All gun stats in one place

[2aguy]

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 !!!!!

Went to the link and the first page is the lie the anti-gunners always use....."gun deaths".....where they mix gun suicides with gun murder to lie to uninformed people...

Of course Capt. Caveman would use a link that lies on the first page.

 

[2aguy]

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 !!!!!

And theylie about suicides at the start as well....

Japan, South Korea and China have extreme gun control and higher suicide rates than the U.S. A large number of European countries also have higher suicide rates than we do....as does Canada

So...this site posted by Capt. Caveman has lied on two subjects right from the top.....

Anti-gun extremists lie about every aspect of the gun debate because the facts, truth and reality show that eveything they feel about guns is wrong...

 

[2aguy]

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 !!!!!

The second link in his post goes to an analyisis based of off the National Crime Victimization Survey...a study that doesnt directly ask any questions about gun self defense, but Capt. Caveman thinks it is definitive on the subject of fun self defense.

 

[2aguy]

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 !!!!!

Your second link takes us to the research based on the National Crime victimization Survey........

Here...the Daily Koz on the NCVS .....

The disadvantages of this study design are:





1) the study is not specifically designed to measure DGUs;





2) the study does not track every type of crime;



3) the study does not ask every interviewee about episodes of DGU;



4) interviewees are not specifically asked about defending themselves with a gun;



5) follow-up studies have demonstrated that the incidence of assault (and especially assaults by relatives and non-strangers) in the NCVS is under-reported, and if crime is under-reported then so too will DGUs be under-reported;





6) respondents’ anonymity is not preserved, and some interviewees may therefore feel wary or unwilling to discuss gun use with federal government employees.



Defensive Gun Use (Part III) - The National Crime Victimization Study

 

[2aguy]

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 !!!!!

And on the use of guns and harm to the victim.....

Guns Effective Defense Against Rape


However, most recent studies with improved methodology are consistently showing that the more forceful the resistance, the lower the risk of a completed rape, with no increase in physical injury. Sarah Ullman's original research (Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 1998) and critical review of past studies (Criminal Justice and Behavior, 1997) are especially valuable in solidifying this conclusion.

I wish to single out one particular subtype of physical resistance: Use of a weapon, and especially a firearm, is statistically a woman's best means of resistance, greatly enhancing her odds of escaping both rape and injury, compared to any other strategy of physical or verbal resistance. This conclusion is drawn from four types of information.

First, a 1989 study (Furby, Journal of Interpersonal Violence) found that both male and female survey respondents judged a gun to be the most effective means that a potential rape victim could use to fend off the assault. Rape "experts" considered it a close second, after eye-gouging.

Second, raw data from the 1979-1985 installments of the Justice Department's annual National Crime Victim Survey show that when a woman resists a stranger rape with a gun, the probability of completion was 0.1 percent and of victim injury 0.0 percent, compared to 31 percent and 40 percent, respectively, for all stranger rapes (Kleck, Social Problems, 1990).

Third, a recent paper (Southwick, Journal of Criminal Justice, 2000) analyzed victim resistance to violent crimes generally, with robbery, aggravated assault and rape considered together. Women who resisted with a gun were 2.5 times more likely to escape without injury than those who did not resist and 4 times more likely to escape uninjured than those who resisted with any means other than a gun. Similarly, their property losses in a robbery were reduced more than six-fold and almost three-fold, respectively, compared to the other categories of resistance strategy.

Fourth, we have two studies in the last 20 years that directly address the outcomes of women who resist attempted rape with a weapon. (Lizotte, Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 1986; Kleck, Social Problems, 1990.) The former concludes,"Further, women who resist rape with a gun or knife dramatically decrease their probability of completion." (Lizotte did not analyze victim injuries apart from the rape itself.) The latter concludes that "resistance with a gun or knife is the most effective form of resistance for preventing completion of a rape"; this is accomplished "without creating any significant additional risk of other injury."

The best conclusion from available scientific data, then, is when avoidance of rape has failed and one must choose between being raped and resisting, a woman's best option is to resist with a gun in her hands.

 

[Captain Caveman]

18-20 year olds are not children

So you ban adults from buying alcohol until they're 21

 

[bigrebnc1775]

So you ban adults from buying alcohol until they're 21

Drinking ain't a right. Not my choice though

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

So you ban adults from buying alcohol until they're 21

Yet we send kids of 18 years old into wars, that allows them to use guns, some even fully automatic and bigger.

 

[Woodznutz]

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 !!!!!

It's a valuable resource if you:

Are an anti-gun person.
Don't want the important information.
Want the confusion about guns to continue.
Are employed in the criminal justice system.
Don't really care about the issue.

 

[Woodznutz]

Drinking ain't a right. Not my choice though

Drinking is a choice.

 

[westwall]

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.

The studies are shit. They used bogus metrics, thus the "study" is invalid.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Drinking is a choice.

Not my choice when it comes to drinking laws
Consuming alcohol is not a right.

 

[fncceo]

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 !!!!!

You come from a population that was disarmed and pacified. Why are you so keen to see it done to others?

Slavery loves company?

 

[fncceo]

The very first battle of The Revolutionary War was started by The British attempting to seized the gunpowder stores (and effectively disarming) The American Colonists.

Every would be oppressor knows that the first step to seizing power is to disarm the people.

 

[Captain Caveman]

It's a valuable resource if you:

Are an anti-gun person.
Don't want the important information.
Want the confusion about guns to continue.
Are employed in the criminal justice system.
Don't really care about the issue.

Well, the thing is Bob, I'm not anti-gun, I'm anti-others having the mentality that they can shoot others, and I'm anti-the-wrong people just willy nilly allowed a gun because an outdated bit of paper gives any idiot a gun, and I'm anti-gun-safety where said idiots think it's sensible to leave loaded guns lying around the house and to take them in public places.

I also prefer stats, as in, what actually happened out there as opposed to what gun nuts want others to believe with their idiotic opinions.

So there's no confusion from me about guns because unlike yourself, I'm from a much much much safer gun culture, the UK. Where the confusion about guns starts, is with you guys honestly believing you're the safe good guys, and you also have no clue about guns outside of your borders. Hence the cliché rhetoric you all keep belching.

 

[Woodznutz]

Not my choice when it comes to drinking laws
Consuming alcohol is not a right.

If it's legal it's a right.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

If it's legal it's a right.

Not really driving isn't a right either

 

[Woodznutz]

Well, the thing is Bob, I'm not anti-gun, I'm anti-others having the mentality that they can shoot others, and I'm anti-the-wrong people just willy nilly allowed a gun because an outdated bit of paper gives any idiot a gun, and I'm anti-gun-safety where said idiots think it's sensible to leave loaded guns lying around the house and to take them in public places.

I also prefer stats, as in, what actually happened out there as opposed to what gun nuts want others to believe with their idiotic opinions.

So there's no confusion from me about guns because unlike yourself, I'm from a much much much safer gun culture, the UK. Where the confusion about guns starts, is with you guys honestly believing you're the safe good guys, and you also have no clue about guns outside of your borders. Hence the cliché rhetoric you all keep belching.

British apples, American oranges.

You don't get data from statistics.

 

[Woodznutz]

Not really driving isn't a right either

You don't need a license to drink. Driving is called a privilege but it's actually a right.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

You don't need a license to drink.

Just be ause something is legal doesn't mean it's a right.