CDZ Defensive gun uses.

[2aguy]

Gunfight or Flee: New Study Finds No Advantages to Using a Firearm in Self-Defense Situations
The research provides the latest evidence debunking the myth of defensive gun use.
BY EVAN DEFILIPPIS AND DEVIN HUGHES

·July 14, 2015

As I thought....everything leads back to hemenway......these guys are his lackeys......and they used the NCVS again......the one study of all the studies that doesn't actually ask anyone about defensive gun use....that doesn't even have the word "gun" in it...and yet this is the study the anti gunners keep going back to......

 

[2aguy]

And here it is...

Gunfight or Flee: New Study Finds No Advantages to Using a Firearm in Self-Defense Situations - Democratic Underground

A recent study published in The Journal of Preventive Medicine offers new support for the argument that owning a gun does not make you safer. The study, led by David Hemenway, Ph.D., of the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, examines data from the National Crime Victimization Survey

And this is again what the National Crime Victimization Survey is all about....


The Daily Kos on why the NCVS is wrong...


Defensive Gun Use Part III - The National Crime Victimization Study

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.

 

[2aguy]

Gunfight or Flee: New Study Finds No Advantages to Using a Firearm in Self-Defense Situations
The research provides the latest evidence debunking the myth of defensive gun use.
BY EVAN DEFILIPPIS AND DEVIN HUGHES

·July 14, 2015

Hey moron....you have to give an actual link.......I tried to find this study..thinking it was by those other two idiots deflip and hughes.....and it isn't...that is an article they wrote about the study....the actual study is by hemenway.....and he as I showed in the last couple of posts...he is still at his old trick of using the only study that isn't a defensive gun use study, to show defensive gun use is low.....versus all the actual self defense gun studies I have linked to that say the exact opposite.....

here they are again...all of these....versus his.....and the one he uses...is not a defensive gun use study...doens't even have the word "gun" in it......

Wilbur....the anti gunners are lying to you......do not trust them.....nothing they say is supported by research or facts.......

I just averaged the studies......which were conducted by different researchers, from both private and public researchers, over a period of 40 years looking specifically at guns and self defense....the name of the researcher is first, then the year then the number of times they determined guns were used for self defense......notice how many of them there are and how many of them were done by gun grabbers like the clinton Justice Dept. and the obama CDC

And these aren't all of the studies either...there are more...and they support the ones below.....

A quick guide to the studies and the numbers.....the full lay out of what was studied by each study is in the links....
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 ( no cops, military)

DMIa 1978...2,141,512 ( no cops, military)

L.A. TIMES...1994...3,609,68 ( no cops, military)

Kleck......1994...2.5 million ( no cops, military)

Obama's CDC....2013....500,000--3million

--------------------


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

DMIb...1978...1,098,409 ( no cops, military)

Hart...1981...1.797,461 ( no cops, military)

Mauser...1990...1,487,342 ( no cops, military)

Gallup...1993...1,621,377 ( no cops, military)

DEPT. OF JUSTICE...1994...1.5 million ( the bill clinton study)

Journal of Quantitative Criminology--- 989,883 times per year."

(Based on survey data from a 2000 study published in the Journal of Quantitative Criminology,[17] U.S. civilians use guns to defend themselves and others from crime at least 989,883 times per year.[18])

Paper: "Measuring Civilian Defensive Firearm Use: A Methodological Experiment." By David McDowall and others. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, March 2000. Measuring Civilian Defensive Firearm Use: A Methodological Experiment - Springer


-------------------------------------------

Ohio...1982...771,043

Gallup...1991...777,152

Tarrance... 1994... 764,036 (no cops, military)

Lawerence Southwich Jr. 400,000 fewer violent crimes and at least 800,000 violent crimes deterred..

*****************************************
If you take the studies from that Kleck cites in his paper, 16 of them....and you only average the ones that exclude military and police shootings..the average becomes 2 million...I use those studies because I have the details on them...and they are still 10 studies (including Kleck's)....

 

[2aguy]

Gunfight or Flee: New Study Finds No Advantages to Using a Firearm in Self-Defense Situations
The research provides the latest evidence debunking the myth of defensive gun use.
BY EVAN DEFILIPPIS AND DEVIN HUGHES

·July 14, 2015

Here is a look at real research........

