Home invasion...thank goodness victims didn't have a gun...grandfather was beaten to death though...

[HereWeGoAgain]

Who cares what I say here. This isn't about people needing guns. it's about why we are such a broken violent society that needs firearms to protect itself, how do we get past THAT? More violence isn't the solution. What is? Smaller Families, better personal interaction. I don't know what else. But more people, more laws and more guns aren't helping.

When the law isnt a solution all you have left is personal protection.
And besides,guns are to keep the government at bay.

 

[Brain357]

This is how Kleck did it.....

Armed Resistance to Crime The Prevalence and Nature of Self-Defense with a Gun

Each interview began with a few general "throat-clearing" questions about problems facing the R's community and crime. The interviewers then asked the following question: "Within the past five years, have you yourself or another member of your household used a gun, even if it was not fired, for self-protection or for the protection of property at home, work, or elsewhere? Please do not include military service, police work, or work as a security guard." Rs who answered "yes" were then asked: "Was this to protect against an animal or a person?" Rs who reported a DGU against a person were asked: "How many incidents involving defensive uses of guns against persons happened to members of your household in the past five years?" and "Did this incident [any of these incidents] happen in the past twelve months?" At this point, Rs were asked "Was it you who used a gun defensively, or did someone else in your household do this?"

All Rs reporting a DGU were asked a long, detailed series of questions establishing exactly what happened in the DGU incident. Rs who reported having experienced more than one DGU in the previous five years were asked about their most recent experience. When the original R was the one who had used a gun defensively, as was usually the case, interviewers obtained his or her firsthand account of the event. When the original R indicated that some other member of the household was the one who had the, experience, interviewers made every effort to speak directly to the involved person, either speaking to that person immediately or obtaining times and dates to call back. Up to three call-backs were made to contact the DGU-involved person. We anticipated that it would sometimes prove impossible to make contact with these persons, so interviewers were instructed to always obtain a proxy account of the DGU from the original R, on the assumption that a proxy account would be better than none at all. It was rarely necessary to rely on these proxy accounts--only six sample cases of DGUs were reported through proxies, out of a total of 222 sample cases.

Yes they are asking in the past 5 years. Well as has been clearly shown here with our examples they have no idea when. So sure they will say yes its in 5 year when it might be 7, 12, or 15. This is one of the ways his survey is loaded with false positives.

 

[2aguy]

This is how Kleck did it.....

Armed Resistance to Crime The Prevalence and Nature of Self-Defense with a Gun

Each interview began with a few general "throat-clearing" questions about problems facing the R's community and crime. The interviewers then asked the following question: "Within the past five years, have you yourself or another member of your household used a gun, even if it was not fired, for self-protection or for the protection of property at home, work, or elsewhere? Please do not include military service, police work, or work as a security guard." Rs who answered "yes" were then asked: "Was this to protect against an animal or a person?" Rs who reported a DGU against a person were asked: "How many incidents involving defensive uses of guns against persons happened to members of your household in the past five years?" and "Did this incident [any of these incidents] happen in the past twelve months?" At this point, Rs were asked "Was it you who used a gun defensively, or did someone else in your household do this?"

All Rs reporting a DGU were asked a long, detailed series of questions establishing exactly what happened in the DGU incident. Rs who reported having experienced more than one DGU in the previous five years were asked about their most recent experience. When the original R was the one who had used a gun defensively, as was usually the case, interviewers obtained his or her firsthand account of the event. When the original R indicated that some other member of the household was the one who had the, experience, interviewers made every effort to speak directly to the involved person, either speaking to that person immediately or obtaining times and dates to call back. Up to three call-backs were made to contact the DGU-involved person. We anticipated that it would sometimes prove impossible to make contact with these persons, so interviewers were instructed to always obtain a proxy account of the DGU from the original R, on the assumption that a proxy account would be better than none at all. It was rarely necessary to rely on these proxy accounts--only six sample cases of DGUs were reported through proxies, out of a total of 222 sample cases.

Yes they are asking in the past 5 years. Well as has been clearly shown here with our examples they have no idea when. So sure they will say yes its in 5 year when it might be 7, 12, or 15. This is one of the ways his survey is loaded with false positives.

You must have read past the question..."Did this incident happen in the last 12 months ?"...

and no, not false positives...they didn't make up defensive gun uses...that would be a false positive....again, there is more of a chance of under reporting not over reporting....

But you keep making things up brain......

 

[2aguy]

Who cares what I say here. This isn't about people needing guns. it's about why we are such a broken violent society that needs firearms to protect itself, how do we get past THAT? More violence isn't the solution. What is? Smaller Families, better personal interaction. I don't know what else. But more people, more laws and more guns aren't helping.

