None of us will change his mind, it's made up. I'm done with this thread.
16 yo kid inside a mill
- Thread starter scut207
- Start date
Help Support Arborist Forum:
Those numbers are kinda misleading due to the fact of the actual size of the work force in each industry. If you look at the fatalities per capita logging is right at the top. Iron worker (my trade) is top 5ish last I looked. Mining and farming had a lower death rate per capita than truck drivers, kinda hard to believe but that is according to OSHA.
The comment about Amish children was a pretty good analogy. Lots of Amish are in construction in this area. It's nothing to see a young teenager setting trusses on a 2 story building with no fall protection. Or in the woods cutting and bucking big timber. The difference is, to Scuts point, those boys are family. The adults have good reason to be concerned for their safety and their future, and are taught the right way to do a job. Kinda goes back to what I was saying about my kids buddies coming over and wanting to hop on a tractor or pick up a saw or a dirt bike because they see my boys doing it. I've been "training" them all their life....there is no way I'm gonna pack all that knowledge into a teenager that don't even know what purpose the glow plugs serve on a piece of equipment....especially when they don't care. My kids knew the operation and the how's and why's of equipment long before they ever touched one.
Again a statistical fallacy.
I don’t know how to explain this other than it matters how many people are engaged in that activity.
Artic fishing is consistently and constantly presented as the most dangerous profession.
Do you think that more artic fishermen die than farmers?
No, but much fewer people are engaged in it so even a few deaths make the date rate higher by activity.
Per Capita, is the only way to compare the relative dangers of given activities, if just judging by raw numbers, then simply being BORN is the most Dangerous thing anyone can do, it is Guaranteed that 100% of people born will die. What you Do during your life can affect how long you live, and statistics compare the relative dangers of various activities, no fallacies in that
Doug
No it’s not Doug, how do you think insurance actuaries come up with this stuff?Per Capita, is the only way to compare the relative dangers of given activities, if just judging by raw numbers, then simply being BORN is the most Dangerous thing anyone can do, it is Guaranteed that 100% of people born will die. What you Do during your life can affect how long you live, and statistics compare the relative dangers of various activities, no fallacies in that
Doug
Why is there a news report of the 10 or so most dangerous jobs ranked every year.
I guarantee you that artic fishing is ranked higher than agriculture yet there will be less deaths associated. However since there are fewer engaged, those deaths are more statistically relevant.
Is freehand unteathered rock climbing more or less dangerous than driving a car? More people died, per capita, driving a car. Get it?
If not, here’s an article that explains it:
Look at the difference between total deaths and deaths per 100000
And the numbers for item 1 and 2, yiu only get 1 free read so absorb it.
https://www.ishn.com/articles/112748-top-25-most-dangerous-jobs-in-the-united-states
you can be done with it.
What you are failing to realize, is the contrary point. Your minds are already made up. Your not changing your mind in the presence of information.
The thing is a lot of the folk here grew up doing this stuff at a young age. No one and I mean NO ONE is the bad guy in their own story. Most people likely think they are good people. You grew up OK. You did this work. Its fine for others to be engaged in this work.
Exaggeration for point: Pol Pot, Hitler and Stalin didn't go to bed thinking they were the bad guys, they were end justify the means folks trying to bring power to their countries. We hopefully recognize that all these men were absolutely evil. but you do you think they believe themselves to be evil?
Everyone is the protagonist of their own life.
What I am saying that is falling on deaf ears: Misuse of statistics aside, logging is a very dangerous activity, having more impressionable young men involved will increase the fatality rate. Some here are saying that the risk they would vote for. In essence some will die, but you think the good outweighs the bad, legislation should be rolled back. You personally would likely train kids well. protect them best as possible et cetera. You wouldnt let kids who have no business near the equipment run the equipment. fine and grand. I wish everyone was like you.
I am just on the opposite side of the fence. I dont think the good outweighs the bad. I think theres people out there, and we've all met the type that would be terrible management and would care more about the bottom line than the safety of the kids in his employ.
