The Moment Sandy Hook Parents start cashing in their kids..

[2aguy]

Brain....you are not being honest here...we are talking 19 different studies, done over 40 years, by both private and government researchers by different researchers.....the studies show, when averaged together, that guns are used 1.6 million times a year to stop violent criminal attack and save lives....Dr. Kleck's research is the most accurate which is why the irrational anti gunners attack him so much....he found that guns are used 2.5 million times....

As to the National Crime Victimization survey ....this is why it is wrong....

Gun Control Myths and Realities Cato Institute

 

[ChrisL]

Leftardicus Maximus,
Most self defense encounters don't involve shooting. The presence of a gun is enough to stop a criminal. I've seen it myself more than once.

That is funny. Do you ever read stories of defenses? There are quite a few that end with a dead criminal actually. A study had these findings:
Overall, shots were fired by the defender in 72% of incidents. The average and median number of shots fired was 2. When more than 2 shots were fired, it generally appeared that the defender's initial response was to fire until empty. It appears that revolver shooters are more likely to empty their guns than autoloader shooters. At least one assailant was killed in 34% of all incidents. At least one assailant was wounded in an additional 29% of all incidents. Of the incidents where shots are fired by a defender, at least one assailant is killed in 53% of those incidents.

This study was done based on the defense incidents on the NRA website. So again, you'd have to be an idiot to believe there are anywhere near 2 million defenses each year when only about 230 criminals are shot and killed.

Wrong, the data was gleaned from the National Crime Victimization Survey, and the data I linked to explains how those numbers are even often times UNDER estimated. THAT is why Dr. Kleck's numbers are higher than the NCVS numbers. NCVS statistics are limited due to a variety of reasons. Obviously, you didn't even BOTHER to read the link.

Also, 2.5 million is NOT hard to believe in a country of over 300,000,000 people!!!

Snip from link below:

Why is the NCVS an unacceptable estimate of annual DGU's? Dr. Kleck states, "Equally important, those who take the NCVS-based estimates seriously have consistently ignored the most pronounced limitations of the NCVS for estimating DGU frequency. The NCVS is a non-anonymous national survey conducted by a branch of the federal government, the U.S. Bureau of the Census. Interviewers identify themselves to respondents as federal government employees, even displaying, in face-to-face contacts, an identification card with a badge. Respondents are told that the interviews are being conducted on behalf of the U.S. Department of Justice, the law enforcement branch of the federal government. As a preliminary to asking questions about crime victimization experiences, interviewers establish the address, telephone number, and full names of all occupants, age twelve and over, in each household they contact. In short, it is made very clear to respondents that they are, in effect, speaking to a law enforcement arm of the federal government, whose employees know exactly who the respondents and their family members are, where they live, and how they can be recontacted."

"It is not hard for gun-using victims interviewed in the NCVS to withhold information about their use of a gun, especially since they are never directly asked whether they used a gun for self-protection. They are asked only general questions about whether they did anything to protect themselves. In short, respondents are merely give the opportunity to volunteer the information that they have used a gun defensively. All it takes for a respondents to conceal a DGU is to simply refrain from mentioning it, i.e., to leave it out of what may be an otherwise accurate and complete account of the crime incident."

"...88% of the violent crimes which respondents [Rs] reported to NCVS interviewers in 1992 were committed away from the victim's home, i.e., in a location where it would ordinarily be a crime for the victim to even possess a gun, never mind use it defensively. Because the question about location is asked before the self-protection questions, the typical violent crime victim R has already committed himself to having been victimized in a public place before being asked what he or she did for self-protection. In short, Rs usually could not mention their defensive use of a gun without, in effect, confessing to a crime to a federal government employee."

Kleck concludes his criticism of the NCVS saying it "was not designed to estimate how often people resist crime using a gun. It was designed primarily to estimate national victimization levels; it incidentally happens to include a few self-protection questions which include response categories covering resistance with a gun. Its survey instrument has been carefully refined and evaluated over the years to do as good a job as possible in getting people to report illegal things which other people have done to them. This is the exact opposite of the task which faces anyone trying to get good DGU estimates--to get people to admit controversial and possibly illegal things which the Rs themselves have done. Therefore, it is neither surprising, nor a reflection on the survey's designers, to note that the NCVS is singularly ill-suited for estimating the prevalence or incidence of DGU. It is not credible to regard this survey as an acceptable basis for establishing, in even the roughest way, how often Americans use guns for self-protection."

