All gun stats in one place

[Captain Caveman]

Here's a useful site -

Gun resources

It's useful because when it states some gun/incident fact, most have the link to the study on that fact. This avoids dissing the source or not providing evidence on your opinion.

So for example -

In a robbery or an assault, studies show people without a gun are just as likely to escape harm as people who are carrying one.

In the link in that claim, you can click to the PDF to its evidence/studies. Then you can read the facts -

We could not find a basic, thorough, descriptive epidemiologic analysis of self-defense gun use using NCVS data—describing who uses guns, where and in what circumstances. Among relevant studies (Tark and Kleck, 2004; McDowall and Wiersema, 1994), the study (Hart and Miethe, 2009) that comes closest to that target analyzes the data in a manner that is not particularly helpful for policy or individual decision-making. That study by Hart and Miethe divides crime situations into 48 categories, as determined by five variables as follows: (a) sexual assault, non-sexual assault, or robbery; (b) offender armed or not; (c) daytime or not; (d) private or public location; and (e) offender on drugs/alcohol or not. These situations are then ranked by the likelihood that a firearm is used in self-defense. Not surprisingly, very low incident categories have both the highest rates and the lowest rates of self-defense gun use. For example, the highest incident rate of self-defense gun use—17% of the time (1/6)—occurred in sexual assaults, when the offender was armed, in a private location, during the day, when the offender was high on drugs/alcohol; the lowest rate—0% of the time (0/7)—occurred for robberies in a private location at night when the offender was armed and high on drugs/alcohol.

So "crime" was broken down into 48 categories, as opposed to just crime. So now if anyone wants to make a claim or lay opinion, you can check beforehand.

I can see this being a valuable resource !!!!!

 

[Blues Man]

Suicide is not gun violence therefore the premise of this site is bullshit

If you are assaulted by definition you were harmed.

Do you really think people who are raped and not killed were not harmed?

 

[Captain Caveman]

Suicide is not gun violence therefore the premise of this site is bullshit

If you are assaulted by definition you were harmed.

Do you really think people who are raped and not killed were not harmed?

Look in the link, the studies will answer all of your questions. If you need help to click on anything, let me know and I'll get one of my Jack Russell puppies to do it for you.

 

[Blues Man]

Look in the link, the studies will answer all of your questions. If you need help to click on anything, let me know and I'll get one of my Jack Russell puppies to do it for you.

I've seen all that info before.

if you have been assaulted by definition you were harmed so you cannot say that a person is just as likely not to be harmed in an assault if they don't have a gun.

The people on the anti gun site also describe suicide as gun violence and suicide is not gun violence.

And of course we can't ever really know how many times people have stopped a themselves from being the victim of a crime with a gun because if the crime never happened then there is no report of a crime and that never ends up in any statistics does it?

 

[Captain Caveman]

I've seen all that info before.

if you have been assaulted by definition you were harmed so you cannot say that a person is just as likely not to be harmed in an assault if they don't have a gun.

The people on the anti gun site also describe suicide as gun violence and suicide is not gun violence.

And of course we can't ever really know how many times people have stopped a themselves from being the victim of a crime with a gun because if the crime never happened then there is no report of a crime and that never ends up in any statistics does it?

Please refer to the link and then the studies.

Even read the op on assaults

 

[1srelluc]

Yeah, useful if you are left-leaning tool.....Just read about their leftist founder.

Nina Vinik - Project Unloaded

Nina founded Project Unloaded to take on this myth directly and bring the facts about using guns to young people.

projectunloaded.org

 

[Captain Caveman]

Yeah, useful if you are left-leaning tool.....Just read about their leftist founder.

Nina Vinik - Project Unloaded

Nina founded Project Unloaded to take on this myth directly and bring the facts about using guns to young people.

projectunloaded.org

I'm UK centre right, but with being British, we tend to go by facts. So for example if a study concluded 89% of American gun owners wore yellow underpants, then that means 89% wear yellow underpants. Where you guys just go off galloping down diarrhoea drive with opinions and bullshit, and after all that shite, 89% still wore yellow underpants.

