In Chapter 5 of Freakonomics, which explores the art and science of parenting, we pose this question: Which is more dangerous, a gun or a swimming pool? It turns out that far more children die each year in swimming pool accidents than in gun incidents. For parents in warm-weather states like Florida, California, and Arizona, this is plainly a year-round concern, and now that summer seems to have leapt over spring (at least here in New York City, where it hit 80 F. yesterday), swimming-pool season is nearly here for all of us.
That’s why I thought it was worthwhile to pass along this e-mail from Bob Lyons of Ottawa, who in 1998 invented a “personal immersion alarm” called the Safety Turtle. (Too bad this guy came along too soon for American Inventor; they really could have used him.) As Lyons writes:
Many mothers [and grandparents and pet owners] were positive; while men were often dismissive. Yet, astonishingly, actions said: “great invention for other people,” but for us, “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it”! I wonder how the inventor of the car seat belt did?
Fortunately, Safety Turtle technology was adopted in workplaces and in boating. And finally pool owners are buying it in large numbers. It’s saving lives as intended, as a last layer of protection — not, to quote a dismissive pool & spa industry leader in 2001, as an “electronic baby sitter.”
Which is more dangerous, a gun or a swimming pool? is pretty compelling. Thank you for helping expose the anomaly that has been so tragic for so many families.
Hey Bob: maybe you’ll consider giving me and Levitt your Safety Turtle sales data so we can back and see if the areas that buy more of your Safety Turtles end up suffering less pool accidents and injuries?
and 
. You can also watch it on 
To answer which is more dangerous, you need to look at statistics like the ratio of pool-related child injuries per household with a pool to gun-related child injuries per household with a gun. There may be lots more households with pools than guns, in which case you would expect more pool injuries than gun injuries. Without that kind of data, you can’t effectively argue that one is statistically more dangerous than the other. It comes down to this: If you want your kids to be safer, educate them and keep an eye on them!
To answer which is more dangerous, you need to look at statistics like the ratio of pool-related child injuries per household with a pool to gun-related child injuries per household with a gun. There may be lots more households with pools than guns, in which case you would expect more pool injuries than gun injuries. Without that kind of data, you can’t effectively argue that one is statistically more dangerous than the other. It comes down to this: If you want your kids to be safer, educate them and keep an eye on them!
about half of adults in the US live in households with guns. there are more guns than people in the US. Even if only 20% of people live in gun households, do you think 20 % of households have pools? I dont know. But guns are WAY more pervasive than most people think.
Some of the previous do not appear to have read the Freakonomics chapter referred to in the article. I believe the premise examined by the Leavitt and Dubner was “Which household is more likely to experience a child fatality – one with guns or one with a pool?” Clearly there are more guns than home swimming pools in the US, but on per household basis they found pools to be more dangerous by an order of magnitude. The best topics in their book were the ones which incited both the left and the right. That’s an indicator that we’re not seeing the big picture because of our biases.
Or as we say in the office, “Structural failures don’t kill people, structural engineers kill people.”
Some of the previous do not appear to have read the Freakonomics chapter referred to in the article. I believe the premise examined by the Leavitt and Dubner was “Which household is more likely to experience a child fatality – one with guns or one with a pool?” Clearly there are more guns than home swimming pools in the US, but on per household basis they found pools to be more dangerous by an order of magnitude. The best topics in their book were the ones which incited both the left and the right. That’s an indicator that we’re not seeing the big picture because of our biases.
Or as we say in the office, “Structural failures don’t kill people, structural engineers kill people.”
Thominator nailed it on the head.
Without additional study, we can only speculate as to why a home with a pool may be more likely to experience a child fatality than one with a gun.
Off the top of my headed, several reasons jump to mind.
1. Guns can be locked in a drawer, cabinet, safe, etc., inaccessible and out of sight. You can’t hide a pool. It’s always there. It’s always in view. The water is a constantly fascinating temptation. Throw a colorful floating pool toy in the mix and you have a trap few toddlers could resist.
2. Everything has to go wrong for a gun to fatally wound a child (by accident). The gun must be left out, it has no gun lock equipped, it’s loaded, the child picks it up, and she squeezes the trigger. Even then, she must aim the gun at herself, and not a wall, to cause a fatality. A fatality in a pool has far less variables: she gets outside, there’s no barrier, she enters the pool, and she drowns. Firing the gun has an uncertain outcome. Entering the pool does not.
3. Pools are more difficult to secure against small children. As mentioned before, if a gun is put away in a safe place, it’s essentially safe from children. A simple gun lock provides even more security. Pools are more difficult. Pool safety devices — barriers, alarms, etc. — are more expensive than a locked drawer/gun lock. The installation of a pool fence is a bigger decision. The consistent use of a personal immersion alarm is more taxing. This is why multiple layers of security are recommended for swimming pools. All must fail to experience a fatality.
4. The media is huge on gun safety, and rightfully so. Any child fatality is tragic. Pool safety gets less coverage.
Everyone knows that guns are dangerous and should be kept away from children. Less people see their backyard swimming pool, a place for fun and relaxation, to be equally as dangerous if misused.
Thominator nailed it on the head.
Without additional study, we can only speculate as to why a home with a pool may be more likely to experience a child fatality than one with a gun.
Off the top of my headed, several reasons jump to mind.
1. Guns can be locked in a drawer, cabinet, safe, etc., inaccessible and out of sight. You can’t hide a pool. It’s always there. It’s always in view. The water is a constantly fascinating temptation. Throw a colorful floating pool toy in the mix and you have a trap few toddlers could resist.
2. Everything has to go wrong for a gun to fatally wound a child (by accident). The gun must be left out, it has no gun lock equipped, it’s loaded, the child picks it up, and she squeezes the trigger. Even then, she must aim the gun at herself, and not a wall, to cause a fatality. A fatality in a pool has far less variables: she gets outside, there’s no barrier, she enters the pool, and she drowns. Firing the gun has an uncertain outcome. Entering the pool does not.
3. Pools are more difficult to secure against small children. As mentioned before, if a gun is put away in a safe place, it’s essentially safe from children. A simple gun lock provides even more security. Pools are more difficult. Pool safety devices — barriers, alarms, etc. — are more expensive than a locked drawer/gun lock. The installation of a pool fence is a bigger decision. The consistent use of a personal immersion alarm is more taxing. This is why multiple layers of security are recommended for swimming pools. All must fail to experience a fatality.
4. The media is huge on gun safety, and rightfully so. Any child fatality is tragic. Pool safety gets less coverage.
Everyone knows that guns are dangerous and should be kept away from children. Less people see their backyard swimming pool, a place for fun and relaxation, to be equally as dangerous if misused.