French gun control...yeah...not so much...

[Brain357]

Blog Who gets shot in Chicago

Sooooo...Chicago had an estimated population of 2,718,782....in 2013.....and from this study....

About 70 percent of the killings occurred in what Papachristos found was a social network of only about 1,600 people — out of a population of about 80,000 in those neighborhoods.
So 1600 people out of 2,718,782 commit 70% of all gun crime........in one small area of this city.....let alone who knows about the other gang infested tiny areas......

And the irrational, anti gunners think that guns are the problem.......who are the real nuts....?

A, a BLOG on the American Thinker.

Okay, it wasn't like I had any expectation you'd produce a real, peer-reviewed study of the issue.

Again....from the link at the American Thinker to the CHICAGO SUN TIMES article on the Yale university study.....dipstick....

New study shows likelihood of being shot in Chicago Chicago


Papachristos — an associate professor of sociology at Yale and a former Chicagoan with an expertise in gangs — said his study found that exposure to gunshot victims also increases one’s odds of becoming a shooting victim.

And as was previously known, race was a key risk factor in getting shot, the study noted. For every 100,000 people, an average of one white person, 28 Hispanics and 113 blacks became victims of nonfatal shootings every year in Chicago over the six-year study period.

But Papachristos and his team sought to go beyond a racial explanation for nonfatal shootings. They were trying to explain why a specific young African-American male in a high-crime neighborhood becomes a shooting victim, while another young black man in the same neighborhood doesn’t, the study said.

Such social network analysis allows the manpower-strapped Chicago Police Department to “discern who’s at risk rather than casting the net really wide,” he said.

The latest Yale University study was built on Papachristos’ previous social-network research into murders on the West Side. He had studied killings between 2005 and 2010 in West Garfield Park and North Lawndale. About 70 percent of the killings occurred in what Papachristos found was a social network of only about 1,600 people — out of a population of about 80,000 in those neighborhoods. Inside that social network, the risk of being killed was 30 out of 1,000. For the others in those neighborhoods, the risk of getting murdered was less than one in 1,000.

Papachristos said his team has been doing similar social network research in Boston; Cincinnati; Newark; New Haven, Conn.; East Palo Alto, Calif.; Stockton, Calif.; and other cities.

“You are also seeing a clustering of victims in small networks there,” he said. “We’re seeing a pattern.”

If you want to stop gun murders...as oppose to all the other murders.......which you guys don't seem to mind so much....then deal with inner city gangs......not "Joe and Jane" from the suburbs......


Sooooo....out of a population in Chicago of 2,718, 782 you have 1,600 people committing 70% of all the murders............stop them.....not me and other law abiding gun owners.......

Sounds like if you are white and not involved in criminal activity you are really safe.

 

[2aguy]

Blog Who gets shot in Chicago

Sooooo...Chicago had an estimated population of 2,718,782....in 2013.....and from this study....

About 70 percent of the killings occurred in what Papachristos found was a social network of only about 1,600 people — out of a population of about 80,000 in those neighborhoods.
So 1600 people out of 2,718,782 commit 70% of all gun crime........in one small area of this city.....let alone who knows about the other gang infested tiny areas......

And the irrational, anti gunners think that guns are the problem.......who are the real nuts....?

A, a BLOG on the American Thinker.

Okay, it wasn't like I had any expectation you'd produce a real, peer-reviewed study of the issue.

Again....from the link at the American Thinker to the CHICAGO SUN TIMES article on the Yale university study.....dipstick....

New study shows likelihood of being shot in Chicago Chicago


Papachristos — an associate professor of sociology at Yale and a former Chicagoan with an expertise in gangs — said his study found that exposure to gunshot victims also increases one’s odds of becoming a shooting victim.

And as was previously known, race was a key risk factor in getting shot, the study noted. For every 100,000 people, an average of one white person, 28 Hispanics and 113 blacks became victims of nonfatal shootings every year in Chicago over the six-year study period.

