Moms demand guns....a new PSA featuring Dana Loesch for women who want guns to protect their family.

[Missourian]

Dana Loesch PSA embedded:

Hope she holds herself responsible for any mom's or children accidently shot and killed like all the examples I have given.

Why would she?

Guns are dangerous. If they weren't, they wouldn't be of much use. There isn't a single soul in America that doesn't know that.

The fact that there are only 500 deaths from accidental shootings is nothing short of an amazing tribute to gun safety education and the responsible nature of the vast majority of gun owners.

 

[Brain357]

Had she been armed she might have just been shot.

Or she may have saved everyone in the restaurant...including her parents, who were both killed.

Heck, this is the very reason, this testimony, that I carry a firearm everyday...because at least I'd have a chance...even if it's only a small one, to save my loved ones...or even a stranger.

Better to have a gun and not need it than to need it and not have it.

Well what we know is that she wasn't armed and lived. Had she been armed she might be very dead.

Here is a guy who was better off not having it:
Hallsville man released after accidentally shooting self - Longview News-Journal

I am not arguing to ban anything, just saying it isn't for everyone and this mass marketing to people to carry will probably lead to a lot more accidents. Each person should look at their situation and decide what they want to do, not be swayed by a silly commercial.

Keep staying safe with yours btw bro!

 

[Brain357]

Dana Loesch PSA embedded:

Hope she holds herself responsible for any mom's or children accidently shot and killed like all the examples I have given.

Why would she?

Guns are dangerous. If they weren't, they wouldn't be of much use. There isn't a single soul in America that doesn't know that.

The fact that there are only 500 deaths from accidental shootings is nothing short of an amazing tribute to gun safety education and the responsible nature of the vast majority of gun owners.

Only 500? That's like 500 more accidental gun deaths than any other civilized country. I wouldn't say only about 500 completely unnecessary deaths.

 

[Missourian]

Had she been armed she might have just been shot.

Or she may have saved everyone in the restaurant...including her parents, who were both killed.

Heck, this is the very reason, this testimony, that I carry a firearm everyday...because at least I'd have a chance...even if it's only a small one, to save my loved ones...or even a stranger.

Better to have a gun and not need it than to need it and not have it.

Well what we know is that she wasn't armed and lived. Had she been armed she might be very dead.

Here is a guy who was better off not having it:
Hallsville man released after accidentally shooting self - Longview News-Journal

I am not arguing to ban anything, just saying it isn't for everyone and this mass marketing to people to carry will probably lead to a lot more accidents. Each person should look at their situation and decide what they want to do, not be swayed by a silly commercial.

Keep staying safe with yours btw bro!

Like I said...I'd rather have a gun and not need it, than need it and not have it.

Don't worry...my wife keeps me in line. If she thinks I'm getting too nonchalant or cavalier in my attitude regarding safety with a firearm, she doesn't hesitate to put me in check.

 

[Brain357]

Had she been armed she might have just been shot.

Or she may have saved everyone in the restaurant...including her parents, who were both killed.

Heck, this is the very reason, this testimony, that I carry a firearm everyday...because at least I'd have a chance...even if it's only a small one, to save my loved ones...or even a stranger.

Better to have a gun and not need it than to need it and not have it.

Well what we know is that she wasn't armed and lived. Had she been armed she might be very dead.

Here is a guy who was better off not having it:
Hallsville man released after accidentally shooting self - Longview News-Journal

I am not arguing to ban anything, just saying it isn't for everyone and this mass marketing to people to carry will probably lead to a lot more accidents. Each person should look at their situation and decide what they want to do, not be swayed by a silly commercial.

Keep staying safe with yours btw bro!

Like I said...I'd rather have a gun and not need it, than need it and not have it.

Don't worry...my wife keeps me in line. If she thinks I'm getting too nonchalant or cavalier in my attitude regarding safety with a firearm, she doesn't hesitate to put me in check.

Well I wouldn't tell you that you can't have it. But I don't think it is for everyone, probably only for a very small minority really. If a mom has a crazy stalker she might want one. But if she avoids criminal activity and loses things a lot then probably not.

Sounds like a heck of a woman. Glad she is taking care of you.

 

[Missourian]

Dana Loesch PSA embedded:

Hope she holds herself responsible for any mom's or children accidently shot and killed like all the examples I have given.

Why would she?

