Woman shot 3 times by 2 home invaders...able to return fire...and lives....

[EatMorChikin]

Might be a good idea. You are 3x more likely to accidently shot and kill someone than to shoot and kill a criminal. You should get an alarm system.

Already have one of those, popping a shell into the chamber of a pump action causes quite the alarm for any intruder.

And so you know, I have confronted an intruder before. I was armed, he left, very clean, very simple. And the bonus, not a chance in hell he was ever coming back. He went to find an anti gun liberal.

 

[Brain357]

Might be a good idea. You are 3x more likely to accidently shot and kill someone than to shoot and kill a criminal. You should get an alarm system.

Already have one of those, popping a shell into the chamber of a pump action causes quite the alarm for any intruder.

If armed I'm sure it makes the intruder ready to shoot. Just how many intruders do you have?

 

[2aguy]

Well....you have never been robbed hence there is no reason to be armed.......nice for you....

I wasn't to concerned about being robbed either....right up till the time it happened.
Thank God for Remington.

It must be nice to be a liberal.....you know each day what is going to happen before it happens....so they never have to worry about being attacked.....hence, they don't need guns

A gun is not always the best thing to have. Look at all the accidental shootings. Studies show you are more likely to be shot if you carry. Cases where they really save a life seem more rare than acidental shootings. Most people are probably safer without.

I think I am going to get rid of all mine, you have convinced me!

If I am ever faced with a home invasion, I will simply appeal to their good nature. They probably aren't bad guys after all. Just misunderstood. And to get them to leave me in peace I will offer up any valuables I can round up. Including sentimental jewelry and such. After they take as much as they want, I will call the police, I am sure finding all my stuff would be no real big issue. If they shoot and kill my family, hell we probably deserved it for not offering up our belongings in the first place.

Might be a good idea. You are 3x more likely to accidently shoot and kill someone than to shoot and kill a criminal. You should get an alarm system.

See Brain.....you always leave out all the really important information......law abiding, innocent people rarely have to shoot and kill their criminal attacker....most of the time they display the weapon and the criminal runs away.....or they hold the criminal until the police arrive, or they shoot and simply injure the attacker without killing them.....that puts the count of the good times a gun are used vs. the accidents that happen much more in favor of using a gun for self defense.....

The problem....when you hold a criminal for the police or scare them away....it doesn't get reported......you kill a criminal, or if there is an accident....that always gets reported.....

Killing a criminal is the smallest of outcomes using a gun for defensive reasons, but that doesn't mean that defensive gun use doesn't far outweigh gun accidents.....

Since 1.6 million times a year on average, innocent, law abiding citizens use guns to stop violent criminal attack and save lives.....and there are only 6-700 accidental gun deaths a year......

 

[2aguy]

Yes. Having a gun may be what got her shot.

Bullshit. Criminals breaking into her home got her shot.

Well the police are calling it a burglary gone bad. So they must feel they were there to rob her, not kill her. So it is possible being armed got her shot.

If I were a criminal I would target people just like you. Talk about your easy pickens.
Do you gift wrap?

I've never been robbed. With 232,000 guns stolen each year gun owners seem to be easy targets.

I concur.

• Theoretically, knowledge that potential victims have access to firearms could increase the perceived cost of committing a crime to a potential perpetrator and thus prevent the crime from occurring. However, there does not seem to be credible evidence that higher levels of gun ownership and availability actually deter crime. A criminologist once claimed that publicized police programs to train citizens in gun use in Orlando (to prevent rape) and in Kansas City (to prevent robbery) led to reductions in crime.[80] However, a careful analysis of the data found no evidence that crime rates changed in either location after the training.[81] The deterrent effects of civilian gun ownership on burglary rates were supposedly shown by the experiences of Morton Grove, Illinois—after it banned handguns—and Kennesaw, Georgia— after it required that firearms be kept in all homes.[80] Again, a careful analysis of the data did not show that guns reduced crime.[82] Instead, in Morton Grove, the banning of handguns was actually followed by a large and statistically significant decrease in burglary reports.[81]
  