Opinion means Jack.

Warning - Yellow underpants was used as a tongue in cheek analogy, it's not real, it was made up, FFS

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

Here's a useful site -

Gun resources

It's useful because when it states some gun/incident fact, most have the link to the study on that fact. This avoids dissing the source or not providing evidence on your opinion.

So for example -

In a robbery or an assault, studies show people without a gun are just as likely to escape harm as people who are carrying one.

In the link in that claim, you can click to the PDF to its evidence/studies. Then you can read the facts -

We could not find a basic, thorough, descriptive epidemiologic analysis of self-defense gun use using NCVS data—describing who uses guns, where and in what circumstances. Among relevant studies (Tark and Kleck, 2004; McDowall and Wiersema, 1994), the study (Hart and Miethe, 2009) that comes closest to that target analyzes the data in a manner that is not particularly helpful for policy or individual decision-making. That study by Hart and Miethe divides crime situations into 48 categories, as determined by five variables as follows: (a) sexual assault, non-sexual assault, or robbery; (b) offender armed or not; (c) daytime or not; (d) private or public location; and (e) offender on drugs/alcohol or not. These situations are then ranked by the likelihood that a firearm is used in self-defense. Not surprisingly, very low incident categories have both the highest rates and the lowest rates of self-defense gun use. For example, the highest incident rate of self-defense gun use—17% of the time (1/6)—occurred in sexual assaults, when the offender was armed, in a private location, during the day, when the offender was high on drugs/alcohol; the lowest rate—0% of the time (0/7)—occurred for robberies in a private location at night when the offender was armed and high on drugs/alcohol.

So "crime" was broken down into 48 categories, as opposed to just crime. So now if anyone wants to make a claim or lay opinion, you can check beforehand.

I can see this being a valuable resource !!!!!

Since i have been carrying, i have never been assaulted. I prove that a good guy with a gun, stops bad buys with a gun.

 

[Captain Caveman]

Since i have been carrying, i have never been assaulted. I prove that a good guy with a gun, stops bad buys with a gun.

What info is there in the link about carrying? What does it say about good guys too?

 

[Auld Phart]

Here's a useful site -

Gun resources

It's useful because when it states some gun/incident fact, most have the link to the study on that fact. This avoids dissing the source or not providing evidence on your opinion.

So for example -

In a robbery or an assault, studies show people without a gun are just as likely to escape harm as people who are carrying one.

In the link in that claim, you can click to the PDF to its evidence/studies. Then you can read the facts -

We could not find a basic, thorough, descriptive epidemiologic analysis of self-defense gun use using NCVS data—describing who uses guns, where and in what circumstances. Among relevant studies (Tark and Kleck, 2004; McDowall and Wiersema, 1994), the study (Hart and Miethe, 2009) that comes closest to that target analyzes the data in a manner that is not particularly helpful for policy or individual decision-making. That study by Hart and Miethe divides crime situations into 48 categories, as determined by five variables as follows: (a) sexual assault, non-sexual assault, or robbery; (b) offender armed or not; (c) daytime or not; (d) private or public location; and (e) offender on drugs/alcohol or not. These situations are then ranked by the likelihood that a firearm is used in self-defense. Not surprisingly, very low incident categories have both the highest rates and the lowest rates of self-defense gun use. For example, the highest incident rate of self-defense gun use—17% of the time (1/6)—occurred in sexual assaults, when the offender was armed, in a private location, during the day, when the offender was high on drugs/alcohol; the lowest rate—0% of the time (0/7)—occurred for robberies in a private location at night when the offender was armed and high on drugs/alcohol.

So "crime" was broken down into 48 categories, as opposed to just crime. So now if anyone wants to make a claim or lay opinion, you can check beforehand.

I can see this being a valuable resource !!!!!

project unloaded?

sounds biased to me.

 

[1srelluc]

I'm UK centre right, but with being British, we tend to go by facts. So for example if a study concluded 89% of American gun owners wore yellow underpants, then that means 89% wear yellow underpants. Where you guys just go off galloping down diarrhoea drive with opinions and bullshit, and after all that shite, 89% still wore yellow underpants.