But Papachristos and his team sought to go beyond a racial explanation for nonfatal shootings. They were trying to explain why a specific young African-American male in a high-crime neighborhood becomes a shooting victim, while another young black man in the same neighborhood doesn’t, the study said.

Such social network analysis allows the manpower-strapped Chicago Police Department to “discern who’s at risk rather than casting the net really wide,” he said.

The latest Yale University study was built on Papachristos’ previous social-network research into murders on the West Side. He had studied killings between 2005 and 2010 in West Garfield Park and North Lawndale. About 70 percent of the killings occurred in what Papachristos found was a social network of only about 1,600 people — out of a population of about 80,000 in those neighborhoods. Inside that social network, the risk of being killed was 30 out of 1,000. For the others in those neighborhoods, the risk of getting murdered was less than one in 1,000.

Papachristos said his team has been doing similar social network research in Boston; Cincinnati; Newark; New Haven, Conn.; East Palo Alto, Calif.; Stockton, Calif.; and other cities.

“You are also seeing a clustering of victims in small networks there,” he said. “We’re seeing a pattern.”

If you want to stop gun murders...as oppose to all the other murders.......which you guys don't seem to mind so much....then deal with inner city gangs......not "Joe and Jane" from the suburbs......


Sooooo....out of a population in Chicago of 2,718, 782 you have 1,600 people committing 70% of all the murders............stop them.....not me and other law abiding gun owners.......

Sounds like if you are white and not involved in criminal activity you are really safe.

Don't forget....not living in a democrat controlled city....it helps a lot too.....it has more to do with people growing up on government welfare for generations and not race.....put any race in the same conditions and you would have the same outcome.....

 

[2aguy]

Again...Kleck's study is the most accurate...but it isn't the only one.........

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
DMIa 1978...2,141,512
L.A. TIMES...1994...3,609,68
Kleck...2.5 million
Obama's CDC....2013....500,000--3million

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


Bordua...1977...1,414,544
DMIb...1978...1,098,409
Hart...1981...1.797,461
Mauser...1990...1,487,342
Gallup...1993...1,621,377
DEPT. OF JUSTICE...1994...1.5 million
Journal of Quantitative Criminology--- 989,883 times per year."
-------------------------------------------
Ohio...1982...771,043
Gallup...1991...777,152
Tarrance... 1994... 764,036
Lawerence Southwich Jr. 400,000 fewer violent crimes and at least 800,000 violent crimes deterred..



NCVS (National Crime Victimization Survey)....108,000


Notice, the 3 different groupings of stats from the research listed so far.....not one of them approaches the NCVS number of 100,000....

Kleck also says most defenders are involved in criminal activity.

No, Kleck says some of the respondents may have been carrying a gun illegally....for protection from criminals back in the 90s before our Constitutional right to carry guns was respected......let's be accurate....

 

[Brain357]

Blog Who gets shot in Chicago

Sooooo...Chicago had an estimated population of 2,718,782....in 2013.....and from this study....

About 70 percent of the killings occurred in what Papachristos found was a social network of only about 1,600 people — out of a population of about 80,000 in those neighborhoods.
So 1600 people out of 2,718,782 commit 70% of all gun crime........in one small area of this city.....let alone who knows about the other gang infested tiny areas......

And the irrational, anti gunners think that guns are the problem.......who are the real nuts....?

A, a BLOG on the American Thinker.

Okay, it wasn't like I had any expectation you'd produce a real, peer-reviewed study of the issue.

Again....from the link at the American Thinker to the CHICAGO SUN TIMES article on the Yale university study.....dipstick....

New study shows likelihood of being shot in Chicago Chicago


Papachristos — an associate professor of sociology at Yale and a former Chicagoan with an expertise in gangs — said his study found that exposure to gunshot victims also increases one’s odds of becoming a shooting victim.

And as was previously known, race was a key risk factor in getting shot, the study noted. For every 100,000 people, an average of one white person, 28 Hispanics and 113 blacks became victims of nonfatal shootings every year in Chicago over the six-year study period.