Guns are dangerous. If they weren't, they wouldn't be of much use. There isn't a single soul in America that doesn't know that.

The fact that there are only 500 deaths from accidental shootings is nothing short of an amazing tribute to gun safety education and the responsible nature of the vast majority of gun owners.

Only 500? That's like 500 more accidental gun deaths than any other civilized country. I wouldn't say only about 500 completely unnecessary deaths.

Yep...only.

There are at least 100,000,000 (100 million) firearm owners in the U.S.

There are 14 million hunters in the woods every year.

And only 500 accidental shootings?

550 people per year are killed by accidental non-lightning electrocution.

3,500 people per year die from non-boating unintentional drowning. 1 in five are children.

38,000 people in the U.S. die from unintentional poisoning.

 

[Brain357]

Dana Loesch PSA embedded:

Hope she holds herself responsible for any mom's or children accidently shot and killed like all the examples I have given.

Why would she?

Guns are dangerous. If they weren't, they wouldn't be of much use. There isn't a single soul in America that doesn't know that.

The fact that there are only 500 deaths from accidental shootings is nothing short of an amazing tribute to gun safety education and the responsible nature of the vast majority of gun owners.

Only 500? That's like 500 more accidental gun deaths than any other civilized country. I wouldn't say only about 500 completely unnecessary deaths.

Yep...only.

There are at least 100,000,000 (100 million) firearm owners in the U.S.

There are 14 million hunters in the woods every year.

And only 500 accidental shootings?

550 people per year are killed by accidental non-lightning electrocution.

3,500 people per year die from non-boating unintentional drowning. 1 in five are children.

38,000 people in the U.S. die from unintentional poisoning.

There are not 100,000,000 firearm owners. There are about 123 million households in the country and of those about 38% have guns. So far short of 100 million gun owners.

I think 500 deaths is always a lot. And those are the deaths, over 17,000 accidental shootings where people are often maimed for life.

Let kids play with guns like they do pools and see if there aren't more accidental deaths.

Every person in the country eats several times a day. Most people will never need gun for anything in their lifetime. Of course there are a lot more poisoning deaths.

 

[2aguy]

DEATHS caused by guns are by .01% of the total of civilian owned guns in this country.

Accidental deaths are less than half that.

Til you come up with a machine that can foretell when someone is going to use a firearm in a crime, or a firearm is going to 'accidently' be used to kill someone, you are infringing on a Right of someone to own a firearm.

I was pretty clear that I wasn't saying anything about not allowing. I am not infringing on anything. But it is quite clear that for many it is a bad idea to own. Adam's Lanza's mom had guns for defense, look at the slaughter that caused.

This is why I discuss this with you brain...I always find new information...

the myths surrounding the Sandy Hook shooter...there is nothing in his background that would have kept him from getting a gun on his own........so his mother having guns was not a factor in the shooting, he could have gotten the same guns himself...or others.....and done the same thing...

Mass Murder Myths About Sandy Hook and Adam Lanza

Lanza did not have the sort of psychiatric (or criminal) history that would have disqualified him from owning firearms, which is one reason strengthening the background check system for gun buyers makes no sense as a response to the Sandy Hook massacre.

He used her guns so is a factor. That is one of the results of you suggesting moms should all have guns.

And again, millions of homes have guns in them and no one in the home uses them to murder people. Nothing in his history would have barrred him from getting his own gun so if she had no guns he still could have done what he did.

The fact remains he used his moms guns. Must make your happy she was armed.

DEATHS caused by guns are by .01% of the total of civilian owned guns in this country.

Accidental deaths are less than half that.

Til you come up with a machine that can foretell when someone is going to use a firearm in a crime, or a firearm is going to 'accidently' be used to kill someone, you are infringing on a Right of someone to own a firearm.

I was pretty clear that I wasn't saying anything about not allowing. I am not infringing on anything. But it is quite clear that for many it is a bad idea to own. Adam's Lanza's mom had guns for defense, look at the slaughter that caused.

This is why I discuss this with you brain...I always find new information...

the myths surrounding the Sandy Hook shooter...there is nothing in his background that would have kept him from getting a gun on his own........so his mother having guns was not a factor in the shooting, he could have gotten the same guns himself...or others.....and done the same thing...

