Guns - a list

[Spoonman]

Who is Dr. Gary Kleck?
The Criminologist Whose Self-Defense Research Destroyed Gun Control Arguments
From Ben Garrett

Crim Justice Grad Program
Degree.TAMUC.edu/Masters-Programs
18 Months - 8 Starts/Year - No GRE. Just $12,402. Get More Info Now!

Criminal Justice Career
online.SouthUniversity.edu
Earn a Degree In Criminal Justice! Attend Class Anytime, Day Or Night.
Civil Liberties Ads
•Gun Control Laws
•Concealed Carry Guns
•Self Defense Class
•Gun
•Research Study

When gun rights supporters make their case against gun control in term papers, op-ed newspaper columns, Internet message board postings and emails to friends and colleagues, as often as not they’ll include numbers to support their argument that are the result of studies conducted by Dr. Gary Kleck. How did a man who was not a supporter of gun rights or gun owners’ causes come to be one of their biggest advocates?

Gary Kleck, Criminologist

Born in Lombard, Ill., in 1951, Kleck received his B.A. from the University of Illinois in 1973. By 1979, he had received his Ph.D. in Sociology from the University of Illinois in Urbana. He has spent his entire career at Florida State University’s School of Criminology, beginning as an instructor and eventually becoming a professor at the College of Criminology and Criminal Justice in 1991.

Dr. Gary Kleck - The Criminologist Whose Self-Defense Research Destroyed Gun Control Arguments

 

[Wry Catcher]

What percent of guns in the U.S. are used in crimes each year?

better yet, what percent of legally owned guns in the US are used in crimes

Is there a point to this question?

As a law abiding, sober and responsible gun owner I have no objection to my state requiring I take regular gun safety training and be licensed for gun ownership.

 

[SFC Ollie]

Firearm-related violence vastly increases expenditures for health care, services for the disabled, insurance, and our criminal justice system," writes Dr. Steven Lippmann of University of Louisville School of Medicine, and colleagues. "The bills are paid by taxpayers and those who buy insurance."

Based on a review of the available scientific data, Dr. Lippmann and co-authors conclude that the dangers of having a gun at home far outweigh the safety benefits. Research shows that access to guns greatly increases the risk of death and firearm-related violence. A gun in the home is twelve times more likely to result in the death of a household member or visitor than an intruder.

Guns in homes can increase risk of death and firearm-related violence

So far so much bull shit.

Yep......

 

[Arthur]

No bull, just a difference of opinion.

 

[Crackerjack]

Today I've begun a list of incidents of gun violence ...

Anecdotal evidence riddled with confirmation bias. In other words: FAIL.

I guess you never went over logical fallacies in this "education" of yours? You should have sent in the extra five box tops for that course.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Today I've begun a list of incidents of gun violence ...

Anecdotal evidence riddled with confirmation bias. In other words: FAIL.

I guess you never went over logical fallacies in this "education" of yours? You should have sent in the extra five box tops for that course.

Actually I still have the text, COPI, Into to Logic, 3rd Edition.

Seems a logical inference when a body is found with a bullet hole that gun violence played a role. I presume the inference you've made in re my thread is based on emotion, not logic. and is a very weak red herring.

 

[Arthur]

What do you want out of the topic, Wry?

 

[Crackerjack]

Today I've begun a list of incidents of gun violence ...

Anecdotal evidence riddled with confirmation bias. In other words: FAIL.

I guess you never went over logical fallacies in this "education" of yours? You should have sent in the extra five box tops for that course.

Actually I still have the text, COPI, Into to Logic, 3rd Edition.

Seems a logical inference when a body is found with a bullet hole that gun violence played a role. I presume the inference you've made in re my thread is based on emotion, not logic. and is a very weak red herring.

Yeah, I can tell you didn't waste too much time reading it.

While you're Googling "anecdotal evidence" and "confirmation bias," also look up "moving the goalposts."

 

[saveliberty]

So you have a lot of crimnals reporting failed crimes due to a gun held by the intended victim?

I suppose aliens are real because I failed to report NOT seeing one each day of my life.

 

[Crackerjack]

So you have a lot of crimnals reporting failed crimes due to a gun held by the intended victim?

I suppose aliens are real because I failed to report NOT seeing one each day of my life.

Sssshhh ... don't spoil his confirmation bias fail.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

What percent of guns in the U.S. are used in crimes each year?

better yet, what percent of legally owned guns in the US are used in crimes

Is there a point to this question?

As a law abiding, sober and responsible gun owner I have no objection to my state requiring I take regular gun safety training and be licensed for gun ownership.

There are also law abiding, sober, and responsible gun owners who would object, and justifiably so.

There is no evidence that training or licensing requirements would decrease the number of accidental shooting deaths or decrease gun crimes or violence.

It could be argued that such requirements would manifest an undue burden to one’s exercising of his Second Amendment rights, manifest an unwarranted expansion of the power of the state, and manifest a presumption of guilt with regard to gun ownership, in that anyone who wishes to own a gun must be held suspect as a potential criminal.

As with abortion, gun violence is a complex and difficult issue, and as with abortion, the solution is not more laws.

Your goal is admirable and desirable, and indeed shared by gun owners as well, you must, however, seek a different route to obtain that goal, one not potentially offensive to the Constitution.

 

[Wry Catcher]

What do you want out of the topic, Wry?

A counterpoint to NRA propaganda repeated by gun nuts on this message board and the gun lobby working with Republicans to inject fear (THEY will take your guns away) every election cycle.

Notice the Apples and Oranges comparison with vehicle deaths, see:

US road safety: Deaths lowest in more than 60 years. How we got there - Yahoo! News

Are guns safer today then they were 60 years ago?

 

[Arthur]

What do you want out of the topic, Wry?

A counterpoint to NRA propaganda repeated by gun nuts on this message board and the gun lobby working with Republicans to inject fear (THEY will take your guns away) every election cycle.

Notice the Apples and Oranges comparison with vehicle deaths, see:

US road safety: Deaths lowest in more than 60 years. How we got there - Yahoo! News

Are guns safer today then they were 60 years ago?

OK, so it's like a commercial to counter the NRA?

Good luck with that. They've got the guns and we're outnumbered!

 

[saveliberty]

More like an attempt to withhold a Constitutional right through logical fallacy.

 

[Arthur]

My, you love to throw things out of left field.

 

[Crackerjack]

Are guns safer today then they were 60 years ago?

So you're comparing firearms with automobiles ... why??

Keep on battling statistics with anecdote, Don Quixote.

 

[saveliberty]

My, you love to throw things out of left field.

Since when is the Constitution and the right to bear arms disconnected?

 

[Arthur]

My, you love to throw things out of left field.

Since when is the Constitution and the right to bear arms disconnected?

Non-sequitur. Look it up.

 

[Crackerjack]

OK, so it's like a commercial to counter the NRA?

Good luck with that. They've got the guns and we're outnumbered!

For what it's worth, I resigned my membership in October after they endorsed the gun-grabber Romney. Gun Owners of America is far superior.

 

[saveliberty]

My, you love to throw things out of left field.

Since when is the Constitution and the right to bear arms disconnected?

Non-sequitur. Look it up.

I understand what you did. Maybe if you read the Constitution.