Gun violence in the world

[LOki]

Well, because it is.
Huh? You're taking the number of crimes and dividing by 365 and claiming that they are prevented. Nothing supports that.

Brought to you by the same folks who said Iraq would cost less than a billion and Reagan-nomics.

It's nowhere near 2,000,000 or even half that.

Given that 2,000,000 fantasy, it translates into 230 preventions due to guns per hour....every single hour of every single day.

Pick a day in the future...lets say July 7...if you can show me 50 news stories on 7/7/15 detailing such preventions that occurred on 7/6/15...I'll buy the statistic.

Surely if there are 230 every hour of every day, 25% of them +/- get reported by the local newspapers/radio/tv...don't they?

Accept the challenge?

Given that that number comes from actual research, done over 40 years by both private and public researchers in economics and criminology it isn't fantasy....fantasy is when you anti gun extremists pull a number out of the air and say...that is the number.....

Here is the actual research and this isn't even all of it........

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...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

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

So the vast majority of studies are under 2 million. The much more accurate NCVS survey is 108k.

The CDC did not estimate DGUs. Please link to the department of justice study. La times and field are very high please link those also.

The NCVS survey didn't ask about DGUs. How do you figure it's the most accurate... besides your obvious bias against the notion of valid DGUs.

He figures that is the number because it is the only study....I repeat, the only study with the number that low.....and of course to get the number that low they have to use a study that isn't a gun study...and doesn't actually ask about guns in the study......

That is some research technique isn't it....?

It is not the only study. You choose to ignore any studies with realistic numbers.

Nonsense. Patently untrue.

A study published in 2013 by the Violence Policy Center, using five years of nationwide statistics (2007-2011) compiled by the federal Bureau of Justice has found that defensive gun uses (DGU) occur at a dramatically lower magnitude than that suggested by Kleck: an average of 67,740 times per year.[11]

While you choose studies commissioned specifically to support a pre-established conclusion.

 

[LOki]

Given that that number comes from actual research, done over 40 years by both private and public researchers in economics and criminology it isn't fantasy....fantasy is when you anti gun extremists pull a number out of the air and say...that is the number.....

Here is the actual research and this isn't even all of it........

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...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

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

So the vast majority of studies are under 2 million. The much more accurate NCVS survey is 108k.

The CDC did not estimate DGUs. Please link to the department of justice study. La times and field are very high please link those also.

The NCVS survey didn't ask about DGUs. How do you figure it's the most accurate... besides your obvious bias against the notion of valid DGUs.

It asks about crimes and what happened during the crime. You need a crime for a dgu. Gun studies go right into guns which leads to many false positives. Many people claim a DGU when it was really intimidating someone. The ncvs also surveys 95k households. No gun study is anywhere close to that. Larger sample equals more accurate results.

The real world is biased against millions of DGUs. Only about 50 make the news each year. People who claim to have one are very rare. Most people don't know anyone who has had one. Only about 230 justifiable homicides each year. Nothing from the real world supports millions of DGUs each year.

You haven't found wisdom yet....the NCVS is not a gun study and does not ask the people questioned if they used a gun for self defense....like doing a study on soft drinks and never asking the people if they drink soft drinks......just hoping someone will mention soft drinks in an off hand way......not smart brain.....try again....


And as the girl with the shotgun shows....she didn't shoot anyone and they ran away.....why are you guys so ******* stupid....

They ask about crimes and what happened during the attempted crime.

But not DGU's. We understand that. Do you?

It would capture any DGUs.

No. It would only capture DGUs unilaterally volunteered.

You know what though, in the NCVS study, not one respondent mentioned catfish. Hence, THERE ARE NO CATFISH!

You need a crime for a dgu,...

The conclusion follows necessarily from the premise. What is your point?

...well unless you are kleck.

What ever do you mean, Pumpkin?

You have no valid point, so you cast baseless aspersions in your hissy fit?

 

[LOki]

No Cupcake, not in the least bit.

You give easily and routinely refuted arguments, but your superstition is impervious to such refutation. You're just a True-Believer(TM), Cupcake.

The verifiable reality that you're in denial of. That precise one, exactly.