But Papachristos and his team sought to go beyond a racial explanation for nonfatal shootings. They were trying to explain why a specific young African-American male in a high-crime neighborhood becomes a shooting victim, while another young black man in the same neighborhood doesn’t, the study said.

Such social network analysis allows the manpower-strapped Chicago Police Department to “discern who’s at risk rather than casting the net really wide,” he said.

The latest Yale University study was built on Papachristos’ previous social-network research into murders on the West Side. He had studied killings between 2005 and 2010 in West Garfield Park and North Lawndale. About 70 percent of the killings occurred in what Papachristos found was a social network of only about 1,600 people — out of a population of about 80,000 in those neighborhoods. Inside that social network, the risk of being killed was 30 out of 1,000. For the others in those neighborhoods, the risk of getting murdered was less than one in 1,000.

Papachristos said his team has been doing similar social network research in Boston; Cincinnati; Newark; New Haven, Conn.; East Palo Alto, Calif.; Stockton, Calif.; and other cities.

“You are also seeing a clustering of victims in small networks there,” he said. “We’re seeing a pattern.”

If you want to stop gun murders...as oppose to all the other murders.......which you guys don't seem to mind so much....then deal with inner city gangs......not "Joe and Jane" from the suburbs......


Sooooo....out of a population in Chicago of 2,718, 782 you have 1,600 people committing 70% of all the murders............stop them.....not me and other law abiding gun owners.......

Sounds like if you are white and not involved in criminal activity you are really safe.

Don't forget....not living in a democrat controlled city....it helps a lot too.....it has more to do with people growing up on government welfare for generations and not race.....put any race in the same conditions and you would have the same outcome.....

I think you can stop at city. The mayor makes little difference.

 

[2aguy]

Blog Who gets shot in Chicago

Sooooo...Chicago had an estimated population of 2,718,782....in 2013.....and from this study....

About 70 percent of the killings occurred in what Papachristos found was a social network of only about 1,600 people — out of a population of about 80,000 in those neighborhoods.
So 1600 people out of 2,718,782 commit 70% of all gun crime........in one small area of this city.....let alone who knows about the other gang infested tiny areas......

And the irrational, anti gunners think that guns are the problem.......who are the real nuts....?

A, a BLOG on the American Thinker.

Okay, it wasn't like I had any expectation you'd produce a real, peer-reviewed study of the issue.

Again....from the link at the American Thinker to the CHICAGO SUN TIMES article on the Yale university study.....dipstick....

New study shows likelihood of being shot in Chicago Chicago


Papachristos — an associate professor of sociology at Yale and a former Chicagoan with an expertise in gangs — said his study found that exposure to gunshot victims also increases one’s odds of becoming a shooting victim.

And as was previously known, race was a key risk factor in getting shot, the study noted. For every 100,000 people, an average of one white person, 28 Hispanics and 113 blacks became victims of nonfatal shootings every year in Chicago over the six-year study period.

But Papachristos and his team sought to go beyond a racial explanation for nonfatal shootings. They were trying to explain why a specific young African-American male in a high-crime neighborhood becomes a shooting victim, while another young black man in the same neighborhood doesn’t, the study said.

Such social network analysis allows the manpower-strapped Chicago Police Department to “discern who’s at risk rather than casting the net really wide,” he said.

The latest Yale University study was built on Papachristos’ previous social-network research into murders on the West Side. He had studied killings between 2005 and 2010 in West Garfield Park and North Lawndale. About 70 percent of the killings occurred in what Papachristos found was a social network of only about 1,600 people — out of a population of about 80,000 in those neighborhoods. Inside that social network, the risk of being killed was 30 out of 1,000. For the others in those neighborhoods, the risk of getting murdered was less than one in 1,000.

Papachristos said his team has been doing similar social network research in Boston; Cincinnati; Newark; New Haven, Conn.; East Palo Alto, Calif.; Stockton, Calif.; and other cities.

