The fallacy of self defence by gun

[Captain Caveman]

You have the balls to call out "shady studies" and then post an author selected collection of his 18 - 25 year old papers, all written by one anti-gun activist who is the Director of the Harvard Injury Control Research Center and the Harvard Youth Violence Prevention Center and is a Senior Soros Justice Fellow?



Even if we were to accept Mr. Hemenway's selected bibliography as unbiased, broad-based research and a scholarly representation of defensive gun use, (it's not) it is a snapshot of the situation in the mid-90's to early 2000's.

Are you really arguing the atmosphere of armed self-defense hasn't changed since then, given the expansion of jurisdictions that have liberalized citizen carriage of guns for self-defense?

1997:

View attachment 648814

View attachment 648815​

What's next for you?

How about a discussion of current internet security and identity theft threats, citing papers from 1997-2004?

.

The age of the studies are irrelevant. If you require more, check this link -

The psychology of guns: risk, fear, and motivated reasoning - Humanities and Social Sciences Communications

The gun debate in America is often framed as a stand-off between two immutable positions with little potential to move ahead with meaningful legislative reform. Attempts to resolve this impasse have been thwarted by thinking about gun ownership attitudes as based on rational choice economics...

www.nature.com

You will find a wealth of studies outlining the negative effects of guns, "more than 30 years of public health research supports thinking of guns as statistically more of a personal hazard than a benefit".

Many studies, scientific based and peer reviewed, all draw the same conclusions, the Harvard ones being no different.

Keep on reading and you find that gun nuts suffer from the cognitive biases and motivated reasoning problems.

 

[Blues Man]

It's on topic. You feel you need a gun for self defence, one fallacy you guys patter is that you need it against home invaders. So people are wanting to steal from your house when you're at work. So please explain how your gun saved you when your home was invaded when you were at work? Or do people only want to break into you house when you're at home??

Please engage both brain cells this time.

What you are too thick in the head to realize is that it only takes one time one just one occurrence of a violent crime to change your life forever.

When I got jumped and mugged when I was 18 I received severe injuries that still affect me today.

I have permanent vision impairment in my left eye and I still get crushing headaches on a pretty regular basis.
I had to have my spleen removed so I have been more susceptible to illnesses.

In fact the Dr told me that my hypothermia from being left unconscious in the middle of winter after my coat and shoes were stolen that I could just as easily have died before I made it to the ER.

So maybe you should just stfu about shit you know nothing about.

 

[Mac-7]

I've always stated that needing a gun for self defence was a fallacy, and we all know it is. So what's with the gun nuts running off and copying pasting articles from shady sources?

Well look no further, just simply check with Harvard and the studies -

Gun Threats and Self-Defense Gun Use

1-3. Guns are not used millions of times each year in self-defense We use epidemiological theory to explain why the “false positive” problem for rare events can lead to large overestimates of the i…

www.hsph.harvard.edu

Pardon the pun, Harvard blow holes in the gun nut's self defence argument.

So anyone arming up for the mistaken belief they need to for self defence against others, they're the worst candidate to own a gun.

Relying on a gun for self defense is a better option than calling 911 when a street thug is waving a knife at you

 

[Blues Man]

Relying on a gun for self defense is a better option than calling 911 when a street thug is waving a knife at you

That and the fact that the Supreme Court has ruled that police have absolutely no legal obligation to come to anyone's aid. So why would any sane person rely on the police for protection?

 

[Mac-7]

That and the fact that the Supreme Court has ruled that police have absolutely no legal obligation to come to anyone's aid. So why would any sane person rely on the police for protection?

Libs have this naive hope that it will never happen to them

 

[Captain Caveman]

Relying on a gun for self defense is a better option than calling 911 when a street thug is waving a knife at you

More fallacies.

 

[Captain Caveman]

What you are too thick in the head to realize is that it only takes one time one just one occurrence of a violent crime to change your life forever.

When I got jumped and mugged when I was 18 I received severe injuries that still affect me today.

I have permanent vision impairment in my left eye and I still get crushing headaches on a pretty regular basis.
I had to have my spleen removed so I have been more susceptible to illnesses.

In fact the Dr told me that my hypothermia from being left unconscious in the middle of winter after my coat and shoes were stolen that I could just as easily have died before I made it to the ER.

So maybe you should just stfu about shit you know nothing about.

Shut up kid, the topic is above your pea size brain and you're still spouting more fallacies.

 

[Blues Man]

Shut up kid, the topic is above your pea size brain and you're still spouting more fallacies.

My injuries aren't a fallacy, Dipshit.

Violent crime and the need for good people to protect themselves from the fucking animals in this world are not fallacies.

You being to fucking stupid to realize that isn't a fallacy either,

 

[Captain Caveman]

My injuries aren't a fallacy, Dipshit.

Violent crime and the need for good people to protect themselves from the fucking animals in this world are not fallacies.

You being to fucking stupid to realize that isn't a fallacy either,

"how emotions can hijack rational-decision-making processes to the point of being the dominant influence on risk assessments. Research has shown that “perceived risk judgments”—estimates of the likelihood that something bad will happen—are especially hampered by emotion"

You're just an emotional wreck with your perceived possible hourly violence occurrences.