Well....if you are facing a violent rapist/torturer/murderer...all by yourself.....a gun would be your best help......as studies have shown......

 

[2aguy]

While your argument is well stated, I think it is quite a stretch to assume that the data from 4,077 households can be applied to a nation with 300,000,000 people. Especially because of the diversity of the population. I suspect that few people in Iowa know anyone who had to draw down on anybody, and few people in the inner city of New Orleans who do NOT know someone who had to draw down on someone.

While your argument is well stated, I think it is quite a stretch to assume that the data from 4,077 households can be applied to a nation with 300,000,000 people. Especially because of the diversity of the population. I suspect that few people in Iowa know anyone who had to draw down on anybody, and few people in the inner city of New Orleans who do NOT know someone who had to draw down on someone.

I agree that I might have been able to find a more statistically significant study if I had taken more time to search. However, I think a sample size of 4,977 is sufficient, assuming the survey was properly conducted. Whether or not a sample size is sufficient must be determined by three factors: (1) the population size; (2) the confidence level; and (3) the margin of error. Actually, the confidence level and margin of error are more important than the population size. If the population size is 300,000,000 and there is a 95 percent confidence level and a margin of error of 5%, a sample size of only 385 is sufficient. If there is 99 percent confidence level and a margin of error of two percent, a sufficient sample size is 4,161.

Here is a link that can help you calculate a proper sample size.

Sample Size Calculator

Note: Generally sample sizes of 1,000 are sufficient for national surveys. Here are a few of many links that will confirm this:

Determining Appropriate Sample Size
FAQs NCPP - National Council on Public Polls

Now, with all due respect to each of you, I am done with this thread.

Have a good night and a great day.

I remember that from when I took Statistics in college, but frankly, I didn't believe that, then, either. For example, If you were to poll my neighborhood, which is a community of 35,000 people, statistically you could claim that Arizona is at least 85% red. Yet, my community is south of Tucson, and our Rep was Gabby Gifford.

That is why they use a larger sample not from just your one spot.....it would be like coming to Chicago and only polling people in China town and concluding Chicago was a Chinese city....

 

[Brain357]

This is how Kleck did it.....

Armed Resistance to Crime The Prevalence and Nature of Self-Defense with a Gun

Each interview began with a few general "throat-clearing" questions about problems facing the R's community and crime. The interviewers then asked the following question: "Within the past five years, have you yourself or another member of your household used a gun, even if it was not fired, for self-protection or for the protection of property at home, work, or elsewhere? Please do not include military service, police work, or work as a security guard." Rs who answered "yes" were then asked: "Was this to protect against an animal or a person?" Rs who reported a DGU against a person were asked: "How many incidents involving defensive uses of guns against persons happened to members of your household in the past five years?" and "Did this incident [any of these incidents] happen in the past twelve months?" At this point, Rs were asked "Was it you who used a gun defensively, or did someone else in your household do this?"

All Rs reporting a DGU were asked a long, detailed series of questions establishing exactly what happened in the DGU incident. Rs who reported having experienced more than one DGU in the previous five years were asked about their most recent experience. When the original R was the one who had used a gun defensively, as was usually the case, interviewers obtained his or her firsthand account of the event. When the original R indicated that some other member of the household was the one who had the, experience, interviewers made every effort to speak directly to the involved person, either speaking to that person immediately or obtaining times and dates to call back. Up to three call-backs were made to contact the DGU-involved person. We anticipated that it would sometimes prove impossible to make contact with these persons, so interviewers were instructed to always obtain a proxy account of the DGU from the original R, on the assumption that a proxy account would be better than none at all. It was rarely necessary to rely on these proxy accounts--only six sample cases of DGUs were reported through proxies, out of a total of 222 sample cases.

Yes they are asking in the past 5 years. Well as has been clearly shown here with our examples they have no idea when. So sure they will say yes its in 5 year when it might be 7, 12, or 15. This is one of the ways his survey is loaded with false positives.

You must have read past the question..."Did this incident happen in the last 12 months ?"...

and no, not false positives...they didn't make up defensive gun uses...that would be a false positive....again, there is more of a chance of under reporting not over reporting....

But you keep making things up brain......

Yes but as has been shown here these people have no idea how long it has been. So even if it was 2 years ago they will say it was a year. And the calculation from the survey are dependent on answers which are accurate. You just don't seem to get that. They aren't accurate as was just proven in this thread.

 

[2aguy]

Brain....come on......you talk to one poster, make up your gibberish about his response and now you are making up ideas about the studies....again....nothing else you have put forward has damaged their credibility...now you try this......

