More normal people with guns, more criminals getting shot during criminal attacks….good.

[RetiredGySgt]

accidental deaths with firearms in this country are 500 or less a year.

 

[progressive hunter]

accidental deaths with firearms in this country are 500 or less a year.

I think more people die from falling down stairs than that,,

 

[braalian]

People being irresponsible gun owners isn’t justification for banning guns

 

[otto105]

The ones doing the shooting are not normal people...

they are repeat offenders released over and over again by the democrats

Hilarious

 

[2aguy]

Hilarious

It is the truth.

 

[2aguy]

I personally don't know anyone who ever shot a violent criminal or stopped a robbery with a gun.

However I personally know many, many victims of people with guns. 43 times more likely is close to reality over my 56 years of experience with guns. 2.7 is pure fiction.

Yeah....right. You are an idiot.....

From a link by Bluesman....

In a 1986 NEJM paper, Kellermann and associates, for example, claimed their “scientific research” proved that defending oneself or one’s family with a firearm in the home is dangerous and counterproductive, claiming “a gun owner is 43 times more likely to kill a family member than an intruder.” This erroneous assertion is what Dr. Edgar Suter, chairman of Doctors for Integrity in Policy Research (DIPR), has accurately termed Kellermann’s “43 times fallacy” for gun ownership.7



In a critical and now classic review published in the March 1994 Journal of the Medical Association of Georgia (JMAG), Suter not only found evidence of “methodologic and conceptual errors,” such as prejudicially truncated data and non-sequitur logic, but also “overt mendacity,” including the listing of “the correct methodology which was described but never used by the authors.” Moreover, the gun-control researchers “deceptively understated” the protective benefits of guns. Suter wrote: “The true measure of the protective benefits of guns are the lives and medical costs saved, the injuries prevented, and the property protected—not the burglar or rapist body count. Since only 0.1 percent-0.2 percent of defensive uses of guns involve the death of the criminal, any study, such as this, that counts criminal deaths as the only measure of the protective benefits of guns will expectedly underestimate the benefits of firearms by a factor of 500 to 1,000.”8

Greater Risk to Victims?​

In 1993, in another peer-reviewed NEJM article (the research again heavily funded by the CDC), Kellermann attempted to show that guns in the home are a greater risk to the residents than to the assailants. Despite valid criticisms by reputable scholars of his previous works (including the 1986 study), Kellermann used the same flawed methodology and non-sequitur approach. He also used study populations with disproportionately high rates of serious psychosocial dysfunction from three selected counties known to be unrepresentative of the general U.S. population.

For example, 53 percent of the case subjects had a household member who had been arrested, 31 percent had a household history of illicit drug use, 32 percent had a household member hit or hurt in a family fight, and 17 percent had a family member hurt so seriously in a domestic altercation that prompt medical attention was required. Moreover, the case studies and control groups in this analysis had a high incidence of financial instability. In fact, gun ownership, the supposedly high-risk factor for homicide, was not one of the most strongly associated factors for being a murder victim. Drinking, illicit drugs, living alone, a history of family violence, and living in a rented home were all greater individual risk factors for being murdered than having a gun in the home. There is no basis for applying the conclusions to the general population.

Most important, Kellermann and his associates again failed to consider the protective benefits of firearms.

In this 1993 study, they arrived at the “2.7 times fallacy.” In other words, they downsized their fallacy and claimed a family member is 2.7 times more likely to kill another family member than an intruder. Yet, a fallacy is still a fallacy and, as such, it deserves no place in scientific investigations and peer-reviewed medical publications.

Although the 1993 NEJM study purported to show that the homicide victims were killed with a gun ordinarily kept in the home, the fact is, as Kates and associates showed, 71.1 percent of the victims were killed by assailants who didn’t live in the victims’ household using guns presumably not kept in that home.9

While Kellermann and associates began with 444 cases of homicides in the home, cases were dropped from the study for a variety of reasons, and in the end, only 316 matched pairs were used, representing only 71.2 percent of the original 444 homicide cases. This reduction increased tremendously the chance for sampling bias. Analysis of why 28.8 percent of the cases were dropped would have helped indicate if the study had been compromised by the existence of such biases, but Dr. Kellermann, in an unprecedented move, refused to release his data and make it available for other researchers to analyze.