There are plenty of DGUs in the news, Pumpkin. They just don't get a lot of national attention. After all, a failed mugging where the victim didn't even fire their gun, is hardly newsworthy--it certainly won't get national attention, nor should it.

You do not need to kill the criminal to use your gun defensively, Mr. Kellerman.

This is not a "fact."

What "bad" surveys Mr. Hemenway? The ones not approved by Shannon Watts, perhaps?

So you have nothing obviously.

I just have nothing new, Pumpkin.

[Let me know if you come up with anything from reality to support millions of DGUs.

It's already been submitted, Cupcake. You just refuse to accept it's real. Like a proper thrall.

[You seem to just blindly believe.

I'm open to the evidence of reality, Cupcake. And the reality is that guns are used defensively by orders of magnitude more often that they are used offensively. The statistics are rather consistent on this fact. Professional criminologists share the consensus. Detractors put OBVIOUSLY disingenuous limits upon what constitutes a DGU, and they simply REFUSE to accept that even peaceful decent folks have valid reasons to not be entirely candid with government agencies. And finally, they deny the OBVIOUS utility that guns have for self defense.

More nothing. I'm still waitng.

More denial of reality from you, Cupcake.

I'm not waiting for you to disavow your superstitions.

Nope you have still given no reason to believe the ridiculous. I'll keep waiting.

More denial of reality from you, Cupcake.

I'm not waiting for you to disavow your superstitions.

 

[2aguy]

"The key facts are:

• The US has the highest gun ownership rate in the world - an average of 88 per 100 people. That puts it first in the world for gun ownership - and even the number two country, Yemen, has significantly fewer - 54.8 per 100 people
• But the US does not have the worst firearm murder rate - that prize belongs to Honduras, El Salvador and Jamaica. In fact, the US is number 28, with a rate of 2.97 per 100,000 people"

Gun homicides and gun ownership listed by country News The Guardian

So we have the highest gun ownership in the world, but despite that NOT the highest gun murder rate. We're 28th in the world in fact.

So how is gun availability linked to gun violence? It isn't. Simple as that.

Apples and antelopes isn't a comparison of worth. Compare the US with other Western Democracies and get back to us.

By SELECTED COUNTRIES. In other words they selected those that reinforced their biased viewpoint. Thank you for making that clear.

Who better to compare our country with than other Western Democracies?

according to politifact addressing obama's claims on mass shootings...we are only #3 for mass shootings based on population levels...so those western democracies with their extreme gun control fall behind our armed society...

 

[2aguy]

"The key facts are:

• The US has the highest gun ownership rate in the world - an average of 88 per 100 people. That puts it first in the world for gun ownership - and even the number two country, Yemen, has significantly fewer - 54.8 per 100 people
• But the US does not have the worst firearm murder rate - that prize belongs to Honduras, El Salvador and Jamaica. In fact, the US is number 28, with a rate of 2.97 per 100,000 people"

Gun homicides and gun ownership listed by country News The Guardian

So we have the highest gun ownership in the world, but despite that NOT the highest gun murder rate. We're 28th in the world in fact.

So how is gun availability linked to gun violence? It isn't. Simple as that.

Apples and antelopes isn't a comparison of worth. Compare the US with other Western Democracies and get back to us.

By SELECTED COUNTRIES. In other words they selected those that reinforced their biased viewpoint. Thank you for making that clear.

Not "selected countries", by First World Countries, not Third World hell-holes, unless of course, you consider the US a Third World country.

again...you anti gun extremists lecture us that extreme gun control laws will stop gun violence......you guys make that claim....and yet in those 3rd world countries with extreme gun control, they have the worst gun murder rates.......which you lecture us should not be possible because they have done what you have said and enacted extreme gun control...


How do you guys explain the gun violence in countries that do what you say with gun laws.......it seems your ideas on gun control fail miserably where hey are tried....

 

[2aguy]

So the vast majority of studies are under 2 million. The much more accurate NCVS survey is 108k.

The CDC did not estimate DGUs. Please link to the department of justice study. La times and field are very high please link those also.

The NCVS survey didn't ask about DGUs. How do you figure it's the most accurate... besides your obvious bias against the notion of valid DGUs.

He figures that is the number because it is the only study....I repeat, the only study with the number that low.....and of course to get the number that low they have to use a study that isn't a gun study...and doesn't actually ask about guns in the study......