“You are also seeing a clustering of victims in small networks there,” he said. “We’re seeing a pattern.”

If you want to stop gun murders...as oppose to all the other murders.......which you guys don't seem to mind so much....then deal with inner city gangs......not "Joe and Jane" from the suburbs......


Sooooo....out of a population in Chicago of 2,718, 782 you have 1,600 people committing 70% of all the murders............stop them.....not me and other law abiding gun owners.......

Sounds like if you are white and not involved in criminal activity you are really safe.

Don't forget....not living in a democrat controlled city....it helps a lot too.....it has more to do with people growing up on government welfare for generations and not race.....put any race in the same conditions and you would have the same outcome.....

I think you can stop at city. The mayor makes little difference.

Not true....democrats tax and fine businesses into leaving creating joblessness, undermine, understaff and underfund the police....and create damaging welfare policies that create and sustain generational poverty....which leads to single parent homes that are the breeding grounds for gangs.....

 

[Brain357]

Again...Kleck's study is the most accurate...but it isn't the only one.........

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
DMIa 1978...2,141,512
L.A. TIMES...1994...3,609,68
Kleck...2.5 million
Obama's CDC....2013....500,000--3million

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


Bordua...1977...1,414,544
DMIb...1978...1,098,409
Hart...1981...1.797,461
Mauser...1990...1,487,342
Gallup...1993...1,621,377
DEPT. OF JUSTICE...1994...1.5 million
Journal of Quantitative Criminology--- 989,883 times per year."
-------------------------------------------
Ohio...1982...771,043
Gallup...1991...777,152
Tarrance... 1994... 764,036
Lawerence Southwich Jr. 400,000 fewer violent crimes and at least 800,000 violent crimes deterred..



NCVS (National Crime Victimization Survey)....108,000


Notice, the 3 different groupings of stats from the research listed so far.....not one of them approaches the NCVS number of 100,000....

Kleck also says most defenders are involved in criminal activity.

No, Kleck says some of the respondents may have been carrying a gun illegally....for protection from criminals back in the 90s before our Constitutional right to carry guns was respected......let's be accurate....

It makes me sad when you choose to lie. He is clear and states defenders are typically involved in criminal activity. Stop lying. None of that gibberish you are stating is in the quote.

 

[2aguy]

Again...Kleck's study is the most accurate...but it isn't the only one.........

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
DMIa 1978...2,141,512
L.A. TIMES...1994...3,609,68
Kleck...2.5 million
Obama's CDC....2013....500,000--3million

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


Bordua...1977...1,414,544
DMIb...1978...1,098,409
Hart...1981...1.797,461
Mauser...1990...1,487,342
Gallup...1993...1,621,377
DEPT. OF JUSTICE...1994...1.5 million
Journal of Quantitative Criminology--- 989,883 times per year."
-------------------------------------------
Ohio...1982...771,043
Gallup...1991...777,152
Tarrance... 1994... 764,036
Lawerence Southwich Jr. 400,000 fewer violent crimes and at least 800,000 violent crimes deterred..



NCVS (National Crime Victimization Survey)....108,000


Notice, the 3 different groupings of stats from the research listed so far.....not one of them approaches the NCVS number of 100,000....

Kleck also says most defenders are involved in criminal activity.

No, Kleck says some of the respondents may have been carrying a gun illegally....for protection from criminals back in the 90s before our Constitutional right to carry guns was respected......let's be accurate....

It makes me sad when you choose to lie. He is clear and states defenders are typically involved in criminal activity. Stop lying. None of that gibberish you are stating is in the quote.

Not lying brain.....he specifically states, in that quote you keep using, "illegal possession of a firearm" he does not say career criminals defending their criminal business activities.......and many Americans carried guns to protect themselves from criminals even though unConstitutional laws said they couldn't ......in fact, they were no different in carrying those guns than people sitting at lunch counters in violation of the law in the 1960s.....

 

[Brain357]

Again...Kleck's study is the most accurate...but it isn't the only one.........