JRM gets it. Regarding his take on the Amish. They become adults and are given adult jobs by necessity at a different ages, I know many amish. in fact, a large contingent of amish came to my grandfathers and fathers funerals. Thats not very normal for the "english." drove their buggies over 20miles to get there. I respect their way of life in that its an entirely and totally different world for them and how they spend their time here. Do I agree with everything, no. Do I think they are endangering their kids, yes. Do I think they are bad people, no.
I think we misunderstand each other,
Your article uses per capita comparison, like I said was the only way to accurately compare the dangers of various activities
I’m done.
Doug
And you missed the point, absolutely, that less people died in item 1 the most dangerous vs 2. How does that work?I think we misunderstand each other,
Your article uses per capita comparison, like I said was the only way to accurately compare the dangers of various activities
I’m done.
Doug
They did it by employment data.
Per capita employed in that activity is the answer.
Which is Exactly what I was saying
It seems most,if not everyone else understood that I meant per capita INVOLVED IN SAID ACTIVITIES, not Per Capita for the General Population
I’m Sorry that I didn’t spell it out in a Third Grade level, I didn’t realize that I needed to
Doug
OK,. sorry, when you quoted ,me. I beleived you to be arguing against what I was saying.Which is Exactly what I was saying
It seems most,if not everyone else understood that I meant per capita INVOLVED IN SAID ACTIVITIES, not Per Capita for the General Population
I’m Sorry that I didn’t spell it out in a Third Grade level, I didn’t realize that I needed to
Doug
Sean is incorrect in how he is using his numbers. He is stating more people overall per capita died in farming so farming is the most dangerous rather than per capita engaged in the activity.
Theres two(well several more as well) possible per capita calculations people are confusing here.
Per capita of overall population and per capita engaged in the activity.
The ones arguing against my point are using the former, I am trying to show how that is inaccurate and misrepresents the discussion in regards to over all danger by activity vs activity.
.
Which is the fallacy I am pointing out.
I could care less about all your statistics as they are irrelevant to the situation. I asked a very simple question that required a very simple answer which was motor vehicle accidents. That was all that was needed not 20 paragraphs of stats.
Now since you seem to like to dig around for stats try reading your original post and providing some facts. Your first line is where you went wrong right away.
What facts do you have to support that ridiculous statement as I have yet to see you produce any.
Exactly!!! Folks jump to conclusions without a single shred of evidence or fact.
Headline..............."Local 16 year old cuts hand, severs finger in woodworking shop".
Now what does that headline make you think? I can tell you the story is real and I know all the facts.
Well hopefully some others leavened something about statistical analysis. You still don’t grasp it I’m sorry I couldn’t explain it better.
I grasp all your numbers are your way of avoiding what you said in the first line you wrote. This is what YOU need to explain.
Please explain to us all what child labor laws were broken and where a lawsuit is imminent. I have been waiting and so far all you have done is avoid what you said.
Very sad that anybody dies while trying to earn a living. 16 years old and had his whole life ahead of him. But saying that, it is just as sad and more common that a 30-40 year old man will die doing his job. I know 14- 15 year olds that chop their own silage and work around machinery. From what I have watched, they know what they are doing because they were taught well. Being careful and well trained will never stop accidents from happening though. I know many 16 year olds I could trust on a D9 dozer, but you also have those blue haired punks that wear a hood in the middle of July. I would not trust those kids with a flat shovel.
I ran all types of dangerous farm, construction, and industrial equipment at a very young age. All of my sons did also. I spent a career working with 13-19 year olds and had them operating industrial tools that most would never have them use. You know what caused the most injuries .............a bandsaw
I will ask this to @scut207 should 16 year olds, heck 14 year olds be allowed to work in a butcher shop on the the kill floor and cutting rooms?
Answer would be it depends on each individual, everyone is different. You can tell once you watch them a few days.
I will clarify a bit. Should they legally be allowed to do so?
If properly trained and tested, yes.
In my opinion, I say yes they should be. If that same 16 year old can legally drive a Dodge 3500 down the road pulling a loaded gooseneck , then he or she should also be able to work around equipment that some may call dangerous. Hell, I was running a saw at around age 11 or 12. Goes back to what I call the pu$$ification of America. Mr. Mike Rowe has some very good videos on this very subject.