 

[Brain357]

Brain....come on......you talk to one poster, make up your gibberish about his response and now you are making up ideas about the studies....again....nothing else you have put forward has damaged their credibility...now you try this......

The studies have been debunked several times over. I'm still waiting for your to explain how gun owners defend more violent crime than actually occurs. And there were two people in this thread who both seem to have no clue when the defense happened. Those are the type of people being surveyed. That's one of the many reasons they are so inaccurate.

 

[2aguy]

Brain....there aren't more defensive uses than crimes actually occurring that is your made up attack, not an accurate point on the studies....

And simply saying..I don't like his numbers therefore the study is debunked is not debunking the studies...and considering there are over 16 of them, done over a 40 year period...your continued fall back is even more tired and silly than before....

and here is what Kleck says about time period...
Armed Resistance to Crime The Prevalence and Nature of Self-Defense with a Gun


The most technically sound estimates presented in Table 2 are those based on the shorter one-year recall peRiod that rely on Rs' firsthand accounts of their own experiences (person-based estimates). These estimates appear in the first two columns. They indicate that each year in the U.S. there are about 2.2 to 2.5 million DGUs of all types by civilians against humans, with about 1.5 to 1.9 million of the incidents involving use of handguns.

These estimates are larger than those derived from the best previous surveys, indicating that technical improvements in the measurement procedures have, contrary to the expectations of Cook,[47] Reiss and Roth,[48] and McDowall and Wiersema,[49] increased rather than decreased estimates of the frequency that DGUs occur. Defensive gun use is thus just another specific example of a commonplace pattern in criminological survey work, which includes victimization surveys, self-report surveys of delinquency, surveys of illicit drug use, etc.: the better the measurement procedures, the higher the estimates of controversial behaviors.[50]

So brain...you don't know what you are talking about....again....

 

[Brain357]

Brain....there aren't more defensive uses than crimes actually occurring that is your made up attack, not an accurate point on the studies....

And simply saying..I don't like his numbers therefore the study is debunked is not debunking the studies...and considering there are over 16 of them, done over a 40 year period...your continued fall back is even more tired and silly than before....

and here is what Kleck says about time period...
Armed Resistance to Crime The Prevalence and Nature of Self-Defense with a Gun


The most technically sound estimates presented in Table 2 are those based on the shorter one-year recall peRiod that rely on Rs' firsthand accounts of their own experiences (person-based estimates). These estimates appear in the first two columns. They indicate that each year in the U.S. there are about 2.2 to 2.5 million DGUs of all types by civilians against humans, with about 1.5 to 1.9 million of the incidents involving use of handguns.

These estimates are larger than those derived from the best previous surveys, indicating that technical improvements in the measurement procedures have, contrary to the expectations of Cook,[47] Reiss and Roth,[48] and McDowall and Wiersema,[49] increased rather than decreased estimates of the frequency that DGUs occur. Defensive gun use is thus just another specific example of a commonplace pattern in criminological survey work, which includes victimization surveys, self-report surveys of delinquency, surveys of illicit drug use, etc.: the better the measurement procedures, the higher the estimates of controversial behaviors.[50]

Of course there isn't, but you keep insisting there are 1.6 million violent crimes defended each year. But there are only about 1.1 million crimes being committed. This should tell you how wrong your numbers are.

 

[2aguy]

Brain....there aren't more defensive uses than crimes actually occurring that is your made up attack, not an accurate point on the studies....

And simply saying..I don't like his numbers therefore the study is debunked is not debunking the studies...and considering there are over 16 of them, done over a 40 year period...your continued fall back is even more tired and silly than before....

and here is what Kleck says about time period...
Armed Resistance to Crime The Prevalence and Nature of Self-Defense with a Gun


The most technically sound estimates presented in Table 2 are those based on the shorter one-year recall peRiod that rely on Rs' firsthand accounts of their own experiences (person-based estimates). These estimates appear in the first two columns. They indicate that each year in the U.S. there are about 2.2 to 2.5 million DGUs of all types by civilians against humans, with about 1.5 to 1.9 million of the incidents involving use of handguns.

These estimates are larger than those derived from the best previous surveys, indicating that technical improvements in the measurement procedures have, contrary to the expectations of Cook,[47] Reiss and Roth,[48] and McDowall and Wiersema,[49] increased rather than decreased estimates of the frequency that DGUs occur. Defensive gun use is thus just another specific example of a commonplace pattern in criminological survey work, which includes victimization surveys, self-report surveys of delinquency, surveys of illicit drug use, etc.: the better the measurement procedures, the higher the estimates of controversial behaviors.[50]

Of course there isn't, but you keep insisting there are 1.6 million violent crimes defended each year. But there are only about 1.1 million crimes being committed. This should tell you how wrong your numbers are.

