In a world without guns...the strong and the many can brutally beat the weak and outnumbered...

[Rotagilla]

Zeke....again..

.You can't, I've asked many time. You come up with one, or two maybe three.

Do I have to list all the studies again...not my studies...not something I made up but studies by the CDC, the Dept. of Jusice, one under obama the other under bill "the serial sexual predator" clinton, plus about 17 others....they did the research and the studies cover 40 years of research....

Here you go Zeke...just for you...

Okay...again...here are all the studies that actually give numbers for guns used to save lives and stop crimes taken from the table I provided from guncite.com...

GunCite-Gun Control-How Often Are Guns Used in Self-Defense

GunCite Frequency of Defensive Gun Use in Previous Surveys

Field...1976....3,052,717

Bordua...1977...1,414,544

DMIa 1978...2,141,512

DMIb...1978...1,098,409

Hart...1981...1.797,461

Ohio...1982...771,043

Mauser...1990...1,487,342

Gallup...1991...777,153

Gallup...1993...1,621,377

L.A. TIMES...1994...3,609,682

Tarrance... 1994... 764,036

DEPT. OF JUSTICE...1994...1.5 million
(Subsequent to Kleck's study, the Department of Justice sponsored a survey in 1994 titled, Guns in America: National Survey on Private Ownership and Use of Firearms (text,PDF). Using a smaller sample size than Kleck's, this survey estimated 1.5 million DGU's annually.)

Lawerence Southwich Jr. 400,000 fewer violent crimes and at least 800,000 violent crimes deterred..
.(Lawrence Southwick, Jr.,Guns and Justifiable Homicide: Deterrence and Defense-concludes there are at least 400,000 "fewer violent crimes due to civilian self-defense use of guns" and at least "800,000 violent crimes are deterred each year because of gun ownership and use by civilians.")

Obama's CDC...

from slate.com an article on CDC obama's era...500-3 million defensive gun uses

Handguns suicides mass shootings deaths and self-defense Findings from a research report on gun violence.

7. Guns are used for self-defense often and effectively. “Almost all national survey estimates indicate that defensive gun uses by victims are at least as common as offensive uses by criminals, with estimates of annual uses ranging from about 500,000 to more than 3 million per year … in the context of about 300,000 violent crimes involving firearms in 2008,” says the report. The three million figure is probably high, “based on an extrapolation from a small number of responses taken from more than 19 national surveys.”


Yes....tell me all of these separate studies are wrong....here is another one...read the whole article...it will enlighten you....here are the stats from another study...

But skeptics will always be skeptical and antis will always prefer their own “reality” so (without questioning its validity) let’s go ahead and throw the K-G number out in favor of a more conservative one. Let’s use the numbers from the study which was commissioned by the Clinton DoJ shortly after the K-G study came out (to refute the K-G numbers maybe? If so: Oops!). That study, conducted by Dr.s Philip Cook and Jens Ludwig (very strong proponents of very strict gun control) concluded that there were 1.46 million DGUs per year.

Applying those restrictions leaves 19 NSPOF respondents (0.8 percent of the sample), representing 1.5 million defensive users. This estimate is di- rectly comparable to the well-known estimate of Kleck and Gertz, shown in the last column of exhibit 7. While the NSPOF estimate is smaller, it is statis- tically plausible that the difference is due to sampling error. Inclusion of multiple DGUs reported by half of the 19 NSPOF respondents increases the estimate to 4.7 million DGUs.

Some troubling comparisons. If the DGU numbers are in the right ballpark, millions of attempted as- saults, thefts, and break-ins were foiled by armed citizens during the 12- month period. According to these re- sults, guns are used far more often to defend against crime than to perpe- trate crime. (Firearms were used by perpetrators in 1.07 million incidents of violent crime in 1994, according to NCVS data.)

See, a lot of the crimininologists who have studied the subject, started out as anti gunners...for example, Dr. Gary Kleck, the current punching bag of the anti gunners and John Lott, who started out not caring about guns and was anti gun in his leanings....and above Cook and Ludwig were anti gun as well...

So we aren't talking pro gun people when they began studying the issue...but the facts changed their minds...

Dennis Henigan on Chardon Clockwork Edition - The Truth About Guns

That's one of their favorite tactics...they demand "proof" of everything..I mean the most insignificant point..ANYTHING to get you sidetracked..or they want you to "define" every term you use...and if they can get you to waste time scouring search engines for the data you need, they'll just ignore it and say the same thing again tomorrow as if nothing ever happened.