No the study was done based on actual incidents. You keep posting deeply flawed surveys that can't agree on a number.

Again only 230 criminals shot and killed each year in defense. You would have to be a moron to believe there are over 2 million defenses and so few killed.

It doesn't matter how many were SHOT, brain dead. If you pull your gun, and the perp flees because he is frightened, that counts as defense as well.

I've provided a study showing how often a criminal is shot and killed during a defense. Your fake defense numbers don't ad up. They are fantasy.

Why do you want to take away the right of United States citizens to defend their property, themselves and their families against criminals?

 

[2aguy]

Why the National Crime Victimization Survey is wrong....

Gun Control Myths and Realities Cato Institute

actually, a different link is needed

 

[2aguy]

Here is the link...finallly...

Forbes article on Cato institute study on defensive gun uses...they culled through reports to get their number...

Disarming the Myths Promoted By the Gun Control Lobby - Forbes

A widely-known study conducted by Gary Kleck and Marc Gertz in the 1990s found that there were somewhere between 830,000 and 2.45 million U.S. defensive gun uses annually. A National Crime Victimization Study (NCVS) which asked victims if they had used a gun in self-defense found that about 108,000 each year had done so. A big problem with the NCVS line of survey reasoning, however, is that it only includes those uses where a citizen kills a criminal, not when one is only wounded, is held by the intended victim until police arrive, or when brandishing a gun caused a criminal to flee.

the NCVS is not a way to understand self defense with guns.....

 

[2aguy]

I guess you don't know how to search the internet.
Enjoy this one
Less Guns Less Crime- Debunking the Self-Defense Myth Armed With Reason

One biased article vs. 19 different studies conducted over 40 years....two of the studies, one by the Clinton Justice dept. found guns were used 1.5 million times a year to stop vioolent criminal attack and save lives and the 2013 obama study, through the CDC that spent 10 million dollars studying the topic found defensive gun uses between 500,00 and 3 million times a year....two anti gun research sources in addition to 17 others......all dispute you Brain....

 

[ChrisL]

Here is the study
The Thinking Gunfighter Self Defense Findings

Only way it is wrong is if nra members are full of shit.

Or you are. I did a search for "230" with no hits. And it's a op-ed piece about incidents reported to the NRA, supposedly.

Look for justifiable homicide numbers. Are you really so dumb?

It wasn't on the page. Try again.

He is only counting perps who were shot and/or killed with a weapon in self defense. He is ignoring the fact that many, many more are NOT shot or killed, but that does not mean they were not deterred by the weapon. They most certainly were deterred from committing a crime.

Notice that brain dead cannot come up with an explanation for that and ignores that little piece of data completely.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

ALL of the data is referenced in the link. A lot of is from the Bureau of Justice Statistics. Now what?

Gun Facts Gun Control Guns and Crime Prevention

So what stat in there do you think is worldwide? You didn't answer my question.

Actually, I just did a little research and, shockingly, that IS in the US alone. How about that? Wow! That's a lot of law-abiding citizens using guns to defend themselves against attackers! Right?

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

There are approximately two million defensive gun uses (DGU's) per year by law abiding citizens. That was one of the findings in a national survey conducted by Gary Kleck, a Florida State University criminologist in 1993. Prior to Dr. Kleck's survey, thirteen other surveys indicated a range of between 800,000 to 2.5 million DGU's annually. However these surveys each had their flaws which prompted Dr. Kleck to conduct his own study specifically tailored to estimate the number of DGU's annually.

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.

There is one study, the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), which in 1993, estimated 108,000 DGU's annually. Why the huge discrepancy between this survey and fourteen others?

Yes it is all in the US. So you actually believe there are like 2 million defenses but only 230 criminals shot each year? You will believe anything.

Leftardicus Maximus,
Most self defense encounters don't involve shooting. The presence of a gun is enough to stop a criminal. I've seen it myself more than once.