That is some research technique isn't it....?

It is not the only study. You choose to ignore any studies with realistic numbers.

A study published in 2013 by the Violence Policy Center, using five years of nationwide statistics (2007-2011) compiled by the federal Bureau of Justice has found that defensive gun uses (DGU) occur at a dramatically lower magnitude than that suggested by Kleck: an average of 67,740 times per year.[11]

The violence policy center has been caught lying with their statistics, they are an anti gun advocacy group with no intentiton of doing honest research.........

So you don't count anything with low numbers. Waiting for you to post a link to that la times survey.

Really, one out of 16 gun studies and it may not be internet accessible...why don't you find it....I gave you the studies...you find them...and some are behind pay walls...and I am no paying for hem...

 

[2aguy]

So the vast majority of studies are under 2 million. The much more accurate NCVS survey is 108k.

The CDC did not estimate DGUs. Please link to the department of justice study. La times and field are very high please link those also.

The NCVS survey didn't ask about DGUs. How do you figure it's the most accurate... besides your obvious bias against the notion of valid DGUs.

It asks about crimes and what happened during the crime. You need a crime for a dgu. Gun studies go right into guns which leads to many false positives. Many people claim a DGU when it was really intimidating someone. The ncvs also surveys 95k households. No gun study is anywhere close to that. Larger sample equals more accurate results.

The real world is biased against millions of DGUs. Only about 50 make the news each year. People who claim to have one are very rare. Most people don't know anyone who has had one. Only about 230 justifiable homicides each year. Nothing from the real world supports millions of DGUs each year.

You haven't found wisdom yet....the NCVS is not a gun study and does not ask the people questioned if they used a gun for self defense....like doing a study on soft drinks and never asking the people if they drink soft drinks......just hoping someone will mention soft drinks in an off hand way......not smart brain.....try again....


And as the girl with the shotgun shows....she didn't shoot anyone and they ran away.....why are you guys so ******* stupid....

They ask about crimes and what happened during the attempted crime.

But not DGU's. We understand that. Do you?

It would capture any DGUs.

No. It would only capture DGUs unilaterally volunteered.

You know what though, in the NCVS study, not one respondent mentioned catfish. Hence, THERE ARE NO CATFISH!

You need a crime for a dgu,...

The conclusion follows necessarily from the premise. What is your point?

...well unless you are kleck.

What ever do you mean, Pumpkin?

You have no valid point, so you cast baseless aspersions in your hissy fit?

Wow...you are good. thanks. Brain has been pushing the NCVS for so long because it is the only study with numbers that low and your take down of him and the study is great.

 

[CMike]

"The key facts are:

• The US has the highest gun ownership rate in the world - an average of 88 per 100 people. That puts it first in the world for gun ownership - and even the number two country, Yemen, has significantly fewer - 54.8 per 100 people
• But the US does not have the worst firearm murder rate - that prize belongs to Honduras, El Salvador and Jamaica. In fact, the US is number 28, with a rate of 2.97 per 100,000 people"

Gun homicides and gun ownership listed by country News The Guardian

So we have the highest gun ownership in the world, but despite that NOT the highest gun murder rate. We're 28th in the world in fact.

So how is gun availability linked to gun violence? It isn't. Simple as that.

I don't believe the US has 88 our of 100 people owning firearms.

I noticed that there is no source cited for that data.

 

[turtledude]

[

I get it now.....lefty, anti gun extremist men are.....lacking in that area...so anti gun extremist chicks dream about real men....even as they try to deny the desire....classical bad boy fixation of an immature woman....

men wanting to ban guns are generally criminals or cowardly fairies

Sir....you just insulted actual fairies.....they do no harm as they flit hither and yon in our forests and glades and comparing them to anti gun extremist males is beyond the pale...for shame Sir.....

damn, well I guess I won't get my yearly supply of fairy dust!!

 

[Brain357]

So you have nothing obviously.

I just have nothing new, Pumpkin.

[Let me know if you come up with anything from reality to support millions of DGUs.

It's already been submitted, Cupcake. You just refuse to accept it's real. Like a proper thrall.

[You seem to just blindly believe.