Guns Effective Defense Against Rape

A woman using a gun is less likely to be raped and more likely to not be injured during the attack....

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.

 

[320 Years of History]

How many people in the U.S. legally own guns?

 

[2aguy]

How many people in the U.S. legally own guns?

They say about 90 million gun owners with about 357,000,000 guns.

 

[320 Years of History]

How many people in the U.S. legally own guns?

They say about 90 million gun owners with about 357,000,000 guns.

Thank you for your reply. Very well, let's go with that and consider some implications of it with regard to DGU.

I am going to try to engage in an objective and comprehensive discussion of the matter of DGU. Objective because that's important for everyone and comprehensive because the matter isn't as simple as the remarks thus far have presented it. The approach I'll use, which I will have to break into multiple posts because I just don't have the time to do it all (read the studies, take notes from them, document my thoughts, aggregate my thoughts into a coherent discussion that presents a conclusion of some sort -- I don't know what I'll conclude because I haven't finished reading all the stuff noted below; I've only considered their methodologies) at once and in one post, is as follows:

• First Post: Identify the basic information that forms the totality of what I'll consider. That's what the main part of this post will do. If you or others have credible studies to suggest, fine, I'm interested in learning of them. I'm only interested in and will only consider writings/studies that have been published in highly regarded peer reviewed journals. I'm not interested in editorials or interest group advocacy studies.
• Second Post: Discuss what I found in the various studies I read.

Some basics

Note: I haven't found free weblinks for all the studies I'm reading. Some because I haven't yet looked; others because I've looked and not found them. Apologies for the "membership protected" links; those are the studies for which I sought free access, but didn't find any. The only way I know to obtain the papers for free is to get them via a public or college library. And no, I'm not going to upload to USMB non-free content obtained from sites to which I or my firm have paid to access because I don't care to contribute to the piracy of content to which someone has rights to collect a fee for its distribution or access.

With that said, let's look at what are the facts and core bodies of DGU research that will lead to thoughtful and objective analysis of the question of whether DGU is a factor that rightly has a role in the discussion of gun control and gun rights:​

• Legal gun owners in the U.S: ~90M
• Population of the U.S: ~318M
• Households in the U.S: ~116M
• Percentage of adults in the U.S. population: 70% --> 318M x 70% = 222.6M
• Gun rights estimate of DGUs per year: ~2.5M (I tend to believe ~1.5M is more likely the upper limit, but I'll go with 2.5M for now.)
• Gun control advocates' estimate of DGUs per year: ~300K (I tend to believe the more likely lower limit is ~200K, but I'll go with 300K for now.)
• The specifics of what constitutes a DGU seems itself to be a definitional point of disagreement among individuals on both sides of the matter.
  • Some may think that any gun use that results in a would be victim being less harmed, or less property loss, than may have been absolutely possible constitutes a defensive use. Absent clear evidence that such constitutes the actual circumstances of an event, this interpretation suffers from the "hypothesis contrary to fact" fallacy and studies that assume this definition necessarily suffer from self-preservation bias unless they control for it. (Whether they do is apparent from the study's documented methodology -- either indirectly using statistical or other post-survey techniques or directly by conducting more in depth interviews of respondents to specifically assess respondent's objectivity and clarity in this regard.).
  • On the other hand, others may contend that a DGU is one in which a would be victim thwarts all personal harm and property loss. This approach suffers from ignoring the situations in which more severe harm/loss to the victim/property was not only plausible but also quite (66%+) probable. Neither is a particularly insightful way to consider what a DGU is; both takes are gross oversimplifications.
• Sources of DGU research and analysis: There are, AFAIK, three bodies of direct inquiry into the matter of defensive gun use. The content and/or methodology generated or used by each is flawed such that none of them is likely a reliable estimate. (Apologies for the "membership protected" links; the only way I know to obtain the papers for free is to get them via a public or college library.)
  