That is funny. Do you ever read stories of defenses? There are quite a few that end with a dead criminal actually. A study had these findings:
Overall, shots were fired by the defender in 72% of incidents. The average and median number of shots fired was 2. When more than 2 shots were fired, it generally appeared that the defender's initial response was to fire until empty. It appears that revolver shooters are more likely to empty their guns than autoloader shooters. At least one assailant was killed in 34% of all incidents. At least one assailant was wounded in an additional 29% of all incidents. Of the incidents where shots are fired by a defender, at least one assailant is killed in 53% of those incidents.

This study was done based on the defense incidents on the NRA website. So again, you'd have to be an idiot to believe there are anywhere near 2 million defenses each year when only about 230 criminals are shot and killed.

Dumbass, you researched self defense shootings, not self defense incidents including a gun. I'm sure you can't finesse the difference, but the rest of us can.

 

[ChrisL]

Brain357


What on EARTH makes you think that any kind of limitations on rounds that the government might impose upon HONEST gun owners who do not use their guns to commit crimes will stop criminals from ignoring the laws?

What is YOUR definition of a criminal? My definition of a criminal is someone who disobeys the laws. We ALREADY have laws against robbery, rape and murder or ANY crime committed with or without a firearm, and if a crime IS committed with a firearm, then the perp faces much more severe punishment for the crime. I cannot, for the LIFE of me, understand how anyone can think that a limitation on ammunition or anything of that sort will stop people from killing one another or committing crimes.

 

[ChrisL]

Laws are good for punishing those who would break them and to make it clear that such acts are unacceptable in our society, but trying to make laws up to PREVENT criminals from breaking laws is useless! IT does not work because that is the definition of a criminal!

 

[Iceweasel]

I guess you don't know how to search the internet.
Enjoy this one
Less Guns Less Crime- Debunking the Self-Defense Myth Armed With Reason

LOL. You fucking retard. You made a claim about a report. I asked you to post it, you posted a link to an article that didn't have the numbers you cited and I called you on it so that means that I don't know how to search the internet? Oh, look, another link. How lazy and sloppy can a guy get? Post the portion of the article that makes your case. No one is believing you at this point, you're just slinging shit hoping something will eventually stick.

 

[Iceweasel]

He is only counting perps who were shot and/or killed with a weapon in self defense. He is ignoring the fact that many, many more are NOT shot or killed, but that does not mean they were not deterred by the weapon. They most certainly were deterred from committing a crime.

Notice that brain dead cannot come up with an explanation for that and ignores that little piece of data completely.

I think it falls under the category of trying to fit data into a belief instead of the other way around. Like a Moonie.

 

[Wry Catcher]

I feel sorry for the gun manufacturers

We need more threads to protect them

The Symbol of Freedom


Far more reliable that the scumbag bureaucrats who sit on the so-called supreme court

I suppose it set free all those children at Sandy Hook, all those students at Columbine and Virginia Tech, and all those slaughtered by the deranged in every other mass shootings in America.

The BIG LIE by the NRA and its supporters is the Slippery Slope Argument, a logical fallacy, that any attempt to mitigate unnecessary violence - some form of gun control - is really a pretense for total confiscation of guns.

Personally I don't care that people keep guns at home, but pushing the envelope to openly carrying firearms is too much. If someone is too scared to go out in public they need psychiatric care, meds and some balls.

 

[paulitician]

One more step in the march towards a complete gun grab. The Communists will exhaust all means to ban guns. In this case, they're using grieving parents and dead children to advance their agenda. It's always 'For the children.'

Hopefully this latest attack will fail. But that's why i always tell Pro-Constitution Americans to stay vigilant. Our Constitution is under all-out assault from the Communists. If you wanna keep your rights, you'll have to fight for em.

If you really believe what you post, there are psychiatrists who will listen to you and give you medicine so you will be less fearful, and maybe you'll be able to sleep at night without looking under your bed while holding onto the gun you hide under your pillow.

Communism is no longer a threat, it is the "God that Failed". Our nation does have two threats of concern, well, three if we count your kind: the first are the religious fundamentalists; the second are the Plutocrats; and finally it is those citizens who cling to an archaic Second Amendment Right and support the first two.