I'm open to the evidence of reality, Cupcake. And the reality is that guns are used defensively by orders of magnitude more often that they are used offensively. The statistics are rather consistent on this fact. Professional criminologists share the consensus. Detractors put OBVIOUSLY disingenuous limits upon what constitutes a DGU, and they simply REFUSE to accept that even peaceful decent folks have valid reasons to not be entirely candid with government agencies. And finally, they deny the OBVIOUS utility that guns have for self defense.

More nothing. I'm still waitng.

More denial of reality from you, Cupcake.

I'm not waiting for you to disavow your superstitions.

Nope you have still given no reason to believe the ridiculous. I'll keep waiting.

More denial of reality from you, Cupcake.

I'm not waiting for you to disavow your superstitions.

You talk a lot and can't give anything from reality to support your belief. That is funny.

 

[Brain357]

The NCVS survey didn't ask about DGUs. How do you figure it's the most accurate... besides your obvious bias against the notion of valid DGUs.

It asks about crimes and what happened during the crime. You need a crime for a dgu. Gun studies go right into guns which leads to many false positives. Many people claim a DGU when it was really intimidating someone. The ncvs also surveys 95k households. No gun study is anywhere close to that. Larger sample equals more accurate results.

The real world is biased against millions of DGUs. Only about 50 make the news each year. People who claim to have one are very rare. Most people don't know anyone who has had one. Only about 230 justifiable homicides each year. Nothing from the real world supports millions of DGUs each year.

You haven't found wisdom yet....the NCVS is not a gun study and does not ask the people questioned if they used a gun for self defense....like doing a study on soft drinks and never asking the people if they drink soft drinks......just hoping someone will mention soft drinks in an off hand way......not smart brain.....try again....


And as the girl with the shotgun shows....she didn't shoot anyone and they ran away.....why are you guys so ******* stupid....

They ask about crimes and what happened during the attempted crime.

But not DGU's. We understand that. Do you?

It would capture any DGUs.

No. It would only capture DGUs unilaterally volunteered.

You know what though, in the NCVS study, not one respondent mentioned catfish. Hence, THERE ARE NO CATFISH!

You need a crime for a dgu,...

The conclusion follows necessarily from the premise. What is your point?

...well unless you are kleck.

What ever do you mean, Pumpkin?

You have no valid point, so you cast baseless aspersions in your hissy fit?

Wow...you are good. thanks. Brain has been pushing the NCVS for so long because it is the only study with numbers that low and your take down of him and the study is great.

You are impressed by that babbling? Why am I not surprised. Neither of you can give any real facts that support your claims.

 

[2aguy]

It asks about crimes and what happened during the crime. You need a crime for a dgu. Gun studies go right into guns which leads to many false positives. Many people claim a DGU when it was really intimidating someone. The ncvs also surveys 95k households. No gun study is anywhere close to that. Larger sample equals more accurate results.

The real world is biased against millions of DGUs. Only about 50 make the news each year. People who claim to have one are very rare. Most people don't know anyone who has had one. Only about 230 justifiable homicides each year. Nothing from the real world supports millions of DGUs each year.

You haven't found wisdom yet....the NCVS is not a gun study and does not ask the people questioned if they used a gun for self defense....like doing a study on soft drinks and never asking the people if they drink soft drinks......just hoping someone will mention soft drinks in an off hand way......not smart brain.....try again....


And as the girl with the shotgun shows....she didn't shoot anyone and they ran away.....why are you guys so ******* stupid....

They ask about crimes and what happened during the attempted crime.

But not DGU's. We understand that. Do you?

It would capture any DGUs.

No. It would only capture DGUs unilaterally volunteered.

You know what though, in the NCVS study, not one respondent mentioned catfish. Hence, THERE ARE NO CATFISH!

You need a crime for a dgu,...

The conclusion follows necessarily from the premise. What is your point?

...well unless you are kleck.

What ever do you mean, Pumpkin?

You have no valid point, so you cast baseless aspersions in your hissy fit?

Wow...you are good. thanks. Brain has been pushing the NCVS for so long because it is the only study with numbers that low and your take down of him and the study is great.

You are impressed by that babbling? Why am I not surprised. Neither of you can give any real facts that support your claims.

Wow...you are good brain...that really got us.....