  [Note: Only material or potentially material flaws are noted. Minor flaws may also exist, but as they don't alter the validity of overall conclusions, I don't care about them re: this discussion; I don't care to drive the discussion to the level of puerile pedantry. One knows some flaws exist because the researchers don't note how they controlled for them (something a researcher would do if they did control for it -- researchers take credit for what they do, no matter how great or small) and an objective observer can see the flaws are potentially material. Others exist because there's a clear and objective methodological failing, such as using an inappropriate or overly simplistic statistical analysis method. (Remember, the figures provided in all DGU studies are estimates, so statistical modeling and analysis are unavoidable.)]
  • Group I: I am aware of three primary sources of analysis regarding the DGU, each of which uses police administrative data and vital statistics data to estimate the quantity of legally acceptable/justifiable DGU where the perpetrator was injured.
    • Kellermann and Reay, 1986: "Protection or Peril? An Analysis of Firearm Related Deaths in the Home"
      • Criticisms specific to this paper:
        • Acquaintances are listed as homicides, while the category includes abusive husbands, neighborhood gangs, and rival drug dealers.
        • There is no attempt to control for risk behavior among gun-owners. Households with residents with criminal or negligent histories are grouped with households lacking such histories, and the latter are smeared by the formers misdeeds.
        • The vast majority of deaths are suicides, and no attempt is made to account for possible substitution of other methods.
          
        • The most blatant problem with the statistic is that the 43:1 ratio given as of suicides, criminal homicides, and accidental deaths to homicides for self-protection, ignores the fact that using a handgun to prevent a crime is NOT equivalent to killing an intruder. Successful defenses with weapons do not involve firing (the threat alone is sufficient).
    • Kleck, 1988: "Crime Control Through the Private Use of Armed Force" (free access at the link)
    • Kellermann et al, 1995: "Weapon Involvement in Home Invasion Crimes"
      • Specific criticisms of this study:
        • The majority (51%) of his cases were burglaries, crimes of stealth in which
          confrontation is avoided by the criminal.
        • Successful protective uses of guns are not expected to end up in emergency
          rooms, police departments, or newspapers, but Kellermann's study included
          only 198 of the minority of Atlanta's home invasion/burglary crimes in which a police report was filed.
        • Kellermann's cases excluded multi-family dwellings, the type of
          housing in which most of Atlanta's population resides. In so doing, he
          excluded the "projects" and apartment buildings in the poorer areas where
          crime is more rampant. Were the study conducted in a locale where most people don't live in multi-family buildings, such an approach (methodology) would be appropriate. Kellermann applied a suburban, single-family household sampling model to a city population and then extrapolated the results to the nation as a whole.
        • His study excluded domestic abuse, sexual assault, and commercial armed robbery. In other words, Kellermann excluded among what are the most important crimes inviting protective uses of guns.
        • He focused on a small sample skewed toward the failures of protection, those crimes that necessitated a police report.
    • Group Level Flaw: Overly selective --> The estimates provided derive from extrapolations based upon too narrow a subset of the population.
  • Group II: Studies based in part or entirely upon the Bureau of Justice Statistics' NCVS, which is a survey of crime victims whereby the victims are asked to identify any DGU they may have taken.
    • Kleck, 1988: "Crime Control through the Private Use of Armed Force" (free)
    • Cook, 1991
    • Cook and Wiersema, 1994
    • Cook, Ludwig and Hemenway, 1997
      
    • Group level flaw: Understatement --> Respondents are not asked directly if they have used a gun in self-defense, but rather offered the opportunity to self-report whether they did. If they don't volunteer the info, the info is not captured.
  • Group III: One-time telephone surveys that directly ask whether the respondent has used a gun in self-defense.
    • Kleck, 1988: "Crime Control through the Private Use of Armed Force" (free)
    • Kleck and Gertz, 1995: "Armed Resistance to Crime: The Prevalence and Nature of Self-Defense with a Gun" (free)
    • Cook and Ludwig, 1996, 1997, & 1998: "Guns in America: Results of a Comprehensive National Survey on Firearms Ownership and Use" (free)
      
    • Group level Flaws:
      • "Telescoping" -- Respondents reporting events that are outside the study's temporal boundaries.
      • Self-preservation bias
      • Measurement errors

 

[M14 Shooter]

According to the rabidly hoplophobic VPC, people use a firearm for self-defense 183 times per day.
This is twice as often as the total number of suicides, murders, and fatal accidents involving guns.