Justifiable Homicide facts.

[Man of Ethics]

Here.

Much discussion about the protective benefits of guns has focused on the incidence of self-defense gun use. Proponents of such putative benefits often claim that 2.5 million Americans use guns in self-defense against criminal attackers each year. This estimate is not plausible and has been nominated as the most outrageous number mentioned in a policy discussion by an elected official.

According to the NCVS, looking at the total number of self-protective behaviors undertaken by victims of both attempted and completed violent crime for the three year period 2014 through 2016, in only 1.1 percent of these instances had the intended victim in resistance to a criminal “threatened or attacked with a firearm.”

Overall, justifiable homicide is 30 times as rare as criminal homicide.

 

[TNHarley]

Thank you! Perfect reason why more people should be armed.
Buy plenty of guns and ammo, friends

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Here.

Overall, justifiable homicide is 30 times as rare as criminal homicide.

Your error is in assuming that a successful use of a gun to defend against a criminal act necessarily involves killing the criminal.

It ought to be obvious that in many instances, the criminal will back off as soon as it becomes apparent that continuing in his criminal act is likely to get him killed. My understanding is that in the vast majority of successful defensive uses of a firearm, no shots are actually fired.

 

[WinterBorn]

The simple fact that a gun is seen by the criminal is often enough to deter them. They want easy victims.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Overall, justifiable homicide is 30 times as rare as criminal homicide.

The defensive use of a firearm does not require the discharge of the firearm, let alone killing the assailant
That being said, how does your statement, above, in any way mean anything?

 

[M14 Shooter]

Here..

The VPC -also- says firearms are used for defense over 100,000 times per year.
Across the same time period - 2014-2016 - that's almost 11x more often than a firearm is used to commit murder and about 4.5x more often than to commit suicide.

https://vpc.org/studies/justifiable20.pdf

 

[Man of Ethics]

Your error is in assuming that a successful use of a gun to defend against a criminal act necessarily involves killing the criminal.

It ought to be obvious that in many instances, the criminal will back off as soon as it becomes apparent that continuing in his criminal act is likely to get him killed. My understanding is that in the vast majority of successful defensive uses of a firearm, no shots are actually fired.

Which happens in about 1% to 2% of all crimes against the person.

Most people are not Action Movie superheroes.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Which happens in about 1% to 2% of all crimes against the person.

Demonstrate this to be true.

 

[Man of Ethics]

The simple fact that a gun is seen by the criminal is often enough to deter them. They want easy victims.

Most criminals are desperate people with nothing to lose.

 

[Man of Ethics]

Demonstrate this to be true.

Page 6

 

[M14 Shooter]

Most criminals are desperate people with nothing to lose.

If so, more would be killed in self-defense.
Your own OP disproves you claim, above.

 

[WinterBorn]

Most criminals are desperate people with nothing to lose.

Nonsense. They are people who want an easy target. You are trying to make them sound like the victim.

Hundreds of thousands of crimes are stopped every year by a private citizen with a gun. The idea that there are so few justifiable homicides refutes this is laughable. It simple shows the difference between the average gun owner and a criminal.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Page 6

This does not demonstrate your claim to be true.
Disagree?
Cope and paste the text to that effect.

 

[Man of Ethics]

If so, the more would be killed in self-defense.
Your own OP disproves you claim, above.

Justifiable homicide is common in Action Movies. All of us have seen thousands of villains killed in self-defense.

In reality, guns are used much more frequently for murder and suicide.

 

[Man of Ethics]

Nonsense. They are people who want an easy target. You are trying to make them sound like the victim.

In Scandinavia where all people in need get help, crime is less common then in USA.

 

[M14 Shooter]

In reality, guns are used much more frequently for murder and suicide.

Your own source disproves your claim - the VPC says firearms are used for defense over 100,000 times per year, which is almost 11x more often than a firearm is used to commit murder and about 4.5x more often than to commit suicide.

 

[WinterBorn]

Justifiable homicide is common in Action Movies. All of us have seen thousands of villains killed in self-defense.

In reality, guns are used much more frequently for murder and suicide.

While your statement is true, it is a misleading.

Yes, justifiable homicides are fairly rare. But then, considering the number of firearms in civilians hands, so are firearm murders.