Mass Murder Myths About Sandy Hook and Adam Lanza

Lanza did not have the sort of psychiatric (or criminal) history that would have disqualified him from owning firearms, which is one reason strengthening the background check system for gun buyers makes no sense as a response to the Sandy Hook massacre.

He used her guns so is a factor. That is one of the results of you suggesting moms should all have guns.

And all the lives saved and crimes stopped by people who own guns, which outnumber criminal uses of guns are also a factor....

No they don't outnumber criminal uses. Sorry. There are maybe 100k defenses each year. That's is dwarfed by the number of criminal uses.

You know you are lying....

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

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

A quick guide to the studies and the numbers.....the full lay out of what was studied by each study is in the links....
GunCite-Gun Control-How Often Are Guns Used in Self-Defense

GunCite Frequency of Defensive Gun Use in Previous Surveys

Field...1976....3,052,717 ( no cops, military)
DMIa 1978...2,141,512 ( no cops, military)
L.A. TIMES...1994...3,609,68 ( no cops, military)
Kleck......1994...2.5 million ( no cops, military)

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

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


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

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

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

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

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

DEPT. OF JUSTICE...1994...1.5 million

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

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


Page 7:



The most important of the other set of questions asked:



Within the past 12 months, have you yourself used a gun, even if it was not fired, to protect yourself or someone else, or for the protection of property at home, work, or elsewhere?



This is largely identical to the standard question from the other surveys, but the reference period is 1 year rather than 5 years. The question also refers to the respondent alone, rather than to all household members.



Page 8: "Because gun ownership is a strong correlate of firearm resistance (e.g., Kleck and Gertz, 1996, p. 187), we selected a national sample from commercial lists of likely gun owners. Of the eventual respondents, 83% did report the presence of a gun in their home."



Page 8: "This left 3006 households, an 81% response rate. The interviewers selected a single respondent from within each household. In a random 75% of the cases, the interviewers asked for the male head of household. In the remaining 25% they asked for the female head."



Page 10: "Table II. Types of Incidents of Firearm Defense...."



Type of Incident

Number of
Respondents

Percentage of
Respondents

No incident 2851 94.8%
Civilian against offender, clear 48 1.6%
Civilian against offender, ambiguous 24 0.8%
Law enforcement and security work 30 1.0%
Civilian against possible offender, no contact 20 0.7%
Against animals 13 0.4%
Carries gun for protection only 10 0.3%
Target shooting 8 0.3%
Military duties 2 0.1%

-------------------------------------------
Ohio...1982...771,043

Gallup...1991...777,152

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

Lawerence Southwich Jr. 400,000 fewer violent crimes and at least 800,000 violent crimes deterred..
*****************************************
If you take the studies from that Kleck cites in his paper, 16 of them....and you only average the ones that exclude military and police shootings..the average becomes 2 million...I use those studies because I have the details on them...and they are still 10 studies (including Kleck's)....

 

[2aguy]

I guess this woman, a trained marital artists didn't learn that program.........

Katie Pavlich - Rape Survivor: A Call Box Above My Head While I Was Being Brutally Raped Wouldn't Have Helped

Amanda Collins is a young rape survivor. While in college in 2007, she was raped 50 feet away from the campus police department office at the University of Nevada-Reno and was lucky to get out alive. Her attacker was James Biela, a serial rapist who raped two other women and murdered another.

He attacked her at gun point in a gun free zone.

At the time of the attack, Collins was in possession of a concealed weapons permit but was not in possession of her firearm due to university policies prohibiting carrying concealed weapons on campus.

She was also a second degree blackbelt at the time and walked to the parking garage with a large group of people.

No she didn't. Is that still the one example you have?

Brain...tell the women who are raped because they did not have a gun but their attacker had a gun, a knife or physical superiority that they could have easily bested the violent sociopath using unarmed combatives....

As a former self defense instructor I am telling you, you are insane.

The results speak for themselves. Far more effective than owning a gun.

You are nuts.

Ok lets see the results of what I am suggesting:
The researchers followed up with the women after six months, then a year. At the one-year mark, the women who received the resistance training were less likely to have fallen victim to completed rape than the control group, with 5.2% self-reporting victimization vs. 9.8% in the control group. The risk reduction was even greater for attempted rape, with a ratio of 3.4% in the group who got the training, compared with 9.3% in the group who did not.

