] Gun Ownership as a Risk Factor for Homicide in the Home | NEJM[16] NRA-ILA | 22 Times Less Safe?Anti-Gun Lobby's FavoriteSpin Re-Attacks Guns In The Home[17] NRA-ILA | Newly Discovered Data Proves Why We Can’t Trust the CDC on Guns[18] NRA-ILA | CDC Kept Quiet on Data Showing Americans Regularly Use Firearms for Self-Defense[19] That Time The CDC Asked About Defensive Gun Uses[20] https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/204431.pdf[21] Garrett Murphy's answer to Was the 1994 assault weapons ban effective?[22] Garrett Murphy's answer to Do statisticians get it wrong? Is the United States not even near the top of the list of world mass shootings?[23] NRA chief accuses Democrats of pushing 'socialist' agenda [24] NRA Defends Vitriol Toward Federal Agents / Letter calls them `jack-booted thugs'[25] Gun paranoia in the age of Trump[26] The NRA Is Taking Credit for the Background Check System It Tried to Sink[27] Roll Call on Gun Background Checks[28] NRA's LaPierre calls for more armed personnel after Navy Yard shooting[29] http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/09/AR2007060901080.html[30] NRA: The mentally ill have gun rights, too[31] NRA v Bondi - Complaint[32] A Judge Said The NRA Has To Actually Name A Teen Who Wants To Sue Florida Over New Gun Control Laws[33] 'We’re Not Terrorists. I’m a Mother!': Dana Loesch Says Parkland Teens Are 'Projecting Bigoted Notions' on '2nd Amendment Advocates'[34] https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2018/02/22/dana-loesch-the-nras-brash-spokeswoman-dials-back-the-rage-at-cnn-town-hall/?utm_term=.968fa9d1cb77[35] https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2018/03/24/nra-host-taunts-parkland-teens-no-one-would-know-your-names-if-classmates-were-still-alive/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.6134b92203fc[36] http://clinton4.nara.gov/WH/New/html/20000317_2.html[37] Boycotts: They Work! | US Concealed Carry Association[38] After taking bullets, Smith & Wesson lives[39] NRA-ILA ::[40] The History of the NRA, Gun Control, and the Whole Shebang[41] How the NRA Defeats National Tragedies[42] How the NRA Defeats National Tragedies[43] Gun Control Buzz Follows Shootings[44] Rieder: No, not 'too soon' to talk gun control[45] No, Mr. President, the NRA is not to blame: Chris Cox[46] Gun laws don’t deter terrorists: Opposing view[47] 7 People Who Tried To Blame ‘Gun Free Zones’ For The UCC Shooting, Even Though The School Wasn’t One[48] San Bernardino shooting: 'The biggest problem was that it was a gun-free zone'[49] FACT CHECK: Umpqua Community College Is a Gun-Free Zone?[50] How the NRA Defeats National Tragedies[51] The History of the NRA, Gun Control, and the Whole Shebang[52] Opinion flashback: NRA's gun-free zone myth[53] Commentary: Gun-Free Zones Don't Attract Mass Shootings[54] Depth Of Russian Politician's Cultivation Of NRA Ties Revealed[55] Russian National Charged in Conspiracy to Act as an Agent of the Russian Federation Within the United States[56] NRA got more money from Russia-linked sources than earlier reported[57] NRA Was 'Foreign Asset' To Russia Ahead of 2016, New Senate Report Reveals[58] https://apps.npr.org/documents/document.html?id=6432520-The-NRA-Russia-How-a-Tax-Exempt-Organization[59] Top Trump Ally Met With Putin’s Deputy in Moscow[60] New York Attorney General Launches Investigation Into NRA Financial Dealings[61] NRA spox: 'Many in legacy media love mass shootings'[62] NRA's Dana Loesch says man killed by cop in his home could've survived if he "was a law abiding gun owner"[63] Neal Knox[63] Neal Knox[63] Neal Knox[63] Neal Knox[64] https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/opinions/1995/07/09/gunning-for-his-enemies/ec63ddc7-a44f-4356-a713-7e0c35b7ca9e/?utm_term=.8e6b675fb391[64] https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/opinions/1995/07/09/gunning-for-his-enemies/ec63ddc7-a44f-4356-a713-7e0c35b7ca9e/?utm_term=.8e6b675fb391[64] https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/opinions/1995/07/09/gunning-for-his-enemies/ec63ddc7-a44f-4356-a713-7e0c35b7ca9e/?utm_term=.8e6b675fb391[64] https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/opinions/1995/07/09/gunning-for-his-enemies/ec63ddc7-a44f-4356-a713-7e0c35b7ca9e/?utm_term=.8e6b675fb391[65] https://www.quora.com/What-is-it-specifically-about-the-NRA-that-angers-so-many-people-on-the-left-no-trolling-please/answer/Garrett-Murphy-6/comment/78569416[65] https://www.quora.com/What-is-it-specifically-about-the-NRA-that-angers-so-many-people-on-the-left-no-trolling-please/answer/Garrett-Murphy-6/comment/78569416[65] https://www.quora.com/What-is-it-specifically-about-the-NRA-that-angers-so-many-people-on-the-left-no-trolling-please/answer/Garrett-Murphy-6/comment/78569416[65] https://www.quora.com/What-is-it-specifically-about-the-NRA-that-angers-so-many-people-on-the-left-no-trolling-please/answer/Garrett-Murphy-6/comment/78569416[66] Are We Revising NRA History?[66] Are We Revising NRA History?[66] Are We Revising NRA History?[66] Are We Revising NRA History?[67] Are We Revising NRA History?[67] Are We Revising NRA History?[67] Are We Revising NRA History?[67] Are We Revising NRA History?