These errors invalidated the findings of the 1993 Kellermann study, just as they tainted those of 1986. Nevertheless, the errors have crept into and now permeate the lay press, the electronic media, and particularly, the medical journals, where they remain uncorrected and are repeated time and again as gospel. The media and gun-control groups still cling to the “43 times fallacy” and repeatedly invoke the erroneous mantra that “a gun owner is 43 times more likely to kill a family member than an intruder.” And, because the publication of the data (and their purported conclusions) supposedly come from “reliable” sources and objective medical researchers, they are given a lot of weight and credibility by practicing physicians, social scientists (who should know better), social workers, law-enforcement officials, and particularly gun-banning politicians.


The Tainted Public-Health Model of Gun Control | Miguel A. Faria Jr.

 

[2aguy]

I will raise you 1.1 million times a year rapes, robberies, murders, beatings and stabbings are stopped by law abiding people with guns....

Lives saved....based on research? By law abiding gun owners using guns to stop criminals?



Case Closed: Kleck Is Still Correct



that makes for at least 176,000 lives saved—

==============

A quick guide to the studies and the numbers.....the full lay out of what was studied by each study is in the links....

The name of the group doing the study, the year of the study, the number of defensive gun uses and if police and military defensive gun uses are included.....notice the bill clinton and obama defensive gun use research is highlighted.....

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, no military)

DMIa 1978...2,141,512 ( no cops, no military)

L.A. TIMES...1994...3,609,68 ( no cops, no military)

Kleck......1994...2.5 million ( no cops, no military)


2021 national firearm survey, Prof. William English, PhD. designed by Deborah Azrael of Harvard T. Chan School of public policy, and Mathew Miller, Northeastern university.......1.67 million defensive uses annually.

CDC...1996-1998... 1.1 million averaged over those years.( no cops, no military)

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

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


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

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

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

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

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

DEPT. OF JUSTICE...1994...1.5 million ( the bill clinton study)

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


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

Ohio...1982...771,043

Gallup...1991...777,152

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

Lawerence Southwich Jr. 400,000 fewer violent crimes and at least 800,000 violent crimes deterred..

2021 national firearms survey..

The survey was designed by Deborah Azrael of the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, and Matthew Miller of Northeastern University,
----
The survey further finds that approximately a third of gun owners (31.1%) have used a firearm to defend themselves or their property, often on more than one occasion, and it estimates that guns are used defensively by firearms owners in approximately 1.67 million incidents per year. Handguns are the most common firearm employed for self-defense (used in 65.9% of defensive incidents), and in most defensive incidents (81.9%) no shot was fired. Approximately a quarter (25.2%) of defensive incidents occurred within the gun owner's home, and approximately half (53.9%) occurred outside their home, but on their property. About one out of ten (9.1%) defensive gun uses occurred in public, and about one out of twenty (4.8%) occurred at work.
2021 National Firearms Survey

Clinton's study by the DOJ....

https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles/165476.pdf

Applying those restrictions leaves 19 NSPOF respondents (0.8 percent of the sample), representing 1.5 million defensive users. This estimate is directly comparable to the well-known estimate of Kleck and Gertz, shown in the last column of exhibit 7. While the NSPOF estimate is smaller, it is statistically plausible that the difference is due to sampling error. Inclusion of multiple DGUs reported by half of the 19 NSPOF respondents increases the estimate to 4.7 million DGUs.



n the third column of Table 6.2, we apply the Kleck and Gertz (1995) criteria for "genuine" DGUs (type A), leaving us with just 19 respondents. They represent 1.5 million defensive users. This estimate is directly comparable to the well-known Kleck and Gertz estimate of 2.5 million, shown in the last

While ours is smaller, it is staistically plausible that the difference is due to sampling error. to the when we include the multiple DGUs victim. defensive reported by half our 19 respondents, our estimate increases to 4.7 milli

While ours is smaller, it is statistically plausible that the difference petrator; in most cases (69 percent), the is due to sampling error. Note that when we include the multiple DGUs reported by half our 19 respondents, our estimate increases to 4.7 million DGUs.
----

As shown in Table 6.6, the defender fired his or her gun in 27 percent of these incidents (combined "fire warning shots" and "fire at perpetrator" percentages, though some respondents reported firing both warning shots and airning at the perpetrator). Forty percent of these were "warning shots," and about a third were aimed at the perpetrator but missed. The perpetrator was wounded by the crime victim in eight percent of all DGUs. In nine percent of DGUs the victim captured and held the perpetrator at gunpoint until the police could arrive.

Obama's study...