Now you are suggesting something that will not help at all in the vast majority of rapes and often has results like this:
Woman accidentally kills self adjusting bra holster
A Michigan woman accidentally shot herself to death last month while adjusting the .22-caliber revolver in her bra holster, police said Wednesday.

I think it is clear I am giving the better advice.

Wow...a whole 6 months on a college campus....one of the safest places for a woman to be.

 

[2aguy]

I guess this woman, a trained marital artists didn't learn that program.........

Katie Pavlich - Rape Survivor: A Call Box Above My Head While I Was Being Brutally Raped Wouldn't Have Helped

Amanda Collins is a young rape survivor. While in college in 2007, she was raped 50 feet away from the campus police department office at the University of Nevada-Reno and was lucky to get out alive. Her attacker was James Biela, a serial rapist who raped two other women and murdered another.

He attacked her at gun point in a gun free zone.

At the time of the attack, Collins was in possession of a concealed weapons permit but was not in possession of her firearm due to university policies prohibiting carrying concealed weapons on campus.

She was also a second degree blackbelt at the time and walked to the parking garage with a large group of people.

No she didn't. Is that still the one example you have?

Brain...tell the women who are raped because they did not have a gun but their attacker had a gun, a knife or physical superiority that they could have easily bested the violent sociopath using unarmed combatives....

As a former self defense instructor I am telling you, you are insane.

The results speak for themselves. Far more effective than owning a gun.

You are nuts.

Ok lets see the results of what I am suggesting:
The researchers followed up with the women after six months, then a year. At the one-year mark, the women who received the resistance training were less likely to have fallen victim to completed rape than the control group, with 5.2% self-reporting victimization vs. 9.8% in the control group. The risk reduction was even greater for attempted rape, with a ratio of 3.4% in the group who got the training, compared with 9.3% in the group who did not.

Now you are suggesting something that will not help at all in the vast majority of rapes and often has results like this:
Woman accidentally kills self adjusting bra holster
A Michigan woman accidentally shot herself to death last month while adjusting the .22-caliber revolver in her bra holster, police said Wednesday.

I think it is clear I am giving the better advice.

And now for the truth.......

And here we have studies that show that guns are the most effective way to stop a rape.....
Guns Effective Defense Against Rape

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

Guns Effective Defense Against Rape


However, most recent studies with improved methodology are consistently showing that the more forceful the resistance, the lower the risk of a completed rape, with no increase in physical injury. Sarah Ullman's original research (Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 1998) and critical review of past studies (Criminal Justice and Behavior, 1997) are especially valuable in solidifying this conclusion.

I wish to single out one particular subtype of physical resistance: Use of a weapon, and especially a firearm, is statistically a woman's best means of resistance, greatly enhancing her odds of escaping both rape and injury, compared to any other strategy of physical or verbal resistance. This conclusion is drawn from four types of information.

First, a 1989 study (Furby, Journal of Interpersonal Violence) found that both male and female survey respondents judged a gun to be the most effective means that a potential rape victim could use to fend off the assault. Rape "experts" considered it a close second, after eye-gouging.

Second, raw data from the 1979-1985 installments of the Justice Department's annual National Crime Victim Survey show that when a woman resists a stranger rape with a gun, the probability of completion was 0.1 percent and of victim injury 0.0 percent, compared to 31 percent and 40 percent, respectively, for all stranger rapes (Kleck, Social Problems, 1990).

Third, a recent paper (Southwick, Journal of Criminal Justice, 2000) analyzed victim resistance to violent crimes generally, with robbery, aggravated assault and rape considered together. Women who resisted with a gun were 2.5 times more likely to escape without injury than those who did not resist and 4 times more likely to escape uninjured than those who resisted with any means other than a gun. Similarly, their property losses in a robbery were reduced more than six-fold and almost three-fold, respectively, compared to the other categories of resistance strategy.

Fourth, we have two studies in the last 20 years that directly address the outcomes of women who resist attempted rape with a weapon. (Lizotte, Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 1986; Kleck, Social Problems, 1990.) The former concludes,"Further, women who resist rape with a gun or knife dramatically decrease their probability of completion." (Lizotte did not analyze victim injuries apart from the rape itself.) The latter concludes that "resistance with a gun or knife is the most effective form of resistance for preventing completion of a rape"; this is accomplished "without creating any significant additional risk of other injury."