Remember, other people are reading this stuff and all you have to do is make your point...these yahoos are NEVER EVER going to admit an opponent is correct about something..and they will NEVER NEVER NEVER admit they are wrong about anything...as long as they can keep you tangled up in peripherals and running down data (that they will deny anyway) they've accomplished their goal...
don't go for it.

 

[JoeB131]

People murder people.

And our gun murder rate is more directly tied to our inner city gang problems than it is to legal gun ownership.

Americans do not believe the rights of law abiding people should be curtailed because some people will choose to break the law.

Our murder rate is tied to the fact that any asshole can walk into a gun store and walk out with enough weapons to fight the Zombie Apocolypse.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Guns do not make people kill.

Guns enable people to kill.

There is a big difference there.

People kill without guns all the time.

In fact according to the FBI more people are killed with fists and feet than they are by any kind of rifle including so called "assault rifles"

Yes, absolutely, and I totally agree.

But if you think of events like Columbine or Sandy Hook or any other mass shooting - how many people could the culprits have killed with fists and feet?

Likewise a lot of accidental deaths that occur with guns would not occur with knives.

That's what I mean by 'enabling killing' - guns are very effective, whereas knives and fists are nowhere near as effective as tools for killing. Not unless you're Steven Seagal, anyway!

An accidental death is not a killing.

We're never going to agree so I see no point in continuing this discussion.

 

[Skull Pilot]

People murder people.

And our gun murder rate is more directly tied to our inner city gang problems than it is to legal gun ownership.

Americans do not believe the rights of law abiding people should be curtailed because some people will choose to break the law.

Our murder rate is tied to the fact that any asshole can walk into a gun store and walk out with enough weapons to fight the Zombie Apocolypse.

Simply not true.

 

[Rotagilla]

People murder people.

And our gun murder rate is more directly tied to our inner city gang problems than it is to legal gun ownership.

Americans do not believe the rights of law abiding people should be curtailed because some people will choose to break the law.

Our murder rate is tied to the fact that any asshole can walk into a gun store and walk out with enough weapons to fight the Zombie Apocolypse.

what a clown!

 

[Saigon]

[

An accidental death is not a killing.

We're never going to agree so I see no point in continuing this discussion.

That is the hardly the point, is it?

It's a given that the number of accidental deaths is reduced in places with less guns, and actually the same is true of suicides. Guns are very effective.

 

[Unkotare]

Should the United States ever deal successfully with its citizens' mental health issues, and develop a social philosophy where violence is perceived as not being a legitimate means of conflict resolution, then fewer murders will likely occur, with the number of guns in American society and their availability unchanged.

Emulating the bloodless, wan, androgynous European attitude toward life (one only recently beaten into them, btw) would hardly count as a "success."

 

[Stephanie]

 

[2aguy]

That is what the gun grabbers never understand....they just believe that history begins when they wake up in the morning and resets when they go to sleep....history shows that disarmed populations are at risk to their governments....does anyone think that the people of Germany saw the death camps coming in the 1920s....would anyone have believed they were possible if someone had come back in time from the 1946 and told them what was going to happen...

And yet...the gun grabbers want all guns banned....they look at 11-12,000 murders by criminals, gangs in inner cities for the most part, and say see....this means law abiding citizens who don't kill people need to surrender their weapons. It is a special kind of logic....

Then, you present them with research...done by experts in the field...award winning experts in the field of criminology, and show them 19 different studies...conducted over a period of 40 years, by different researchers, both from the private research sector and the government....many of the researchers are anti gun themselves, or start out that way....and it shows that the benefit of armed civilians out weights the use of guns to commit murder...in fact, law abiding civilians with guns save more lives and stop more violent crime than criminals take with guns...

We are talking lives saved...either outright in that they are not dead, or lives that are not diminished or ruined by brutal rapes or beatings...and still, they want these people to be disarmed....

and they say "I've never been a victim, I don't know anyone who has..." and that is the end of it for them....

It is as if actual victims, who have been brutally raped, beaten, or who have had members of their family raped, beaten or murdered don't exist....as if they are fairy tale characters in the imagination of "gun nuts" and "gun paranoids."

I remember a recent television show that I saw when I used to post over on martialtalk...a girl had broken up with a boyfriend...he convinced her to come out of her house for one last hug....and then....stabbed her 19 times in the face and neck....they didn't think she would ever walk again....

At the end of the show it was interesting...she married one of the paramedics who helped save her life....and it showed her at a gun range practicing her shooting and she said she would never be disarmed and helpless again...now her and her husband go shooting together...