Defensive Use of Guns

Defensive use of guns by crime victims is a common occurrence, although the exact number remains disputed (Cook and Ludwig, 1996; Kleck, 2001a). Almost all national survey estimates indicate that defensive gun uses by victims are at least as common as offensive uses by criminals, with estimates of annual uses ranging from about 500,000 to more than 3 million (Kleck, 2001a), in the context of about 300,000 violent crimes involving firearms in 2008 (BJS, 2010).
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2013. Priorities for Research to Reduce the Threat of Firearm-Related Violence. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. Priorities for Research to Reduce the Threat of Firearm-Related Violence |The National Academies Press.

https://nap.nationalacademies.org/read/18319/chapter/3#16

 

[Blues Man]

In America, attempted suicide is not both illegal or legal. So you won't be sent to jail, but you are likely to be locked up in a nut house for assessment.

The thing is, suicide by gun often means they harmed themselves, whereas a gun nut authorised by the 2ndA harmed many innocents. So suicide by gun is irrelevant.

Maybe a 72 hour hold at most. The only reason for that is the erroneous assumption that a person who attempts suicide is necessarily mentally ill.

A gun cannot harm anyone. it is an inanimate object. Tell me to you blame the match for the fire too?

Every single person has the ABSOLUTE right to decide whether they live or die. Why do you think a government has the right to decide such things for a person?

 

[JoeB131]

I will raise you 1.1 million times a year rapes, robberies, murders, beatings and stabbings are stopped by law abiding people with guns....

Lives saved....based on research? By law abiding gun owners using guns to stop criminals?

Then how come I don't know of anyone who ever has stopped a crime with a gun?

I know of three people who died from gun violence, including a neighbor who shot himself not 30 feet from my condo.

(We jokingly referred to that as the cursed unit, as all sorts of weird things happened there. The Next owners did some voodoo thing to scare out the spirits.)

Now, you would think that if this happens millions of times, I would know of someone directly or indirectly.

 

[Blues Man]

Then how come I don't know of anyone who ever has stopped a crime with a gun?

I know of three people who died from gun violence, including a neighbor who shot himself not 30 feet from my condo.

(We jokingly referred to that as the cursed unit, as all sorts of weird things happened there. The Next owners did some voodoo thing to scare out the spirits.)

Now, you would think that if this happens millions of times, I would know of someone directly or indirectly.

Why would you?

 

[JoeB131]

Why would you?

Because if it's a common occurance, I'd have heard about it from a friend, a family member, or a co-worker at the office talking about how someone broke into their house last night and they had to scare them off with a gun.

But I never have.

I did know about the neighbor who shot himself. I wasn't there when it happened, but everyone in the building was talking about it.
I did know about the guy from the old neighborhood who shot his wife during an argument, and then tried to dispose of the body by cutting it up. It was kind of a neighborhood legend for years.
I did know about the coworker who told me about how her teenage son shot himself.

But yet, not one person has ever told me about that time the had to chase off the scary black man with a gun.

 

[Blues Man]

Because if it's a common occurance, I'd have heard about it from a friend, a family member, or a co-worker at the office talking about how someone broke into their house last night and they had to scare them off with a gun.

But I never have.

I did know about the neighbor who shot himself. I wasn't there when it happened, but everyone in the building was talking about it.
I did know about the guy from the old neighborhood who shot his wife during an argument, and then tried to dispose of the body by cutting it up. It was kind of a neighborhood legend for years.
I did know about the coworker who told me about how her teenage son shot himself.

But yet, not one person has ever told me about that time the had to chase off the scary black man with a gun.

Common?

Out of 340 million people ? 1 million people is .29% of the population.

the average person knows how many people?

And there is the inconvenient little fact that any DGU where a gun is not discharged is not going to be recorded in any police records or be reported by any news outlet.

And if you heard anyone say they did use a gun to defend themselves you would laugh it off and say the guy has a Rambo complex then you would childishly make some penis reference.

 

[Captain Caveman]

and yet you cant give a single example,,,
while we have dozens if not hundreds of examples posted on this forum each yr where a gun stopped a violent crime,,,

Hundreds of fallacies

 

[Blues Man]

Hundreds of fallacies

The NRA publishes monthly at least 7 or 8 instances of citizens using guns to protect themselves. All the details are easily confirmed as dates, times states and towns are all included.

It's not a fallacy that there are probably many more than those where a piece of shit would be criminal wasn't shot.

An Official Journal Of The NRA | The Armed Citizen® Feb. 27, 2023

Read today's "The Armed Citizen" entry for real stories of law-abiding citizens, past and present, who used their firearms to save lives.

www.americanrifleman.org

 

[JoeB131]

Common?