 

[2aguy]

I've always stated that needing a gun for self defence was a fallacy, and we all know it is. So what's with the gun nuts running off and copying pasting articles from shady sources?

Well look no further, just simply check with Harvard and the studies -

Gun Threats and Self-Defense Gun Use

1-3. Guns are not used millions of times each year in self-defense We use epidemiological theory to explain why the “false positive” problem for rare events can lead to large overestimates of the i…

www.hsph.harvard.edu

Pardon the pun, Harvard blow holes in the gun nut's self defence argument.

So anyone arming up for the mistaken belief they need to for self defence against others, they're the worst candidate to own a gun.

Tell us that this lady is a myth…..

69 year old woman defends herself against a criminal….a real stupid criminal who decides advancing on an armed woman was a good idea….

he odds of a 69-year old woman being able to fight off an intruder half her age are pretty slim, but give that older woman a gun for self-defense and all of a sudden her chances of survival look a lot better.
————-
but Morrison says she was determined to protect herself.

“Something wasn’t right with the man,” she said, adding that he didn’t say a word. “He had a blank look on his face.”
She said she thought her fiance was outside, so the door to the house was unlocked.
Morrison said the stranger stepped inside so she asked him who he was and what he wanted, but he did not respond.
“I said, ‘I’m getting my damn gun.’ So I went to my bedroom and got my gun and I went out the back door and I came to the fence and he sees me and he starts toward me,” Morrison said. “I fired a shot above him, then said, ‘Back off, dude. I’ll shoot you.’ And he kept coming toward me, so I shot him.”
Morrison said it was the first time she’s ever used her gun.
“Keep your doors locked. Anybody can walk into your house now,” she said. “I killed a man. I didn’t intend to do that. I’m trying to protect me and (my fiance).

Home intruders no match for well armed women

bearingarms.com

 

[Briss]

"how emotions can hijack rational-decision-making processes to the point of being the dominant influence on risk assessments. Research has shown that “perceived risk judgments”—estimates of the likelihood that something bad will happen—are especially hampered by emotion"

You're just an emotional wreck with your perceived possible hourly violence occurrences.

I find that getting people to answer a questions allows them to see the faultiness of their thinking. So, let's start with your dismissal of the victims of home invasion. On average, how many home invasions are there every year?

 

[Dayton3]

Are you at all bothered by the fact that Hitler used that exact argument to disarm Jews prior to their genocide?

I so wish people on both sides would not go running to use Hitler or Nazis as an example.

 

[2aguy]

I so wish people on both sides would not go running to use Hitler or Nazis as an example.

Why? They are a known example of gun control….using gun registration lists to disarm their intended victims……

The registration lists and gun bans implemented by the German government using the same exact arguments anti-gun fanatics are using today…….

You don’t want to hear about the most relevant example of government gun banning and confiscation…….

 

[BasicHumanUnit]

The Conservative Right STILL doesn't get it.
THEY ARE FUCKING WITH YOUR HEADS and you're responding by letting your heads explode rather than do anything about it.
They don't give a flying fuck about your safety or saving lives...NONE. NADA.
They want you helpless against their God (Big iron-fisted government control) period.

All the rest is just fucking with your minds and you morons keep arguing with them as if it means something rather than doing a damn thing meaningful.
I'll bet NONE of the self proclaimed "2A defenders" on this forum have sent a single DIME to help GOA fight lawsuits or ever contacted a representative..
Pathetic.

The Gun Policy Coalition that fights for 2A rights recently stated that out of 2 MILLION urgent requests sent out to members FOR urgent HELP CONTACTING REPRESENTATIVES IN CONGRESS , less than 50,000 had responded.
THAT'S LESS THAN 1% !!!!

This is how I know for absolutely 100% CERTAIN, they WILL get all the guns.

What's that BL ?

Easy now...I side with Conservatives, I vote with Conservatives BUT they are the most nutless, spinless, big mouth pieces of shit that ever were. Come on man...they didn’t have the balls to keep heterosexual white Christians cool in a nation founded, built, run and funded by heterosexual white Christians. The Left has owned their sackless asses for decades....Sad but true.

 

[Dayton3]

Why? They are a known example of gun control….using gun registration lists to disarm their intended victims……

The registration lists and gun bans implemented by the German government using the same exact arguments anti-gun fanatics are using today…….

You don’t want to hear about the most relevant example of government gun banning and confiscation…….

It is a shameless attempt to be inflammatory. Because no matter how you exaggerate the modern American gun grabbers are not Nazis or even aspirational ones.

 

[Mac-7]

More fallacies.

Its no fallacy

You can wave your cell phone at them and shout “THE COPS ARE ON THEIR WAY” before they take it away from you

But they will have plenty of time to kill you if they so choose

 

[M14 Shooter]

Did you know, 65% of burglaries occur between 6am and 6pm, and most of those are between 10am and 3pm because most houses are empty during those times.