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
DMIa 1978...2,141,512
L.A. TIMES...1994...3,609,68
Kleck...2.5 million
Obama's CDC....2013....500,000--3million

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


Bordua...1977...1,414,544
DMIb...1978...1,098,409
Hart...1981...1.797,461
Mauser...1990...1,487,342
Gallup...1993...1,621,377
DEPT. OF JUSTICE...1994...1.5 million
Journal of Quantitative Criminology--- 989,883 times per year."
-------------------------------------------
Ohio...1982...771,043
Gallup...1991...777,152
Tarrance... 1994... 764,036
Lawerence Southwich Jr. 400,000 fewer violent crimes and at least 800,000 violent crimes deterred..



NCVS (National Crime Victimization Survey)....108,000


Notice, the 3 different groupings of stats from the research listed so far.....not one of them approaches the NCVS number of 100,000....

Kleck also says most defenders are involved in criminal activity.

No, Kleck says some of the respondents may have been carrying a gun illegally....for protection from criminals back in the 90s before our Constitutional right to carry guns was respected......let's be accurate....

It makes me sad when you choose to lie. He is clear and states defenders are typically involved in criminal activity. Stop lying. None of that gibberish you are stating is in the quote.

Not lying brain.....he specifically states, in that quote you keep using, "illegal possession of a firearm" he does not say career criminals defending their criminal business activities.......and many Americans carried guns to protect themselves from criminals even though unConstitutional laws said they couldn't ......in fact, they were no different in carrying those guns than people sitting at lunch counters in violation of the law in the 1960s.....

He says criminal activity and uses illegal possession as one example. That does include felons. And you realize he mentions this when questioned on why his numbers equal more home burglaries than there were that year. So these are home defenders. Stop making shit up and realize most defenders are involved in criminal activity.

 

[2aguy]

Again...Kleck's study is the most accurate...but it isn't the only one.........

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
DMIa 1978...2,141,512
L.A. TIMES...1994...3,609,68
Kleck...2.5 million
Obama's CDC....2013....500,000--3million

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


Bordua...1977...1,414,544
DMIb...1978...1,098,409
Hart...1981...1.797,461
Mauser...1990...1,487,342
Gallup...1993...1,621,377
DEPT. OF JUSTICE...1994...1.5 million
Journal of Quantitative Criminology--- 989,883 times per year."
-------------------------------------------
Ohio...1982...771,043
Gallup...1991...777,152
Tarrance... 1994... 764,036
Lawerence Southwich Jr. 400,000 fewer violent crimes and at least 800,000 violent crimes deterred..



NCVS (National Crime Victimization Survey)....108,000


Notice, the 3 different groupings of stats from the research listed so far.....not one of them approaches the NCVS number of 100,000....

Kleck also says most defenders are involved in criminal activity.

No, Kleck says some of the respondents may have been carrying a gun illegally....for protection from criminals back in the 90s before our Constitutional right to carry guns was respected......let's be accurate....

It makes me sad when you choose to lie. He is clear and states defenders are typically involved in criminal activity. Stop lying. None of that gibberish you are stating is in the quote.

Not lying brain.....he specifically states, in that quote you keep using, "illegal possession of a firearm" he does not say career criminals defending their criminal business activities.......and many Americans carried guns to protect themselves from criminals even though unConstitutional laws said they couldn't ......in fact, they were no different in carrying those guns than people sitting at lunch counters in violation of the law in the 1960s.....

He says criminal activity and uses illegal possession as one example. That does include felons. And you realize he mentions this when questioned on why his numbers equal more home burglaries than there were that year. So these are home defenders. Stop making shit up and realize most defenders are involved in criminal activity.

Stop being an asshole Brain......he specifically says illegal gun possession, in the very quote you use....he does not say defending drug territory, or breaking into homes or robbing homes.....in the 90s, people could not legally carry in most states because they were violating the 2nd Amendment......you know, the one that says you can keep and BEAR arms.....but people still needed protection from criminals...so they carried guns illegally....so they could be protected from actual criminals......