Again...the whole point...of defensive gun uses, at least 54 % happen where the victim uses the gun to stop or prevent the attack and never fires a shot and feels no need to involve the police...thus....the crime was stopped before it was completed....because of the gun........so your silly attempt to play number games doesn't work......and that number needs a link....which would be nice, and the fact that many crimes go unreported just goes to show that your game playing is lame....

 

[2aguy]

More from Kleck....

2. Results

Table 2 displays a large number of estimates of how often guns are used defensively. These estimates are not inconsistent with each other; they each measure different things in different ways. Some estimates are based only on incidents which Rs reported as occurring in the twelve months preceding the interview, while others are based on incidents reported for the preceding five years. Both telescoping and recall failure should be lower with a one year recall period, so estimates derived from this period should be superior to those based on the longer recall period. Some estimates are based only on incidents which Rs reported as involving themselves, (person-based estimates), while others were based on all incidents which Rs reported as involving anyone in their household (household-based estimates). The person-based estimates should be better because of its first-hand character. Finally, some of the figures pertain only to DGUS involving use of handguns, while others pertain to DGUS involving any type of gun.

 

[Brain357]

Brain....there aren't more defensive uses than crimes actually occurring that is your made up attack, not an accurate point on the studies....

And simply saying..I don't like his numbers therefore the study is debunked is not debunking the studies...and considering there are over 16 of them, done over a 40 year period...your continued fall back is even more tired and silly than before....

and here is what Kleck says about time period...
Armed Resistance to Crime The Prevalence and Nature of Self-Defense with a Gun


The most technically sound estimates presented in Table 2 are those based on the shorter one-year recall peRiod that rely on Rs' firsthand accounts of their own experiences (person-based estimates). These estimates appear in the first two columns. They indicate that each year in the U.S. there are about 2.2 to 2.5 million DGUs of all types by civilians against humans, with about 1.5 to 1.9 million of the incidents involving use of handguns.

These estimates are larger than those derived from the best previous surveys, indicating that technical improvements in the measurement procedures have, contrary to the expectations of Cook,[47] Reiss and Roth,[48] and McDowall and Wiersema,[49] increased rather than decreased estimates of the frequency that DGUs occur. Defensive gun use is thus just another specific example of a commonplace pattern in criminological survey work, which includes victimization surveys, self-report surveys of delinquency, surveys of illicit drug use, etc.: the better the measurement procedures, the higher the estimates of controversial behaviors.[50]

Of course there isn't, but you keep insisting there are 1.6 million violent crimes defended each year. But there are only about 1.1 million crimes being committed. This should tell you how wrong your numbers are.

Again...the whole point...of defensive gun uses, at least 54 % happen where the victim uses the gun to stop or prevent the attack and never fires a shot and feels no need to involve the police...thus....the crime was stopped before it was completed....because of the gun........so your silly attempt to play number games doesn't work......and that number needs a link....which would be nice, and the fact that many crimes go unreported just goes to show that your game playing is lame....

Sorry but that doesn't matter. Gun owners are a minority. This minority can't be defending more violent crimes than are occurring. There are only 1.1 million violent crimes committed. How can a minority of the population be defending 1.6 million? It's impossible unless they attract like 3X more crime than people who don't own guns. And that isn't the case. So your numbers are ridiculous.

 

[Vandalshandle]

I am not buying the assertion that a major portion of defensive actions with guns are not reported to the police...unless you are counting one gangster backing down from another because he drew his gun first. If I ever felt that my gun just saved my life, you can bet your sweet ass that I would be on 911 before the dust settled on their footprints.

 

[2aguy]

I am not buying the assertion that a major portion of defensive actions with guns are not reported to the police...unless you are counting one gangster backing down from another because he drew his gun first. If I ever felt that my gun just saved my life, you can bet your sweet ass that I would be on 911 before the dust settled on their footprints.

Most cases of a gun being used are merely showing the gun to the criminal with the intent on using it and they leave the scene....since they don't want to get shot and they don't want to get arrested....and they can easily find someone who doesn't have a gun to attack......

And If you decide to tell the police you displayed your gun.......will you be arrested for brandishing.....disturbing the peace, wreckless endangerment, will you have your permit to carry suspended, .....there are a lot of reasons not to report a crime if you used your gun to scare off the criminal...ask the woman from Pennsylvania who informed the New Jersey police officer she had a legal permit to carry a gun and that she had a gun........then she was arrested and faced 3 years in jail because her permit wasn't valid in New Jersey...