The best conclusion from available scientific data, then, is when avoidance of rape has failed and one must choose between being raped and resisting, a woman's best option is to resist with a gun in her hands.

********************

So, again a woman's best chance for stopping the rape and ultimately surviving the situation is to use a gun.....
**

 

[2aguy]

Sheriff: Woman accidentally shot by gun in her purse

Again.....in 2013 there were only 505 accidental gun deaths in a country of over 320 million people with over 320 million guns in private hands....

And.....over 12.8 million people actually carrying guns on their person for self defense......

505.

 

[2aguy]

Dana Loesch PSA embedded:

Hope she holds herself responsible for any mom's or children accidently shot and killed like all the examples I have given.

Hmmm....If she could I am sure she might just say...**** you brain.

And all those people who die because people like you disarmed them, their blood is on your hands. And those gun free zones have allowed a lot of people to die.....

 

[Missourian]

Had she been armed she might have just been shot.

Or she may have saved everyone in the restaurant...including her parents, who were both killed.

Heck, this is the very reason, this testimony, that I carry a firearm everyday...because at least I'd have a chance...even if it's only a small one, to save my loved ones...or even a stranger.

Better to have a gun and not need it than to need it and not have it.

Well what we know is that she wasn't armed and lived. Had she been armed she might be very dead.

Here is a guy who was better off not having it:
Hallsville man released after accidentally shooting self - Longview News-Journal

I am not arguing to ban anything, just saying it isn't for everyone and this mass marketing to people to carry will probably lead to a lot more accidents. Each person should look at their situation and decide what they want to do, not be swayed by a silly commercial.

Keep staying safe with yours btw bro!

Like I said...I'd rather have a gun and not need it, than need it and not have it.

Don't worry...my wife keeps me in line. If she thinks I'm getting too nonchalant or cavalier in my attitude regarding safety with a firearm, she doesn't hesitate to put me in check.

Well I wouldn't tell you that you can't have it. But I don't think it is for everyone, probably only for a very small minority really. If a mom has a crazy stalker she might want one. But if she avoids criminal activity and loses things a lot then probably not.

Sounds like a heck of a woman. Glad she is taking care of you.

She's definitely one of the good ones.

I'd have to agree with you on that. Like I said before, guns are dangerous. It wouldn't be worth having one if they weren't.

There is a risk/reward analysis that needs to be mentally performed before making a decision to carry a firearm everyday...and that is going to be different for everyone. If you live in Mayberry, the risk of carrying a firearm may outweigh the reward.

The prospective firearm buyer also need to do research. While my wife carries a DAO semi-automatic with manual decocker and chambered round pop-up indicator, I carry the what I consider a safer single/double semi-automatic with grip safety. If you have no idea what any of this means, you are not ready to go gun shopping...while conversely, if I verified that my firearm was chambered in 45ACP, a vast majority of knowledgeable gun owners who already suspected that they could identify my firearm would have those suspicions confirmed.

Finally, the prospective gun owner must be willing to train. Learn proper safety procedures, care and maintenance of a firearm, then learn to deploy and shoot that firearm well.

 

[2aguy]

Had she been armed she might have just been shot.

Or she may have saved everyone in the restaurant...including her parents, who were both killed.

Heck, this is the very reason, this testimony, that I carry a firearm everyday...because at least I'd have a chance...even if it's only a small one, to save my loved ones...or even a stranger.

Better to have a gun and not need it than to need it and not have it.

Well what we know is that she wasn't armed and lived. Had she been armed she might be very dead.

Here is a guy who was better off not having it:
Hallsville man released after accidentally shooting self - Longview News-Journal

I am not arguing to ban anything, just saying it isn't for everyone and this mass marketing to people to carry will probably lead to a lot more accidents. Each person should look at their situation and decide what they want to do, not be swayed by a silly commercial.

Keep staying safe with yours btw bro!

Like I said...I'd rather have a gun and not need it, than need it and not have it.

Don't worry...my wife keeps me in line. If she thinks I'm getting too nonchalant or cavalier in my attitude regarding safety with a firearm, she doesn't hesitate to put me in check.

Well I wouldn't tell you that you can't have it. But I don't think it is for everyone, probably only for a very small minority really. If a mom has a crazy stalker she might want one. But if she avoids criminal activity and loses things a lot then probably not.

Sounds like a heck of a woman. Glad she is taking care of you.