And you are comparing the number of times guns are used to kill in self defense against the number of times a gun is used to commit murder or suicide. While the overwhelming majority of times a gun is used to stop a crime it is not even fired, to say nothing of used to kill.

Surveys of inmates have consistently shown they will choose an unarmed victim, and even leave a potential crime scene in favor of an easier target.

 

[WinterBorn]

In Scandinavia where all people in need get help, crime is less common then in USA.

So we should pay criminals not to commit crimes?

America is a violent country overall. That is the nature of our existence and our culture. Not preferable, but not avoidable either.

And if we are going to use other countries as the standard, look at the suicide rates in Japan. And Japan has some of the strictest gun laws in the world.

 

[2aguy]

Here.





Overall, justifiable homicide is 30 times as rare as criminal homicide.

The NCVS is unreliable as a source for this information.

Why?

The National Crime Victimization Survey is just that...it asks about crimes committed against people....

The NCVS does not have the word gun in it....it does not ask any direct questions about guns....it does not ask any direct questions about using a gun for self defense...

That would be like asking people about driving their car in a survey, asking them where they go with their car, then asking them what they bought at the grocery store if they list the grocery store as one stop.....and if they mention getting Orange Juice...recording that....

Then stating that the survey documents Orange Juice Comsumption in the U.S...

Do you understand the problem with that?

But don't trust me....try the Daily Koz...

The Daily Kos on why the NCVS is wrong...
Defensive Gun Use Part III - The National Crime Victimization Study

The disadvantages of this study design are:
1) the study is not specifically designed to measure DGUs;

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

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

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

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

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

 

[2aguy]

Here.





Overall, justifiable homicide is 30 times as rare as criminal homicide.

Again with the Violence Policy Center.....an rabid, anti-gun extremist organization.....the group that created the campaign to demonize rifles as "Assault Rifles."

And here...another reason the NCVS is crap when it comes to defensive gun use....they can't even get a real grasp of rape...

National Crime Victimization Survey A new report finds that the Justice Department has been undercounting instances of rape and sexual assault.

How helpful, then, that the Justice Department asked the National Research Council (part of the National Academies, which also includes the National Academy of Sciences and the Institute of Medicine) to study how successfully the federal government measures rape. The answer has just arrived, in a report out Tuesday with the headline from the press release: “The National Crime Victimization Survey Is Likely Undercounting Rape and Sexual Assault.” We’re not talking about small fractions—we’re talking about the kind of potentially massive underestimate that the military and the Justice Department have warned about for years—and that could be throwing a wrench into the effort to do the most effective type of rape prevention.....

But here are the flaws that call the nice-sounding stats into doubt: The NCVS is designed to measure all kinds of crime victimization. The questions it poses about sexual violence are embedded among questions that ask about lots of other types of crime. For example:

So......the NCVS can't get an accurate account of what it is researching....how do we know this...the numbers are off...

There is, in fact, an existing survey that has many of the attributes the NCVS currently lacks. It’s administered by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and it’s called the National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey. (NISVS is the acronym. Apologies for the alphabet soup.)

NISVS “represents the public health perspective,” as Tuesday’s report puts it, and it asks questions about specific behavior, including whether the survey-taker was unable to consent to sex because he or she had been drinking or taking drugs. NISVS was first conducted in 2010, so it doesn’t go back in time the way the NCVS numbers do. But here’s the startling direct comparison between the two measures: NISVS counted 1.27 million total sexual acts of forced penetration for women over the past year (including completed, attempted, and alcohol or drug facilitated).

NCVS counted only 188,380 for rape and sexual assault. And the FBI, which collects its data from local law enforcement, and so only counts rapes and attempted rapes that have been reported as crimes, totaled only 85,593 for 2010.

So no....the NCVS is not a tool to understand the use of guns for self defense..........

And the most obvious point.......they undercount rape and sexual assault by a vast number compared to an actual study that researches rape and sexual assault....using the same method the anti gunners claim for the number of gun defenses....

But here’s the startling direct comparison between the two measures: NISVS counted 1.27 million total sexual acts of forced penetration for women over the past year (including completed, attempted, and alcohol or drug facilitated).

NCVS counted only 188,380 for rape and sexual assault.