According to the US DOJ:

An estimated 3.7 million household burglaries occurred each
year on average from 2003 to 2007. In about 28% of these
burglaries, a household member was present during the burglary.
In 7% of all household burglaries, a household member
experienced some form of violent victimization

https://bjs.ojp.gov/content/pub/ascii/vdhb.txt

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Oh shut up you silly boy.

A boy sticks his nose in matters that does not concern them.

 

[2aguy]

It is a shameless attempt to be inflammatory. Because no matter how you exaggerate the modern American gun grabbers are not Nazis or even aspirational ones.

Look...in the 1920s they said the same thing about the government calling for registration and confiscation of guns........the government isn't crazy, they just want to reduce crime and keep people safe....15 years later the socialists used the lists from the 20s to confiscate guns.....Germany had courts, the rule of law, modern political processes, universities, the sciences and philosophy..........and 15 years later they murdered 15 million people......

So sell that silliness about not using actual examples to defend this Right to biden voters......

 

[2aguy]

Did you know, 65% of burglaries occur between 6am and 6pm, and most of those are between 10am and 3pm because most houses are empty during those times.

So tell me again, when your house is burgled and you're at work, how did your gun save you?

Do you understand that in Britain....because they don't have guns.....burglaries more often happen when people are home? Did you know that?

Why? So that they can torture the people in the home to find out where they keep the good stuff.....

America...

http://www.davekopel.com/2A/LawRev/LawyersGunsBurglars.htm#FN;F64

C. In Homes and on the Street​

Rengert and Wasilchick's book about how burglars work reveals that fear of armed homeowners played a major role in determining burglary targets. Burglars reported that they avoided late-night burglaries because, "That's the way to get shot." [FN63] Some burglars said that they shun burglaries in neighborhoods with people of mostly a different race because, "You'll get shot if you're caught there." [FN64]


The most thorough study of burglary patterns was a St. Louis survey of 105 currently active burglars. [FN65] The authors observed, "One of the most serious risks faced by residential burglars is the possibility of being injured or killed by occupants of a target. Many of the offenders we spoke to reported that this was far and away their greatest fear." [FN66] Said one burglar: "I don't think about gettin' caught, I think about gettin' gunned down, shot or somethin'...'cause you get into some people's houses...quick as I come in there, boom, they hit you right there. That's what I think about."


Another burglar explained:

Hey, wouldn't you blow somebody away if someone broke into your house and you don't know them? You hear this noise and they come breakin' in the window tryin' to get into your house, they gon' want to kill you anyway. See, with the police, they gon' say, "Come out with your hands up and don't do nothing foolish!" Okay, you still alive, but you goin' to jail. But you alive. You sneak into somebody's house and they wait til you get in the house and then they shoot you.. . .See what I'm sayin'? You can't explain nothin' to nobody; you layin' down in there dead! [FN67]

In contrast, Missouri is one of only nine states which has no provision for citizens to be issued permits to carry handguns for protection. Thus, a criminal in St. Louis faces a very high risk that the target of a home invasion may have a lawful gun for protection, but minimal risk that the target of a street robbery will have a lawful firearm for defense. The same authors who studied active St. Louis burglars conducted another study of active St. Louis armed robbers. [FN68] They found that "ome of the offenders who favored armed robbery over other crimes *355 maintained that the offense was also safer than burglary. . .." [FN69] As one armed robber put it: "My style is, like, don't have to be up in nobody's house in case they come in; they might have a pistol in the house or something." [FN70]
On the streets, many of the St. Louis robbers "routinely targeted law-abiding citizens," [FN71] who, unlike their counterparts in most American states, were certain not to be carrying a gun for protection. Law-abiding citizens were chosen as robbery victims because, as one robber noted, "You don't want to pick somebody dangerous; they might have a gun themselves." [FN72]
In addition to the St. Louis study, the Wright-Rossi National Institute of Justice surveyed felony prisoners in eleven state prison systems on the impact of victim firearms on burglar behavior. [FN73] In that survey, seventy-four percent of the convicts who had committed a burglary or violent crime agreed, "One reason burglars avoid houses when people are at home is that they fear being shot." [FN74]



Britain...

According to my research, which has been published in the Journal of Law and Economics and elsewhere, such laws make it more difficult for people to defend themselves and their families successfully. As a result, criminals became more emboldened to invade people’s homes. There have been 300 more total murders and 4,000 more rapes occurring each year in states with these laws. Burglaries are also dramatically higher.



If you want to see the importance of deterrence, consider so-called hot burglaries, where residents are at home when criminals strike. The United Kingdom not only has twice the burglary rate as the United States, but 59% of break-ins there are hot burglaries. By contrast, the U.S. has a hot burglary rate of 13%.


Consistent with this, surveys of convicted burglars in the two countries indicate that American criminals spend about twice as much time casing a home before they break in. The reason: They want to ensure that no one is home because it prevents them from getting shot. Similarly, American burglars frequently comment that they avoid late-night break-ins because ‘‘that’s the way to get shot.” These are concerns that British burglars don’t share, given that nation’s strict gun laws.

In the same vein, it’s not surprising that crime rises when governments prevent people from defending themselves. Indeed, every place in the world that has banned guns has seen an increase in murders.



At Real Clear Politics: Why Gun Storage Laws Would Do More Harm Than Good