She's definitely one of the good ones.

I'd have to agree with you on that. Like I said before, guns are dangerous. It wouldn't be worth having one if they weren't.

There is a risk/reward analysis that needs to be mentally performed before making a decision to carry a firearm everyday...and that is going to be different for everyone. If you live in Mayberry, the risk of carrying a firearm may outweigh the reward.

The prospective firearm buyer also need to do research. While my wife carries a DAO semi-automatic with manual decocker and chambered round pop-up indicator, I carry the what I consider a safer single/double semi-automatic with grip safety. If you have no idea what any of this means, you are not ready to go gun shopping...while conversely, if I verified that my firearm was chambered in 45ACP, a vast majority of knowledgeable gun owners who already suspected that they could identify my firearm would have those suspicions confirmed.

Finally, the prospective gun owner must be willing to train. Learn proper safety procedures, care and maintenance of a firearm, then learn to deploy and shoot that firearm well.

You can do all of that...brain still wants to disarm you, your wife and everyone else.

 

[2aguy]

....imagine your closest friends and family murdered in front of you because you were not allowed to have a gun.......

That's a long time ago.

The passage of time makes it no less relevant.

Had she been armed she might have just been shot.

Let's see. Sadly, because of people like you brain Dr. Hupp was disarmed. She was forced to rely on your anti gun extremist techniques for self defense...let's review...

1) rely on the kindness and compassion of the mass shooter murdering people in a restaurant.

2) rely on the incompetence of the mass shooter murdering people in a restaurant.

3) rely on blind, dumb luck to save your ass when a mass shooter drives his pickup through the window of the restaurant you are eating in, and starts shooting all the legally disarmed customers...


To all of you anti gun extremists out there....which of the above techniques saved the lives of Dr. Hupp's parent's...

Oh yeah...that's right....they were both executed by the mass shooter because you disarmed them, and Dr. Gratia Hupp.......

Nice work assholes....

 

[Missourian]

There are not 100,000,000 firearm owners. There are about 123 million households in the country and of those about 38% have guns. So far short of 100 million gun owners.

One in Three Americans Own Guns; Culture a Factor, Study Finds : NBCNews.com

"The study, published in the journal Injury Prevention, is one of several trying to pin down the number of gun owners in the United States. No agency keeps statistics on gun ownership and many pro-gun activists advocate keeping gun ownership private because of fears about potential future laws that might take guns away."
​

This study was conducted in 2014. So, let's do some arithmetic...one in three of a pool of 330,000,000 (330 million) equals 110 million gun owners...no need to argue with me...feel free to argue with the author of the study:

1. Correspondence to Dr Bindu Kalesan, Department of Epidemiology, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, 722 W. 168th St., New York, NY 10032, USA; bindu.kalesan@gmail.com

​

 

[HappyJoy]

An actual still from an ad by Crickett Firearms, which markets rifles to young children. Look at where the mother is pointing the barrel of the rifle here.

Come on, that's not fair. I was taught to shoot my rifle like a big barbie bazooka too!

 

[Jarlaxle]

44% of victims under 18, can't own a gun
80% are committed by someone the victim knows, not going to use a gun for defense.

Hmm...sounds like bullshit to me. Offhand, I watched my uncle draw and cock on his brother in law. Had he not backed down, my uncle WOULD have fired, and my father WOULD NOT have survived.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Here is what to do if you want to prevent rape:
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/12/h...ntion-program-proves-a-rare-success.html?_r=0

And nobody will get accidently shot.

I guess this woman, a trained marital artists didn't learn that program.........

Katie Pavlich - Rape Survivor: A Call Box Above My Head While I Was Being Brutally Raped Wouldn't Have Helped

Amanda Collins is a young rape survivor. While in college in 2007, she was raped 50 feet away from the campus police department office at the University of Nevada-Reno and was lucky to get out alive. Her attacker was James Biela, a serial rapist who raped two other women and murdered another.

He attacked her at gun point in a gun free zone.

At the time of the attack, Collins was in possession of a concealed weapons permit but was not in possession of her firearm due to university policies prohibiting carrying concealed weapons on campus.

She was also a second degree blackbelt at the time and walked to the parking garage with a large group of people.

No she didn't. Is that still the one example you have?

Brain...tell the women who are raped because they did not have a gun but their attacker had a gun, a knife or physical superiority that they could have easily bested the violent sociopath using unarmed combatives....