To the anti gunners...that story doesn't exist...or they don't care...probably both...they prefer that that girl, now a woman, go on with her life feeling just as vulnerable as she was before she was stabbed 19 times...

it is crazy...

For the record, in 47 years I have never experienced a crime...I have known 2 people who have been robbed at gun point...but never personally experienced a violent crime....but I know they happen...all the time...and I will not disarm people who might need guns to save their lives or the lives of a loved one....

 

[Skull Pilot]

[

An accidental death is not a killing.

We're never going to agree so I see no point in continuing this discussion.

That is the hardly the point, is it?

It's a given that the number of accidental deaths is reduced in places with less guns, and actually the same is true of suicides. Guns are very effective.

Suicides don't count.

If a person wants to end his life who are yo to tell him he can't?

And accidents are usually caused by human stupidity. You can't save people from that

 

[2aguy]

If a person wants to end his life who are yo to tell him he can't?

It would need to be explained why guns with strict gun control like China and Japan have more suicides than the U.S.

 

[Saigon]

Skull -

This isn't about blame - it's about preventing deaths.

If we can work to prevent accidents, suicides or homicides, I think those are actions worth considering.

I agree that accidents can never be totally ruled out because of stupidity, but we can have laws that ensure that gun owners are sane, competent people who understand the need for adequate locks etc on their weapons.

 

[MaxGrit]

Zeke....again..

.You can't, I've asked many time. You come up with one, or two maybe three.

Do I have to list all the studies again...not my studies...not something I made up but studies by the CDC, the Dept. of Jusice, one under obama the other under bill "the serial sexual predator" clinton, plus about 17 others....they did the research and the studies cover 40 years of research....

Here you go Zeke...just for you...

Okay...again...here are all the studies that actually give numbers for guns used to save lives and stop crimes taken from the table I provided from guncite.com...

GunCite-Gun Control-How Often Are Guns Used in Self-Defense

GunCite Frequency of Defensive Gun Use in Previous Surveys

Field...1976....3,052,717

Bordua...1977...1,414,544

DMIa 1978...2,141,512

DMIb...1978...1,098,409

Hart...1981...1.797,461

Ohio...1982...771,043

Mauser...1990...1,487,342

Gallup...1991...777,153

Gallup...1993...1,621,377

L.A. TIMES...1994...3,609,682

Tarrance... 1994... 764,036

DEPT. OF JUSTICE...1994...1.5 million
(Subsequent to Kleck's study, the Department of Justice sponsored a survey in 1994 titled, Guns in America: National Survey on Private Ownership and Use of Firearms (text,PDF). Using a smaller sample size than Kleck's, this survey estimated 1.5 million DGU's annually.)

Lawerence Southwich Jr. 400,000 fewer violent crimes and at least 800,000 violent crimes deterred..
.(Lawrence Southwick, Jr.,Guns and Justifiable Homicide: Deterrence and Defense-concludes there are at least 400,000 "fewer violent crimes due to civilian self-defense use of guns" and at least "800,000 violent crimes are deterred each year because of gun ownership and use by civilians.")

Obama's CDC...

from slate.com an article on CDC obama's era...500-3 million defensive gun uses

Handguns suicides mass shootings deaths and self-defense Findings from a research report on gun violence.

7. Guns are used for self-defense often and effectively. “Almost all national survey estimates indicate that defensive gun uses by victims are at least as common as offensive uses by criminals, with estimates of annual uses ranging from about 500,000 to more than 3 million per year … in the context of about 300,000 violent crimes involving firearms in 2008,” says the report. The three million figure is probably high, “based on an extrapolation from a small number of responses taken from more than 19 national surveys.”


Yes....tell me all of these separate studies are wrong....here is another one...read the whole article...it will enlighten you....here are the stats from another study...

But skeptics will always be skeptical and antis will always prefer their own “reality” so (without questioning its validity) let’s go ahead and throw the K-G number out in favor of a more conservative one. Let’s use the numbers from the study which was commissioned by the Clinton DoJ shortly after the K-G study came out (to refute the K-G numbers maybe? If so: Oops!). That study, conducted by Dr.s Philip Cook and Jens Ludwig (very strong proponents of very strict gun control) concluded that there were 1.46 million DGUs per year.