He specifically states, as well, that defensive uses of guns outnumber CRIMINAL uses of guns by 3-4 to 1..........

But don't worry brain......all of the 50 states have some form of legal carry....and over 11.1 million people can now legally carry their guns......

 

[2aguy]

Kleck also says most defenders are involved in criminal activity.

No, Kleck says some of the respondents may have been carrying a gun illegally....for protection from criminals back in the 90s before our Constitutional right to carry guns was respected......let's be accurate....

It makes me sad when you choose to lie. He is clear and states defenders are typically involved in criminal activity. Stop lying. None of that gibberish you are stating is in the quote.

Not lying brain.....he specifically states, in that quote you keep using, "illegal possession of a firearm" he does not say career criminals defending their criminal business activities.......and many Americans carried guns to protect themselves from criminals even though unConstitutional laws said they couldn't ......in fact, they were no different in carrying those guns than people sitting at lunch counters in violation of the law in the 1960s.....

He says criminal activity and uses illegal possession as one example. That does include felons. And you realize he mentions this when questioned on why his numbers equal more home burglaries than there were that year. So these are home defenders. Stop making shit up and realize most defenders are involved in criminal activity.

Stop being an asshole Brain......he specifically says illegal gun possession, in the very quote you use....he does not say defending drug territory, or breaking into homes or robbing homes.....in the 90s, people could not legally carry in most states because they were violating the 2nd Amendment......you know, the one that says you can keep and BEAR arms.....but people still needed protection from criminals...so they carried guns illegally....so they could be protected from actual criminals......

He specifically states, as well, that defensive uses of guns outnumber CRIMINAL uses of guns by 3-4 to 1..........

But don't worry brain......all of the 50 states have some form of legal carry....and over 11.1 million people can now legally carry their guns......

And his isn't the only study that shows this.......there are 19 others that show defensive gun uses on average about 1.6 million times a year........

 

[2aguy]

Here....again......a large number of the 19 studies over 40 years......

Again...Kleck's study is the most accurate...but it isn't the only one.........

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
DMIa 1978...2,141,512
L.A. TIMES...1994...3,609,68
Kleck...2.5 million
Obama's CDC....2013....500,000--3million

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


Bordua...1977...1,414,544
DMIb...1978...1,098,409
Hart...1981...1.797,461
Mauser...1990...1,487,342
Gallup...1993...1,621,377
DEPT. OF JUSTICE...1994...1.5 million
Journal of Quantitative Criminology--- 989,883 times per year."
-------------------------------------------

Ohio...1982...771,043
Gallup...1991...777,152
Tarrance... 1994... 764,036
Lawerence Southwich Jr. 400,000 fewer violent crimes and at least 800,000 violent crimes deterred..



NCVS (National Crime Victimization Survey)....108,000


Notice, the 3 different groupings of stats from the research listed so far.....not one of them approaches the NCVS number of 100,000....

 

[2aguy]

And again...Kleck, one of 19 researchers looking at this subject.....states this....

Guns and Self-Defense by Gary Kleck Ph.D.

The authors concluded that defensive uses of guns are about three to four times as common as criminal uses of guns. The National Self-Defense Survey confirmed the picture of frequent defensive gun use implied by the results of earlier, less sophisticated surveys.

A national survey conducted in 1994 by the Police Foundation and sponsored by the National Institute of Justice almost exactly confirmed the estimates from the National Self-Defense Survey. This survey's person-based estimate was that 1.44% of the adult population had used a gun for protection against a person in the previous year, implying 2.73 million defensive gun users. These results were well within sampling error of the corresponding 1.33% and 2.55 million estimates produced by the National Self-Defense Survey.

 

[Brain357]

Kleck also says most defenders are involved in criminal activity.

No, Kleck says some of the respondents may have been carrying a gun illegally....for protection from criminals back in the 90s before our Constitutional right to carry guns was respected......let's be accurate....