 

[Brain357]

So the vast majority of studies are under 2 million. The much more accurate NCVS survey is 108k.

The CDC did not estimate DGUs. Please link to the department of justice study. La times and field are very high please link those also.

The NCVS survey didn't ask about DGUs. How do you figure it's the most accurate... besides your obvious bias against the notion of valid DGUs.

It asks about crimes and what happened during the crime. You need a crime for a dgu. Gun studies go right into guns which leads to many false positives. Many people claim a DGU when it was really intimidating someone. The ncvs also surveys 95k households. No gun study is anywhere close to that. Larger sample equals more accurate results.

The real world is biased against millions of DGUs. Only about 50 make the news each year. People who claim to have one are very rare. Most people don't know anyone who has had one. Only about 230 justifiable homicides each year. Nothing from the real world supports millions of DGUs each year.

You haven't found wisdom yet....the NCVS is not a gun study and does not ask the people questioned if they used a gun for self defense....like doing a study on soft drinks and never asking the people if they drink soft drinks......just hoping someone will mention soft drinks in an off hand way......not smart brain.....try again....


And as the girl with the shotgun shows....she didn't shoot anyone and they ran away.....why are you guys so ******* stupid....

They ask about crimes and what happened during the attempted crime.

But not DGU's. We understand that. Do you?

It would capture any DGUs.

No. It would only capture DGUs unilaterally volunteered.

You know what though, in the NCVS study, not one respondent mentioned catfish. Hence, THERE ARE NO CATFISH!

You need a crime for a dgu,...

The conclusion follows necessarily from the premise. What is your point?

...well unless you are kleck.

What ever do you mean, Pumpkin?

You have no valid point, so you cast baseless aspersions in your hissy fit?

Any positive responses to a crime are asked this:
“Was there anything you did or tried to do about the incident while it was going on?”

So yes it would include any DGUs.

 

[Brain357]

You haven't found wisdom yet....the NCVS is not a gun study and does not ask the people questioned if they used a gun for self defense....like doing a study on soft drinks and never asking the people if they drink soft drinks......just hoping someone will mention soft drinks in an off hand way......not smart brain.....try again....


And as the girl with the shotgun shows....she didn't shoot anyone and they ran away.....why are you guys so ******* stupid....

They ask about crimes and what happened during the attempted crime.

But not DGU's. We understand that. Do you?

It would capture any DGUs.

No. It would only capture DGUs unilaterally volunteered.

You know what though, in the NCVS study, not one respondent mentioned catfish. Hence, THERE ARE NO CATFISH!

You need a crime for a dgu,...

The conclusion follows necessarily from the premise. What is your point?

...well unless you are kleck.

What ever do you mean, Pumpkin?

You have no valid point, so you cast baseless aspersions in your hissy fit?

Wow...you are good. thanks. Brain has been pushing the NCVS for so long because it is the only study with numbers that low and your take down of him and the study is great.

You are impressed by that babbling? Why am I not surprised. Neither of you can give any real facts that support your claims.

Wow...you are good brain...that really got us.....

I know. You still have nothing based on reality to support your claim. Your claim is debunked and weak.

 

[2aguy]

They ask about crimes and what happened during the attempted crime.

But not DGU's. We understand that. Do you?

It would capture any DGUs.

No. It would only capture DGUs unilaterally volunteered.

You know what though, in the NCVS study, not one respondent mentioned catfish. Hence, THERE ARE NO CATFISH!

You need a crime for a dgu,...

The conclusion follows necessarily from the premise. What is your point?

...well unless you are kleck.

What ever do you mean, Pumpkin?

You have no valid point, so you cast baseless aspersions in your hissy fit?

Wow...you are good. thanks. Brain has been pushing the NCVS for so long because it is the only study with numbers that low and your take down of him and the study is great.

You are impressed by that babbling? Why am I not surprised. Neither of you can give any real facts that support your claims.

Wow...you are good brain...that really got us.....

I know. You still have nothing based on reality to support your claim. Your claim is debunked and weak.

Yes.....standing upright, head turned up and pointing your finger and looking down your nose and pronouncing...." I DEBUNK thee...." Does not make the studies wrong......

 

[Brain357]

But not DGU's. We understand that. Do you?

No. It would only capture DGUs unilaterally volunteered.