Applying those restrictions leaves 19 NSPOF respondents (0.8 percent of the sample), representing 1.5 million defensive users. This estimate is di- rectly comparable to the well-known estimate of Kleck and Gertz, shown in the last column of exhibit 7. While the NSPOF estimate is smaller, it is statis- tically plausible that the difference is due to sampling error. Inclusion of multiple DGUs reported by half of the 19 NSPOF respondents increases the estimate to 4.7 million DGUs.

Some troubling comparisons. If the DGU numbers are in the right ballpark, millions of attempted as- saults, thefts, and break-ins were foiled by armed citizens during the 12- month period. According to these re- sults, guns are used far more often to defend against crime than to perpe- trate crime. (Firearms were used by perpetrators in 1.07 million incidents of violent crime in 1994, according to NCVS data.)

See, a lot of the crimininologists who have studied the subject, started out as anti gunners...for example, Dr. Gary Kleck, the current punching bag of the anti gunners and John Lott, who started out not caring about guns and was anti gun in his leanings....and above Cook and Ludwig were anti gun as well...

So we aren't talking pro gun people when they began studying the issue...but the facts changed their minds...

Dennis Henigan on Chardon Clockwork Edition - The Truth About Guns

That's one of their favorite tactics...they demand "proof" of everything..I mean the most insignificant point..ANYTHING to get you sidetracked..or they want you to "define" every term you use...and if they can get you to waste time scouring search engines for the data you need, they'll just ignore it and say the same thing again tomorrow as if nothing ever happened.

Remember, other people are reading this stuff and all you have to do is make your point...these yahoos are NEVER EVER going to admit an opponent is correct about something..and they will NEVER NEVER NEVER admit they are wrong about anything...as long as they can keep you tangled up in peripherals and running down data (that they will deny anyway) they've accomplished their goal...
don't go for it.

Yep.

 

[MaxGrit]

That is what the gun grabbers never understand....they just believe that history begins when they wake up in the morning and resets when they go to sleep....history shows that disarmed populations are at risk to their governments....does anyone think that the people of Germany saw the death camps coming in the 1920s....would anyone have believed they were possible if someone had come back in time from the 1946 and told them what was going to happen...

And yet...the gun grabbers want all guns banned....they look at 11-12,000 murders by criminals, gangs in inner cities for the most part, and say see....this means law abiding citizens who don't kill people need to surrender their weapons. It is a special kind of logic....

Then, you present them with research...done by experts in the field...award winning experts in the field of criminology, and show them 19 different studies...conducted over a period of 40 years, by different researchers, both from the private research sector and the government....many of the researchers are anti gun themselves, or start out that way....and it shows that the benefit of armed civilians out weights the use of guns to commit murder...in fact, law abiding civilians with guns save more lives and stop more violent crime than criminals take with guns...

We are talking lives saved...either outright in that they are not dead, or lives that are not diminished or ruined by brutal rapes or beatings...and still, they want these people to be disarmed....

and they say "I've never been a victim, I don't know anyone who has..." and that is the end of it for them....

It is as if actual victims, who have been brutally raped, beaten, or who have had members of their family raped, beaten or murdered don't exist....as if they are fairy tale characters in the imagination of "gun nuts" and "gun paranoids."

I remember a recent television show that I saw when I used to post over on martialtalk...a girl had broken up with a boyfriend...he convinced her to come out of her house for one last hug....and then....stabbed her 19 times in the face and neck....they didn't think she would ever walk again....

At the end of the show it was interesting...she married one of the paramedics who helped save her life....and it showed her at a gun range practicing her shooting and she said she would never be disarmed and helpless again...now her and her husband go shooting together...

To the anti gunners...that story doesn't exist...or they don't care...probably both...they prefer that that girl, now a woman, go on with her life feeling just as vulnerable as she was before she was stabbed 19 times...

it is crazy...

For the record, in 47 years I have never experienced a crime...I have known 2 people who have been robbed at gun point...but never personally experienced a violent crime....but I know they happen...all the time...and I will not disarm people who might need guns to save their lives or the lives of a loved one....

That is a good example of the liberal mindset.

 

[Brain357]

That is what the gun grabbers never understand....they just believe that history begins when they wake up in the morning and resets when they go to sleep....history shows that disarmed populations are at risk to their governments....does anyone think that the people of Germany saw the death camps coming in the 1920s....would anyone have believed they were possible if someone had come back in time from the 1946 and told them what was going to happen...

And yet...the gun grabbers want all guns banned....they look at 11-12,000 murders by criminals, gangs in inner cities for the most part, and say see....this means law abiding citizens who don't kill people need to surrender their weapons. It is a special kind of logic....