It makes me sad when you choose to lie. He is clear and states defenders are typically involved in criminal activity. Stop lying. None of that gibberish you are stating is in the quote.

Not lying brain.....he specifically states, in that quote you keep using, "illegal possession of a firearm" he does not say career criminals defending their criminal business activities.......and many Americans carried guns to protect themselves from criminals even though unConstitutional laws said they couldn't ......in fact, they were no different in carrying those guns than people sitting at lunch counters in violation of the law in the 1960s.....

He says criminal activity and uses illegal possession as one example. That does include felons. And you realize he mentions this when questioned on why his numbers equal more home burglaries than there were that year. So these are home defenders. Stop making shit up and realize most defenders are involved in criminal activity.

Stop being an asshole Brain......he specifically says illegal gun possession, in the very quote you use....he does not say defending drug territory, or breaking into homes or robbing homes.....in the 90s, people could not legally carry in most states because they were violating the 2nd Amendment......you know, the one that says you can keep and BEAR arms.....but people still needed protection from criminals...so they carried guns illegally....so they could be protected from actual criminals......

He specifically states, as well, that defensive uses of guns outnumber CRIMINAL uses of guns by 3-4 to 1..........

But don't worry brain......all of the 50 states have some form of legal carry....and over 11.1 million people can now legally carry their guns......

Look at the context of the quote. It is part of his explanation why he has more home burglaries than occurred that year. And he states that is because most defenders are involved in criminal activity so they don't get reported. You lose, carry has nothing to do with it.

 

[2aguy]

No, Kleck says some of the respondents may have been carrying a gun illegally....for protection from criminals back in the 90s before our Constitutional right to carry guns was respected......let's be accurate....

It makes me sad when you choose to lie. He is clear and states defenders are typically involved in criminal activity. Stop lying. None of that gibberish you are stating is in the quote.

Not lying brain.....he specifically states, in that quote you keep using, "illegal possession of a firearm" he does not say career criminals defending their criminal business activities.......and many Americans carried guns to protect themselves from criminals even though unConstitutional laws said they couldn't ......in fact, they were no different in carrying those guns than people sitting at lunch counters in violation of the law in the 1960s.....

He says criminal activity and uses illegal possession as one example. That does include felons. And you realize he mentions this when questioned on why his numbers equal more home burglaries than there were that year. So these are home defenders. Stop making shit up and realize most defenders are involved in criminal activity.

Stop being an asshole Brain......he specifically says illegal gun possession, in the very quote you use....he does not say defending drug territory, or breaking into homes or robbing homes.....in the 90s, people could not legally carry in most states because they were violating the 2nd Amendment......you know, the one that says you can keep and BEAR arms.....but people still needed protection from criminals...so they carried guns illegally....so they could be protected from actual criminals......

He specifically states, as well, that defensive uses of guns outnumber CRIMINAL uses of guns by 3-4 to 1..........

But don't worry brain......all of the 50 states have some form of legal carry....and over 11.1 million people can now legally carry their guns......

Look at the context of the quote. It is part of his explanation why he has more home burglaries than occurred that year. And he states that is because most defenders are involved in criminal activity so they don't get reported. You lose, carry has nothing to do with it.

Sorry brain...he also states that again, in the 90s, having a gun in the home was tricky business as well....that is why people were reluctant to say they used a gun....

Post your quote again brain.....where he specifically states "Illegal Gun Possession" and no other crime......

 

[2aguy]

Kleck and what he actually points out about defensive gun uses.....

Guns and Self-Defense by Gary Kleck Ph.D.

The authors concluded that defensive uses of guns are about three to four times as common as criminal uses of guns. The National Self-Defense Survey confirmed the picture of frequent defensive gun use implied by the results of earlier, less sophisticated surveys.

 

[Brain357]

It makes me sad when you choose to lie. He is clear and states defenders are typically involved in criminal activity. Stop lying. None of that gibberish you are stating is in the quote.