Out of 340 million people ? 1 million people is .29% of the population.

the average person knows how many people?

And there is the inconvenient little fact that any DGU where a gun is not discharged is not going to be recorded in any police records or be reported by any news outlet.

And if you heard anyone say they did use a gun to defend themselves you would laugh it off and say the guy has a Rambo complex then you would childishly make some penis reference.

You've got it in reverse.

There are 45,000 gun deaths a year. That's a statistically small number, yet most of us know of at least one person who died from a gunshot. I personally know of three.

If there were really really 1.1 million DGU's a year, we'd all know of a lot of them.

Yet I have never heard a coworker, a neighbor, a friend or a family member tell me about that time that they used their gun to scare off a criminal. And I interact with thousands of people.

 

[JoeB131]

The NRA publishes monthly at least 7 or 8 instances of citizens using guns to protect themselves. All the details are easily confirmed as dates, times states and towns are all included.

A whole 7 or 8 monthly? So that comes out to what, less than 100 a year.

Meanwhile we have,

19,500 gun homicides a year
23,500 gun suicides
70,000 gun injuries
400,000 gun crimes

 

[Blues Man]

You've got it in reverse.

There are 45,000 gun deaths a year. That's a statistically small number, yet most of us know of at least one person who died from a gunshot. I personally know of three.

If there were really really 1.1 million DGU's a year, we'd all know of a lot of them.

Yet I have never heard a coworker, a neighbor, a friend or a family member tell me about that time that they used their gun to scare off a criminal. And I interact with thousands of people.

Suicides are not crimes nor are the defensive gun uses.

And no we wouldn't know if they are not recorded in police reports or reported on the news.

and "interact" does not mean all those people tell you everything about their lives.

and again 1000 people is .0029% of the population and most of those will not be telling you any personal details in your "interactions"

 

[Blues Man]

A whole 7 or 8 monthly? So that comes out to what, less than 100 a year.

Meanwhile we have,

19,500 gun homicides a year
23,500 gun suicides
70,000 gun injuries
400,000 gun crimes

View attachment 761811

Irrelevant. And how many DGUs never get reported? You like to gloss over that don't you? If there is no police report or news coverage then you have no way of knowing.
and why do you think that the 7 or 8 in the magazine every month are the only ones in the entire country?

Suicide is not a crime it is a choice that every single person has the absolute right to make. There are just as many suicides that don't use a gun.

How many of those gun injuries are criminals getting shot and not dying?

And as I have said it is 100% irrelevant how many DGUs there are

IMO it's more likely to be 500K a year as the truth is always somewhere between the extremes but you haven't seemed to realize that yet either.

 

[Hollie]

Then how come I don't know of anyone who ever has stopped a crime with a gun?

I know of three people who died from gun violence, including a neighbor who shot himself not 30 feet from my condo.

(We jokingly referred to that as the cursed unit, as all sorts of weird things happened there. The Next owners did some voodoo thing to scare out the spirits.)

Now, you would think that if this happens millions of times, I would know of someone directly or indirectly.

Because woke is a mental disorder.....

I don't personally know of anyone who has been saved from death or traumatic injury because they were wearing a seat belt during a traffic accident. I don't doubt, however, that seat belts actually do prevent death or traumatic injury.

How come I don't know about the three people you claim died from gun violence? You're just making that up, right?

 

[Hollie]

A whole 7 or 8 monthly? So that comes out to what, less than 100 a year.

Meanwhile we have,

19,500 gun homicides a year
23,500 gun suicides
70,000 gun injuries
400,000 gun crimes

View attachment 761811

The woke'ists are driven to copy and paste number without attribution while flailing their Pom Poms for woke prosecutors and DA's who refuse to charge criminals for entire classes of crimes.

It’s Not Just Rising Crime: Rogue Prosecutors Are a Huge Problem

The very nature of criminal justice—to protect the innocent and increase public safety—is today undermined by a group of district attorneys (Das) in America’s big, mostly Democratic-run cities. These rogue prosecutors, and those who fund them, dress up their schemes with poll-tested feel-good...

www.heritage.org

"The very nature of criminal justice—to protect the innocent and increase public safety—is today undermined by a group of district attorneys.

They believe the entire criminal justice system is racist. It’s absurd, but they believe it.

This cancerous movement will continue unless and until the people most affected by these policies—black and brown inner-city men and women—say enough is enough."



Beetlejuice, Beetlejuice, Beetlejuice