As a former self defense instructor I am telling you, you are insane.

Some women can (my wife comes to mind), most cannot.

 

[Brain357]

I was pretty clear that I wasn't saying anything about not allowing. I am not infringing on anything. But it is quite clear that for many it is a bad idea to own. Adam's Lanza's mom had guns for defense, look at the slaughter that caused.

This is why I discuss this with you brain...I always find new information...

the myths surrounding the Sandy Hook shooter...there is nothing in his background that would have kept him from getting a gun on his own........so his mother having guns was not a factor in the shooting, he could have gotten the same guns himself...or others.....and done the same thing...

Mass Murder Myths About Sandy Hook and Adam Lanza

Lanza did not have the sort of psychiatric (or criminal) history that would have disqualified him from owning firearms, which is one reason strengthening the background check system for gun buyers makes no sense as a response to the Sandy Hook massacre.

He used her guns so is a factor. That is one of the results of you suggesting moms should all have guns.

And again, millions of homes have guns in them and no one in the home uses them to murder people. Nothing in his history would have barrred him from getting his own gun so if she had no guns he still could have done what he did.

The fact remains he used his moms guns. Must make your happy she was armed.

I was pretty clear that I wasn't saying anything about not allowing. I am not infringing on anything. But it is quite clear that for many it is a bad idea to own. Adam's Lanza's mom had guns for defense, look at the slaughter that caused.

This is why I discuss this with you brain...I always find new information...

the myths surrounding the Sandy Hook shooter...there is nothing in his background that would have kept him from getting a gun on his own........so his mother having guns was not a factor in the shooting, he could have gotten the same guns himself...or others.....and done the same thing...

Mass Murder Myths About Sandy Hook and Adam Lanza

Lanza did not have the sort of psychiatric (or criminal) history that would have disqualified him from owning firearms, which is one reason strengthening the background check system for gun buyers makes no sense as a response to the Sandy Hook massacre.

He used her guns so is a factor. That is one of the results of you suggesting moms should all have guns.

And all the lives saved and crimes stopped by people who own guns, which outnumber criminal uses of guns are also a factor....

No they don't outnumber criminal uses. Sorry. There are maybe 100k defenses each year. That's is dwarfed by the number of criminal uses.

You know you are lying....

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

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

A quick guide to the studies and the numbers.....the full lay out of what was studied by each study is in the links....
GunCite-Gun Control-How Often Are Guns Used in Self-Defense

GunCite Frequency of Defensive Gun Use in Previous Surveys

Field...1976....3,052,717 ( no cops, military)
DMIa 1978...2,141,512 ( no cops, military)
L.A. TIMES...1994...3,609,68 ( no cops, military)
Kleck......1994...2.5 million ( no cops, military)

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

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


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

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

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

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

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

DEPT. OF JUSTICE...1994...1.5 million

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

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


Page 7:



The most important of the other set of questions asked:



Within the past 12 months, have you yourself used a gun, even if it was not fired, to protect yourself or someone else, or for the protection of property at home, work, or elsewhere?



This is largely identical to the standard question from the other surveys, but the reference period is 1 year rather than 5 years. The question also refers to the respondent alone, rather than to all household members.



Page 8: "Because gun ownership is a strong correlate of firearm resistance (e.g., Kleck and Gertz, 1996, p. 187), we selected a national sample from commercial lists of likely gun owners. Of the eventual respondents, 83% did report the presence of a gun in their home."



Page 8: "This left 3006 households, an 81% response rate. The interviewers selected a single respondent from within each household. In a random 75% of the cases, the interviewers asked for the male head of household. In the remaining 25% they asked for the female head."



Page 10: "Table II. Types of Incidents of Firearm Defense...."



Type of Incident

Number of
Respondents

Percentage of
Respondents

No incident 2851 94.8%
Civilian against offender, clear 48 1.6%
Civilian against offender, ambiguous 24 0.8%
Law enforcement and security work 30 1.0%
Civilian against possible offender, no contact 20 0.7%
Against animals 13 0.4%
Carries gun for protection only 10 0.3%
Target shooting 8 0.3%
Military duties 2 0.1%

-------------------------------------------
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)....

Lying? The vast majority of your own studies say less than 2 million. Show me mathematically given crime and ownership rates that 2 million is even possible.