Not lying brain.....he specifically states, in that quote you keep using, "illegal possession of a firearm" he does not say career criminals defending their criminal business activities.......and many Americans carried guns to protect themselves from criminals even though unConstitutional laws said they couldn't ......in fact, they were no different in carrying those guns than people sitting at lunch counters in violation of the law in the 1960s.....

He says criminal activity and uses illegal possession as one example. That does include felons. And you realize he mentions this when questioned on why his numbers equal more home burglaries than there were that year. So these are home defenders. Stop making shit up and realize most defenders are involved in criminal activity.

Stop being an asshole Brain......he specifically says illegal gun possession, in the very quote you use....he does not say defending drug territory, or breaking into homes or robbing homes.....in the 90s, people could not legally carry in most states because they were violating the 2nd Amendment......you know, the one that says you can keep and BEAR arms.....but people still needed protection from criminals...so they carried guns illegally....so they could be protected from actual criminals......

He specifically states, as well, that defensive uses of guns outnumber CRIMINAL uses of guns by 3-4 to 1..........

But don't worry brain......all of the 50 states have some form of legal carry....and over 11.1 million people can now legally carry their guns......

Look at the context of the quote. It is part of his explanation why he has more home burglaries than occurred that year. And he states that is because most defenders are involved in criminal activity so they don't get reported. You lose, carry has nothing to do with it.

Sorry brain...he also states that again, in the 90s, having a gun in the home was tricky business as well....that is why people were reluctant to say they used a gun....

Post your quote again brain.....where he specifically states "Illegal Gun Possession" and no other crime......

But it has never been illegal and hence not criminal activity. Unless you are a felon.

 

[Brain357]

Kleck and what he actually points out about defensive gun uses.....

Guns and Self-Defense by Gary Kleck Ph.D.

The authors concluded that defensive uses of guns are about three to four times as common as criminal uses of guns. The National Self-Defense Survey confirmed the picture of frequent defensive gun use implied by the results of earlier, less sophisticated surveys.

So armed criminals are defending against unarmed criminals. So what?

 

[2aguy]

Kleck and what he actually points out about defensive gun uses.....

Guns and Self-Defense by Gary Kleck Ph.D.

The authors concluded that defensive uses of guns are about three to four times as common as criminal uses of guns. The National Self-Defense Survey confirmed the picture of frequent defensive gun use implied by the results of earlier, less sophisticated surveys.

So armed criminals are defending against unarmed criminals. So what?

Really brain.......?

 

[2aguy]

And here is how John Lott, another researcher in the field responded to the question of defensive gun uses.....

John R. Lott Jr. <[email protected]>

Feb 3 (9 days ago)

to me

Thanks for the note, Bill. My 2002 survey discussed in The Bias Against Guns is different than Gary’s in some ways and similar in terms of the total defensive gun uses. As far as we could tell, all the people who reported using guns defensively were law-abiding citizens and all of our cases were either in a home or on a person’s property. Of course, there were relative few permits issued back then. New Report from Crime Prevention Research Center shows 11.1 million Americans Hold Concealed Carry Permits - Crime Prevention Research Center

I hope that this helps.

Thanks.

John R. Lott, Jr., Ph.D.
President
Crime Prevention Research Center
Crime Prevention Research Center - To subscribe to the CPRC write us at info crimeresearch.org put subscribe in subject line
[email protected]

 

[Brain357]

Kleck and what he actually points out about defensive gun uses.....

Guns and Self-Defense by Gary Kleck Ph.D.

The authors concluded that defensive uses of guns are about three to four times as common as criminal uses of guns. The National Self-Defense Survey confirmed the picture of frequent defensive gun use implied by the results of earlier, less sophisticated surveys.

So armed criminals are defending against unarmed criminals. So what?

Really brain.......?

Well yes. Kleck has stated most defenders are involved in criminal activity. So some armed drug dealer defends his stash against an unarmed thief. He clearly counts people involved in criminal activity as a defense.