Opinion means Jack.

Warning - Yellow underpants was used as a tongue in cheek analogy, it's not real, it was made up, FFS

 

[Captain Caveman]

Ok guys, the link is there, judging by the posts, not one has had the brains to use it. So I'll check back in tomorrow on this thread to see if anyone can take it further with useful posts.

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

What info is there in the link about carrying? What does it say about good guys too?

Dont need a link, as i am living proof that carrying concealed, i have never been assaulted. Personal experience there bud. Now get on your knees and suck Charles dick.

 

[Blues Man]

I'm UK centre right, but with being British, we tend to go by facts. So for example if a study concluded 89% of American gun owners wore yellow underpants, then that means 89% wear yellow underpants. Where you guys just go off galloping down diarrhoea drive with opinions and bullshit, and after all that shite, 89% still wore yellow underpants.

Opinion means Jack.

Warning - Yellow underpants was used as a tongue in cheek analogy, it's not real, it was made up, FFS

Which means you are a left leaning ultra authoritarian in comparison to a US citizen who is center right.

You have not addressed the fact that crimes prevented by a would be victim never are reported as crimes and therefore cannot be represented in the statistics you are basing your conclusions upon.

 

[1srelluc]

Ok guys, the link is there, judging by the posts, not one has had the brains to use it. So I'll check back in tomorrow on this thread to see if anyone can take it further with useful posts.

I read your link then decided to dig a bit deeper.....True to form they told us all about themselves, as leftists always do........Pure leftist fueled tripe......Now, bugger-off.

 

[mudwhistle]

Please refer to the link and then the studies.

Even read the op on assaults

Yes.....mindlessly follow the recommendations of the communists that compiled all of these statistics.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Here's a useful site -

Gun resources

It's useful because when it states some gun/incident fact, most have the link to the study on that fact. This avoids dissing the source or not providing evidence on your opinion.

So for example -

In a robbery or an assault, studies show people without a gun are just as likely to escape harm as people who are carrying one.

In the link in that claim, you can click to the PDF to its evidence/studies. Then you can read the facts -

We could not find a basic, thorough, descriptive epidemiologic analysis of self-defense gun use using NCVS data—describing who uses guns, where and in what circumstances. Among relevant studies (Tark and Kleck, 2004; McDowall and Wiersema, 1994), the study (Hart and Miethe, 2009) that comes closest to that target analyzes the data in a manner that is not particularly helpful for policy or individual decision-making. That study by Hart and Miethe divides crime situations into 48 categories, as determined by five variables as follows: (a) sexual assault, non-sexual assault, or robbery; (b) offender armed or not; (c) daytime or not; (d) private or public location; and (e) offender on drugs/alcohol or not. These situations are then ranked by the likelihood that a firearm is used in self-defense. Not surprisingly, very low incident categories have both the highest rates and the lowest rates of self-defense gun use. For example, the highest incident rate of self-defense gun use—17% of the time (1/6)—occurred in sexual assaults, when the offender was armed, in a private location, during the day, when the offender was high on drugs/alcohol; the lowest rate—0% of the time (0/7)—occurred for robberies in a private location at night when the offender was armed and high on drugs/alcohol.

So "crime" was broken down into 48 categories, as opposed to just crime. So now if anyone wants to make a claim or lay opinion, you can check beforehand.

I can see this being a valuable resource !!!!!

This is not facts it's Anti gun propaganda

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Yes.....mindlessly follow the recommendations of the communists that compiled all of these statistics.

We have a leftist anti rights fascist epidemic

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Look in the link, the studies will answer all of your questions. If you need help to click on anything, let me know and I'll get one of my Jack Russell puppies to do it for you.

Suicided is not a violent gun death
Gang bangers killing other gangbangers is not a mass shooting.
18-20 year olds are not children

 

[mudwhistle]

Suicided is not a violent gun death
Gang bangers killing other gangbangers is not a mass shooting.
18-20 year olds are not children

Democrats, no matter what age, are still children.