You know what though, in the NCVS study, not one respondent mentioned catfish. Hence, THERE ARE NO CATFISH!

The conclusion follows necessarily from the premise. What is your point?

What ever do you mean, Pumpkin?

You have no valid point, so you cast baseless aspersions in your hissy fit?

Wow...you are good. thanks. Brain has been pushing the NCVS for so long because it is the only study with numbers that low and your take down of him and the study is great.

You are impressed by that babbling? Why am I not surprised. Neither of you can give any real facts that support your claims.

Wow...you are good brain...that really got us.....

I know. You still have nothing based on reality to support your claim. Your claim is debunked and weak.

Yes.....standing upright, head turned up and pointing your finger and looking down your nose and pronouncing...." I DEBUNK thee...." Does not make the studies wrong......

The fact you can't pull anything from reality to support your claim shows it is pure fantasy. Your claim has been debunked in many ways. Heck the vast majority of your own gun studies say your 2 mil number is a joke.

 

[LOki]

I just have nothing new, Pumpkin.

It's already been submitted, Cupcake. You just refuse to accept it's real. Like a proper thrall.

I'm open to the evidence of reality, Cupcake. And the reality is that guns are used defensively by orders of magnitude more often that they are used offensively. The statistics are rather consistent on this fact. Professional criminologists share the consensus. Detractors put OBVIOUSLY disingenuous limits upon what constitutes a DGU, and they simply REFUSE to accept that even peaceful decent folks have valid reasons to not be entirely candid with government agencies. And finally, they deny the OBVIOUS utility that guns have for self defense.

More nothing. I'm still waitng.

More denial of reality from you, Cupcake.

I'm not waiting for you to disavow your superstitions.

Nope you have still given no reason to believe the ridiculous. I'll keep waiting.

More denial of reality from you, Cupcake.

I'm not waiting for you to disavow your superstitions.

You talk a lot and can't give anything from reality to support your belief. That is funny.

You are not paying attention. I said I have nothing NEW to submit to you. Other have already presented plenty of work that substantiates ~2M DGUs/year. You just refuse to accept it's real. Like a proper thrall.

The reality is that guns are used defensively by orders of magnitude more often that they are used offensively. The statistics are rather consistent on this fact. Professional criminologists share the consensus. Detractors like yourself put OBVIOUSLY disingenuous limits upon what constitutes a DGU, and they simply REFUSE to accept that even peaceful decent folks have valid reasons to not be entirely candid with government agencies. And finally, they deny the OBVIOUS utility that guns have for self defense.

 

[LOki]

It asks about crimes and what happened during the crime. You need a crime for a dgu. Gun studies go right into guns which leads to many false positives. Many people claim a DGU when it was really intimidating someone. The ncvs also surveys 95k households. No gun study is anywhere close to that. Larger sample equals more accurate results.

The real world is biased against millions of DGUs. Only about 50 make the news each year. People who claim to have one are very rare. Most people don't know anyone who has had one. Only about 230 justifiable homicides each year. Nothing from the real world supports millions of DGUs each year.

You haven't found wisdom yet....the NCVS is not a gun study and does not ask the people questioned if they used a gun for self defense....like doing a study on soft drinks and never asking the people if they drink soft drinks......just hoping someone will mention soft drinks in an off hand way......not smart brain.....try again....


And as the girl with the shotgun shows....she didn't shoot anyone and they ran away.....why are you guys so ******* stupid....

They ask about crimes and what happened during the attempted crime.

But not DGU's. We understand that. Do you?

It would capture any DGUs.

No. It would only capture DGUs unilaterally volunteered.

You know what though, in the NCVS study, not one respondent mentioned catfish. Hence, THERE ARE NO CATFISH!

You need a crime for a dgu,...

The conclusion follows necessarily from the premise. What is your point?

...well unless you are kleck.

What ever do you mean, Pumpkin?

You have no valid point, so you cast baseless aspersions in your hissy fit?

Wow...you are good. thanks. Brain has been pushing the NCVS for so long because it is the only study with numbers that low and your take down of him and the study is great.

You are impressed by that babbling? Why am I not surprised. Neither of you can give any real facts that support your claims.

Just more denial of verifiable reality from you.