Spoken like a true Un-American Communist asshole. Thanks for that.

 

[RKMBrown]

I feel sorry for the gun manufacturers

We need more threads to protect them

The Symbol of Freedom


Far more reliable that the scumbag bureaucrats who sit on the so-called supreme court

I suppose it set free all those children at Sandy Hook, all those students at Columbine and Virginia Tech, and all those slaughtered by the deranged in every other mass shootings in America.

The BIG LIE by the NRA and its supporters is the Slippery Slope Argument, a logical fallacy, that any attempt to mitigate unnecessary violence - some form of gun control - is really a pretense for total confiscation of guns.

Personally I don't care that people keep guns at home, but pushing the envelope to openly carrying firearms is too much. If someone is too scared to go out in public they need psychiatric care, meds and some balls.

The problem with libs is nothing is enough. No amount of liberty is too big to give up for presumed security. Was it good enough to limit fully automatic weapons? No. Was it good enough to limit access to criminals? No. Was it good to create "gun" free zones where criminals come to slaughter people? No. Was it good to ban pocket knives on planes? No. Was it good to allow give up any of these liberties for small amounts of presumed security? No. Did any of these limits increase security for anyone? No.

In summary, progressives are epic morons when it comes to matters of liberty and security.

 

[Wry Catcher]

One more step in the march towards a complete gun grab. The Communists will exhaust all means to ban guns. In this case, they're using grieving parents and dead children to advance their agenda. It's always 'For the children.'

Hopefully this latest attack will fail. But that's why i always tell Pro-Constitution Americans to stay vigilant. Our Constitution is under all-out assault from the Communists. If you wanna keep your rights, you'll have to fight for em.

If you really believe what you post, there are psychiatrists who will listen to you and give you medicine so you will be less fearful, and maybe you'll be able to sleep at night without looking under your bed while holding onto the gun you hide under your pillow.

Communism is no longer a threat, it is the "God that Failed". Our nation does have two threats of concern, well, three if we count your kind: the first are the religious fundamentalists; the second are the Plutocrats; and finally it is those citizens who cling to an archaic Second Amendment Right and support the first two.

Spoken like a true Un-American Communist asshole. Thanks for that.

An angry and thoughtless response ^^^. Emotional responses such as this ^^^ are one reason I believe we need to vet and license anyone who wants to own, possess or have in his or her custody and control a gun.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

I feel sorry for the gun manufacturers

We need more threads to protect them

The Symbol of Freedom


Far more reliable that the scumbag bureaucrats who sit on the so-called supreme court

I suppose it set free all those children at Sandy Hook, all those students at Columbine and Virginia Tech, and all those slaughtered by the deranged in every other mass shootings in America.

The BIG LIE by the NRA and its supporters is the Slippery Slope Argument, a logical fallacy, that any attempt to mitigate unnecessary violence - some form of gun control - is really a pretense for total confiscation of guns.

Personally I don't care that people keep guns at home, but pushing the envelope to openly carrying firearms is too much. If someone is too scared to go out in public they need psychiatric care, meds and some balls.

All those shootings you cited happened in public. Your argument defeats itself

 

[paulitician]

One more step in the march towards a complete gun grab. The Communists will exhaust all means to ban guns. In this case, they're using grieving parents and dead children to advance their agenda. It's always 'For the children.'

Hopefully this latest attack will fail. But that's why i always tell Pro-Constitution Americans to stay vigilant. Our Constitution is under all-out assault from the Communists. If you wanna keep your rights, you'll have to fight for em.

If you really believe what you post, there are psychiatrists who will listen to you and give you medicine so you will be less fearful, and maybe you'll be able to sleep at night without looking under your bed while holding onto the gun you hide under your pillow.

Communism is no longer a threat, it is the "God that Failed". Our nation does have two threats of concern, well, three if we count your kind: the first are the religious fundamentalists; the second are the Plutocrats; and finally it is those citizens who cling to an archaic Second Amendment Right and support the first two.

Spoken like a true Un-American Communist asshole. Thanks for that.