There is a huge risk that you take when you deal with police and prosecutors if you use a gun to defend yourself, even if you don't fire it....

Like the guy in the SUV driving through Ferguson during the protest...his car was surrounded, they smashed his rear window....and when he drew his pistol and held it ready as he called 911, the attackers also called police to report him drawing his weapon......the police showed up and took him into custody......I imagine he was released later...but he was still left dealing with the police....and what if he had to retain a lawyer....that isn't cheap.......

So yes....people who use a gun to stop or prevent a crime do not always report it to the police....especially if no shots were fired.....

And if nothing happened and you report it....what do the police report...........you were approached and threatened...the guy ran away when you displayed your pistol...........

To the law enforcement types here on U.S.....what do you report that as?

 

[rightwinger]

If the victims had had a gun they would have prompted a shootout with the robbbers and all been massacred

Not true. I could have easily shot all three mexicans before they reached their car.
The threat was over so I let em slide..but dont think I didnt reconsider after I let em go.
They may have went on to hurt someone else,and that still weighs on my mind even after years.

If the homeowners had been armed the robbers would have immediately seen them as more of a threat and lined them up and killed them execution style one by one

 

[Papageorgio]

99% of the gun owners in this country can barely shoot a paper target at 30 feet. And that's a STILL paper target, not an attacker moving 30 feet in 3 seconds. I come from a family of certified sharp-shooters. So this is not just my humble opinion.

It's pure fantasy that simply owning a gun will insure your safety. The chances are great of misfiring or not getting to your gun at all and also shooting someone by accident, sort of like Dick Cheney did a few years ago when he shot his friend in the face. Remember that? No? Oh gee......

That is why Joe Biden said it's best to own a sawed-off shotgun. No pointing necessary. No skills necessary. He's not as nutty as you think.

Where go you get the 99% figure? So, you come from a family of gun nuts as you say, where are the facts to back up your story?

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

If the victims had had a gun they would have prompted a shootout with the robbbers and all been massacred

Not true. I could have easily shot all three mexicans before they reached their car.
The threat was over so I let em slide..but dont think I didnt reconsider after I let em go.
They may have went on to hurt someone else,and that still weighs on my mind even after years.

If the homeowners had been armed the robbers would have immediately seen them as more of a threat and lined them up and killed them execution style one by one

Or the homeowners would have shot em dead.

 

[2aguy]

So....rightwinger....people break into your home....and you want to give them the absolute power to determine your fate from that point forward....you trust these people who just broke through your door to administer "just enough" of a beating...and no more than that....to not decide "hey, let's not leave any witnesses".....or "hey, let's rape the old woman in front of her husband"........you want that power to be in the sole hands of the people who just broke into your home....

I would rather that old couple have the choice to choose the other way....shooting them out of their F*****g socks for breaking into their home.......

We just have a different tolerance point for uncivilized behavior.......

 

[2aguy]

I am not buying the assertion that a major portion of defensive actions with guns are not reported to the police...unless you are counting one gangster backing down from another because he drew his gun first. If I ever felt that my gun just saved my life, you can bet your sweet ass that I would be on 911 before the dust settled on their footprints.

Here you go, from today......another innocent, law abiding person caught up in the purposefully, byzantine gun laws....

NJ Man Charged with Felony for Keeping Legally Purchased Gun in Glove Compartment - Breitbart

When officers pulled Steffon Josey-Davis over for a traffic violation on September 20, 2013, they discovered a legally owned gun in his car. But because Josey-Davis did not have a permit to carry the gun, he was charged with a “second degree felony.”

According to Fox News, Josey-Davis was an armed guard for Loomis Armored at the time, yet because the gun “was stored, still loaded, in the glove compartment” with no permit to possess, he was charged and eventually had to plead “guilty to to second degree unlawful possession of a weapon.”


Part of the plea deal exchanged the 10 years hard time he could have served for probation.


Middlesex County Prosecutor Andrew Carey said Josey-Davis was charged for carrying the loaded gun in the front of his vehicle when NJ law requires that guns can only be transported “unloaded” and “in the trunk.” Josey-Davis’ attorney clarified, however, saying the charges indicated the problem was the lack of a permit.


Rev. Robert Moore, of the gun control group Coalition for Peace Action, said, “We think the law needs to take into consideration individual circumstances, but it’s still a law for the well being of the people of New Jersey.”


Moore said he believes the “officers were doing their job” regarding Josey-Davis.


For his part, Josey-Davis is now trying to get his record expunged because the charges prevent him from passing a criminal background check to get a good job.