If you didn't have systematically flawed data to support your contentions, you'd have no data. If you didn't have a fundamentally flawed argument, you'd have no argument.

 

[LOki]

The NCVS survey didn't ask about DGUs. How do you figure it's the most accurate... besides your obvious bias against the notion of valid DGUs.

It asks about crimes and what happened during the crime. You need a crime for a dgu. Gun studies go right into guns which leads to many false positives. Many people claim a DGU when it was really intimidating someone. The ncvs also surveys 95k households. No gun study is anywhere close to that. Larger sample equals more accurate results.

The real world is biased against millions of DGUs. Only about 50 make the news each year. People who claim to have one are very rare. Most people don't know anyone who has had one. Only about 230 justifiable homicides each year. Nothing from the real world supports millions of DGUs each year.

You haven't found wisdom yet....the NCVS is not a gun study and does not ask the people questioned if they used a gun for self defense....like doing a study on soft drinks and never asking the people if they drink soft drinks......just hoping someone will mention soft drinks in an off hand way......not smart brain.....try again....


And as the girl with the shotgun shows....she didn't shoot anyone and they ran away.....why are you guys so ******* stupid....

They ask about crimes and what happened during the attempted crime.

But not DGU's. We understand that. Do you?

It would capture any DGUs.

No. It would only capture DGUs unilaterally volunteered.

You know what though, in the NCVS study, not one respondent mentioned catfish. Hence, THERE ARE NO CATFISH!

You need a crime for a dgu,...

The conclusion follows necessarily from the premise. What is your point?

...well unless you are kleck.

What ever do you mean, Pumpkin?

You have no valid point, so you cast baseless aspersions in your hissy fit?

Any positive responses to a crime are asked this:
“Was there anything you did or tried to do about the incident while it was going on?”

So yes it would include any DGUs.

So, no one had pants on. They didn't volunteer that they had pants on, so ... NO PANTS!

Also, if someone prevented a criminal from victimizing them, were they then a victim? If they thought not, then those folks who used a gun defensively were NEVER GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY to report the DGU.

And... they didn't report that they were wearing pants. Therefore, there are very few DGUs, and no one wears pants.

 

[Brain357]

It asks about crimes and what happened during the crime. You need a crime for a dgu. Gun studies go right into guns which leads to many false positives. Many people claim a DGU when it was really intimidating someone. The ncvs also surveys 95k households. No gun study is anywhere close to that. Larger sample equals more accurate results.

The real world is biased against millions of DGUs. Only about 50 make the news each year. People who claim to have one are very rare. Most people don't know anyone who has had one. Only about 230 justifiable homicides each year. Nothing from the real world supports millions of DGUs each year.

You haven't found wisdom yet....the NCVS is not a gun study and does not ask the people questioned if they used a gun for self defense....like doing a study on soft drinks and never asking the people if they drink soft drinks......just hoping someone will mention soft drinks in an off hand way......not smart brain.....try again....


And as the girl with the shotgun shows....she didn't shoot anyone and they ran away.....why are you guys so ******* stupid....

They ask about crimes and what happened during the attempted crime.

But not DGU's. We understand that. Do you?

It would capture any DGUs.

No. It would only capture DGUs unilaterally volunteered.

You know what though, in the NCVS study, not one respondent mentioned catfish. Hence, THERE ARE NO CATFISH!

You need a crime for a dgu,...

The conclusion follows necessarily from the premise. What is your point?

...well unless you are kleck.

What ever do you mean, Pumpkin?

You have no valid point, so you cast baseless aspersions in your hissy fit?

Any positive responses to a crime are asked this:
“Was there anything you did or tried to do about the incident while it was going on?”

So yes it would include any DGUs.

So, no one had pants on. They didn't volunteer that they had pants on, so ... NO PANTS!

Also, if someone prevented a criminal from victimizing them, were they then a victim? If they thought not, then those folks who used a gun defensively were NEVER GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY to report the DGU.

And... they didn't report that they were wearing pants. Therefore, there are very few DGUs, and no one wears pants.

Sorry but anyone who used a gun in defense would report it when asked:
“Was there anything you did or tried to do about the incident while it was going on?”

It's pretty clear and obvious. The ncvs includes attempted crimes. All your arguments fail.