An angry and thoughtless response ^^^. Emotional responses such as this ^^^ are one reason I believe we need to vet and license anyone who wants to own, possess or have in his or her custody and control a gun.

Nah, that's just you rationalizing and justifying being an Un-American Communist piece of shite. Please contract Ebola in your arsehole real soon. You going away will be the only good thing you'll ever do for this country. Capisce.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

You believe which stat is worldwide? Do you not understand that statistics you posted? Shocking. So I guess you are an idiot? You really believe there are 2.5million defenses and only 230 criminals get killed each year? That is funny.

ALL of the data is referenced in the link. A lot of is from the Bureau of Justice Statistics. Now what?

Gun Facts Gun Control Guns and Crime Prevention

So what stat in there do you think is worldwide? You didn't answer my question.

Actually, I just did a little research and, shockingly, that IS in the US alone. How about that? Wow! That's a lot of law-abiding citizens using guns to defend themselves against attackers! Right?

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

There are approximately two million defensive gun uses (DGU's) per year by law abiding citizens. That was one of the findings in a national survey conducted by Gary Kleck, a Florida State University criminologist in 1993. Prior to Dr. Kleck's survey, thirteen other surveys indicated a range of between 800,000 to 2.5 million DGU's annually. However these surveys each had their flaws which prompted Dr. Kleck to conduct his own study specifically tailored to estimate the number of DGU's annually.

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.

There is one study, the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), which in 1993, estimated 108,000 DGU's annually. Why the huge discrepancy between this survey and fourteen others?

Yes it is all in the US. So you actually believe there are like 2 million defenses but only 230 criminals shot each year? You will believe anything.

Leftardicus Maximus,
Most self defense encounters don't involve shooting. The presence of a gun is enough to stop a criminal. I've seen it myself more than once.

Such has been the case no less than three times in my life.

In my experience I've found that NOTHING brings reality crashing home faster than a 12Gg pump... shucked and shoved on one's face. I've seen the miracle of this method of deterrence and it is AMAZING how quickly ... and consistently, it can turn a bad situation into a fantastic story, which all parties live to tell.

The will to live is a remarkable incentive ... .

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

I feel sorry for the gun manufacturers

We need more threads to protect them

The Symbol of Freedom


Far more reliable that the scumbag bureaucrats who sit on the so-called supreme court

I suppose it set free all those children at Sandy Hook, all those students at Columbine and Virginia Tech, and all those slaughtered by the deranged in every other mass shootings in America.

The BIG LIE by the NRA and its supporters is the Slippery Slope Argument, a logical fallacy, that any attempt to mitigate unnecessary violence - some form of gun control - is really a pretense for total confiscation of guns.

Personally I don't care that people keep guns at home, but pushing the envelope to openly carrying firearms is too much. If someone is too scared to go out in public they need psychiatric care, meds and some balls.

All those shootings you cited happened in public. Your argument defeats itself

They do that, a LOT!

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

One more step in the march towards a complete gun grab. The Communists will exhaust all means to ban guns. In this case, they're using grieving parents and dead children to advance their agenda. It's always 'For the children.'

Hopefully this latest attack will fail. But that's why i always tell Pro-Constitution Americans to stay vigilant. Our Constitution is under all-out assault from the Communists. If you wanna keep your rights, you'll have to fight for em.

If you really believe what you post, there are psychiatrists who will listen to you and give you medicine so you will be less fearful, and maybe you'll be able to sleep at night without looking under your bed while holding onto the gun you hide under your pillow.

Communism is no longer a threat, it is the "God that Failed". Our nation does have two threats of concern, well, three if we count your kind: the first are the religious fundamentalists; the second are the Plutocrats; and finally it is those citizens who cling to an archaic Second Amendment Right and support the first two.

Spoken like a true Un-American Communist asshole. Thanks for that.

An angry and thoughtless response ^^^. Emotional responses such as this ^^^ are one reason I believe we need to vet and license anyone who wants to own, possess or have in his or her custody and control a gun.

The founders who ratified the Constitution thought people like you should be shot or hung or sent back to Merry Ol' England. Paulitician has the precise mindset of the authors of the Bill of Rights. It's statists like you that are out of sync with the American cause.