[68] https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/lifestyle/1995/04/29/recoil-from-the-nras-two-top-guns/34853e23-838d-4200-b79d-c76a3b007267/?utm_term=.90a96875da98[68] https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/lifestyle/1995/04/29/recoil-from-the-nras-two-top-guns/34853e23-838d-4200-b79d-c76a3b007267/?utm_term=.90a96875da98[68] https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/lifestyle/1995/04/29/recoil-from-the-nras-two-top-guns/34853e23-838d-4200-b79d-c76a3b007267/?utm_term=.90a96875da98[68] https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/lifestyle/1995/04/29/recoil-from-the-nras-two-top-guns/34853e23-838d-4200-b79d-c76a3b007267/?utm_term=.90a96875da98[69] https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/opinions/1995/07/09/gunning-for-his-enemies/ec63ddc7-a44f-4356-a713-7e0c35b7ca9e/?utm_term=.8e6b675fb391[69] https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/opinions/1995/07/09/gunning-for-his-enemies/ec63ddc7-a44f-4356-a713-7e0c35b7ca9e/?utm_term=.8e6b675fb391[69] https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/opinions/1995/07/09/gunning-for-his-enemies/ec63ddc7-a44f-4356-a713-7e0c35b7ca9e/?utm_term=.8e6b675fb391[69] https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/opinions/1995/07/09/gunning-for-his-enemies/ec63ddc7-a44f-4356-a713-7e0c35b7ca9e/?utm_term=.8e6b675fb391[70] Aggressive Strategy By N.R.A. Has Left Its Finances Reeling[70] Aggressive Strategy By N.R.A. Has Left Its Finances Reeling[70] Aggressive Strategy By N.R.A. Has Left Its Finances Reeling[70] Aggressive Strategy By N.R.A. Has Left Its Finances Reeling[71] Aggressive Strategy By N.R.A. Has Left Its Finances Reeling[71] Aggressive Strategy By N.R.A. Has Left Its Finances Reeling[71] Aggressive Strategy By N.R.A. Has Left Its Finances Reeling[71] Aggressive Strategy By N.R.A. Has Left Its Finances Reeling[72] https://www.quora.com/What-is-it-specifically-about-the-NRA-that-angers-so-many-people-on-the-left-no-trolling-please/answer/Garrett-Murphy-6/comment/79774764[72] https://www.quora.com/What-is-it-specifically-about-the-NRA-that-angers-so-many-people-on-the-left-no-trolling-please/answer/Garrett-Murphy-6/comment/79774764[72] https://www.quora.com/What-is-it-specifically-about-the-NRA-that-angers-so-many-people-on-the-left-no-trolling-please/answer/Garrett-Murphy-6/comment/79774764[72] https://www.quora.com/What-is-it-specifically-about-the-NRA-that-angers-so-many-people-on-the-left-no-trolling-please/answer/Garrett-Murphy-6/comment/79774764

This is somewhat hard to answer due to time and massive improvements in computer performance and architecture. It's kind of like a return to the megahertz wars of the 1980s and 1990s.A year I would give as a potential would be 1963-1964, just before and during the initial introduction of the IBM System/360.Data puts the number of computers in the USA at 11,700 in 1963. Given these would be pre-S360 systems such as IBM 704s or 709x series scientific processors, Univac systems, etc.In 1964, a System 360/40 is listed around 0.034 MIPS. An i7-930 is listed at around 5136 MIPS (assuming we can do an apples-apples comparison).That makes the (now dated) i7-930 equivalent to 151058 System 360/40 mainframes of 1964. It's a real crude comparison and doesn't take into account the performance curves on the high end where the highest end System 360 was 50 times faster than the slowest. The 360/40 is a typical "bread and butter" business processor of the day.Even with a doubling of total computers to 1965 levels at approximately 23,400 using the System 360/40 numbers, you wind up with an average MIPS of 795.6.In other words, even in crude terms, if 100% of the computers in the world were roughly equal to a 1964 System 360/40, the i7-930 would be over 6 times faster. You could easily factor in every scientific processor and high-end System 360 (at 50+ times the performance) and still have headroom.And given the i7-3770 in my desktop PC is almost twice as fast as the i7-930, it really is no contest even factoring in the CDC 6600 (under development in 1964), all of the competitors machines, previous generation transistor systems and even earlier vacuum tube systems that would have been around at the same time.And that's just CPU power. Factor in the horsepower of a reasonably modern GPU like my GTX 560Ti and a modern machine walks away from everything. In fact, a modern GPU would put a modern PC in the top 10 on the Top 500 supercomputer list in terms of raw power at the turn of the 21st century.Sorry for the spotty data. It's hard to get accurate sales and performance figures as there is no single effective benchmark. I prefer to use FLOPS as a measure as it is somewhat more representative of architectural ability than raw MIPS. But back in the day, scientific and business machines were different classes and architecture. Even the fastest System/360 in 1960s for scientific use peaked at around 6.7 MFLOPS compared to the CDC 7600, the title holder of the day at 10 MFLOPS average (34 peak). A PC and GPU from 5 years ago would sneer at such paltry performance.I've done some research on this topic as I've contemplated writing a novel on what would happen if someone found themselves in the late 1960s with a bevy of modern PC hardware, storage and mainframe emulators/OSs. I quickly determined that a handful of modern 1st through 3rd generation Intel Core i7 series or equivalent machines could handle all of the leased data processing needs of the planet and have capacity to spare.Sources:Essentials of Strategic ManagementWhetstone Benchmark History and ResultsComputer Speeds From Instruction MixesIBM System/360