Then, you present them with research...done by experts in the field...award winning experts in the field of criminology, and show them 19 different studies...conducted over a period of 40 years, by different researchers, both from the private research sector and the government....many of the researchers are anti gun themselves, or start out that way....and it shows that the benefit of armed civilians out weights the use of guns to commit murder...in fact, law abiding civilians with guns save more lives and stop more violent crime than criminals take with guns...

We are talking lives saved...either outright in that they are not dead, or lives that are not diminished or ruined by brutal rapes or beatings...and still, they want these people to be disarmed....

and they say "I've never been a victim, I don't know anyone who has..." and that is the end of it for them....

It is as if actual victims, who have been brutally raped, beaten, or who have had members of their family raped, beaten or murdered don't exist....as if they are fairy tale characters in the imagination of "gun nuts" and "gun paranoids."

I remember a recent television show that I saw when I used to post over on martialtalk...a girl had broken up with a boyfriend...he convinced her to come out of her house for one last hug....and then....stabbed her 19 times in the face and neck....they didn't think she would ever walk again....

At the end of the show it was interesting...she married one of the paramedics who helped save her life....and it showed her at a gun range practicing her shooting and she said she would never be disarmed and helpless again...now her and her husband go shooting together...

To the anti gunners...that story doesn't exist...or they don't care...probably both...they prefer that that girl, now a woman, go on with her life feeling just as vulnerable as she was before she was stabbed 19 times...

it is crazy...

For the record, in 47 years I have never experienced a crime...I have known 2 people who have been robbed at gun point...but never personally experienced a violent crime....but I know they happen...all the time...and I will not disarm people who might need guns to save their lives or the lives of a loved one....

You are very paranoid for someone who hasn't experienced a crime.

So the two people who were robbed at gun point. Were they armed? Did they survive?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Skull -

This isn't about blame - it's about preventing deaths.

If we can work to prevent accidents, suicides or homicides, I think those are actions worth considering.

I agree that accidents can never be totally ruled out because of stupidity, but we can have laws that ensure that gun owners are sane, competent people who understand the need for adequate locks etc on their weapons.

The United States is a Constitutional Republic, not a democracy as is the case with most of Europe and the Commonwealth.

In a democracy the people are subject to majority rule, in our Constitutional Republic the people are subject solely to the rule of law. In a democracy the people are at liberty to establish the legal criteria defining what constitutes 'sane' or 'competent,' however capricious or subjective. In the United States, however, the rule of law requires that when the state seeks to limit citizens' civil liberties, the state's intent must be rationally based, predicated on objective facts and evidence, and pursues a proper legislative end.

Consequently, the criteria of what constitutes 'sane' or 'competent' can often be irrational, subjective, and not intended to pursue a proper legislative end.

We do have laws in the United States that prohibit felons from possessing firearms, or those adjudicated mentally ill, or undocumented immigrants – but those are rational, objective restrictions. Attempting to decide who is 'sane' or not, or who is 'competent' as some sort of a prerequisite to gun ownership absent due process is anathema to the doctrine of the rule of law; that the state 'thinks' or 'believes' or 'feels' that a citizen 'might' do something criminal with a firearm is not justification to indeed prohibit ownership.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Billc said:

“That is what the gun grabbers never understand...”

This is delusional, unsubstantiated idiocy – there are no 'gun grabbers,' that's an infantile, ridiculous contrivance of the right. No one of merit or consequence is seeking to 'take' anyone's guns.

 

[Rotagilla]

oh, a strict literalist parsing words....more semantic distortion.

 

[Political Junky]

Guns per capita & homicides per capita:

USA : 90 guns per 100 people
Holland: 3.9

USA 4.7
Holland: 0.9

And another myth bites the dust.....

Not really since the CDC has reported that nearly 80% of gun murders can be tied to gang activity. Remove just a few cities from those stats and our gun murder rate drops significantly.

We do not have a gun problem. We have a gang problem.

Who is the official propaganda minister for the Right nowadays?

 

[Rikurzhen]

[

An accidental death is not a killing.

We're never going to agree so I see no point in continuing this discussion.

That is the hardly the point, is it?

It's a given that the number of accidental deaths is reduced in places with less guns, and actually the same is true of suicides. Guns are very effective.

It's also quite likely that instances of husbands killing their wives for infidelity are reduced by keeping women prisoners in their homes.

This isn't about blame - it's about preventing deaths.

Which is worth more, women's lives or their freedom?