  One study found an association between lower crime rates in states with higher levels of household gun ownership.[83] But the gun ownership data for the analysis were not valid. The source of the data (Voter News Service) stated that the data could not justifiably be used to determine state-level gunownership levels or changes in gun ownership rates.
  Some have argued that when gun prevalence is high, there are fewer burglaries[84] and fewer "hot" burglaries (when someone is at home) because burglars will seek out unoccupied dwellings to avoid being shot.[80,85] But the evidence does not show this. An international compilation of victimization surveys in 11 developed countries found that the United States (with the most guns) was average in terms of attempted and completed burglary rates,[86] and there was no relationship between gun prevalence and burglary rates.[12] Studies in the United States across states and counties found that in areas with higher levels of household gun ownership, there were actually more burglaries, and there were more burglaries when someone was at home, not less.[63,87] One reason may be that guns, like cash and jewelry, are attractive loot fo
  
  REPORT
  + QUOTEREPLY

• Jan 8, 2015#122

that issue is going to be debated for a long time.....however......what has turned out to be even more important.....increased levels of gun ownership, as more Americans not only buy guns, but also carry them for self defense, have not led to more crime......in fact, as more Americans have bought and carry guns.....the gun crime rate and the accidental gun death rate have gone down...substantially, and not up, as the anti gunners predicted they would....

 

[2aguy]

Nope that's why I said make you wonder. I'd be curious to hear more details. Especially who started shooting first.

They brought guns didnt they? seeing as they are the ones who are the criminals, brought the guns, Id lay the blame on them, if they pointed the guns at her then she was right to shoot.

.





Nah, braino doesn't think like a reasonable person.. The perps only brought the guns to scare the people. They had no intention of actually hurting anyone don't ya know. They just wanted to frighten them a little.

That is often the case. If every criminal with a gun started shooting people we'd have a much higher homicide rate. The police are treating it as a burglary gone bad, not murder. So it is quite possible that having a gun is the only reason she was shot.

You can't be serious........thugs cross the line of civilized behavior by breaking into someones home, armed, and you think her getting shot is her fault....? You need some help Brain....

I'm saying the gun may have put her in more danger

More likely it saved her from an opportunity rape, or a beating or being murdered......

 

[Brain357]

I wasn't to concerned about being robbed either....right up till the time it happened.
Thank God for Remington.

It must be nice to be a liberal.....you know each day what is going to happen before it happens....so they never have to worry about being attacked.....hence, they don't need guns

A gun is not always the best thing to have. Look at all the accidental shootings. Studies show you are more likely to be shot if you carry. Cases where they really save a life seem more rare than acidental shootings. Most people are probably safer without.

I think I am going to get rid of all mine, you have convinced me!

If I am ever faced with a home invasion, I will simply appeal to their good nature. They probably aren't bad guys after all. Just misunderstood. And to get them to leave me in peace I will offer up any valuables I can round up. Including sentimental jewelry and such. After they take as much as they want, I will call the police, I am sure finding all my stuff would be no real big issue. If they shoot and kill my family, hell we probably deserved it for not offering up our belongings in the first place.

Might be a good idea. You are 3x more likely to accidently shoot and kill someone than to shoot and kill a criminal. You should get an alarm system.

See Brain.....you always leave out all the really important information......law abiding, innocent people rarely have to shoot and kill their criminal attacker....most of the time they display the weapon and the criminal runs away.....or they hold the criminal until the police arrive, or they shoot and simply injure the attacker without killing them.....that puts the count of the good times a gun are used vs. the accidents that happen much more in favor of using a gun for self defense.....

The problem....when you hold a criminal for the police or scare them away....it doesn't get reported......you kill a criminal, or if there is an accident....that always gets reported.....

Killing a criminal is the smallest of outcomes using a gun for defensive reasons, but that doesn't mean that defensive gun use doesn't far outweigh gun accidents.....

Since 1.6 million times a year on average, innocent, law abiding citizens use guns to stop violent criminal attack and save lives.....and there are only 6-700 accidental gun deaths a year......

In this case she was armed and got shot.

Kleck says they aren't law abiding and I've corrected you many times over. Stop lying.

 

[Brain357]

Bullshit. Criminals breaking into her home got her shot.

Well the police are calling it a burglary gone bad. So they must feel they were there to rob her, not kill her. So it is possible being armed got her shot.

If I were a criminal I would target people just like you. Talk about your easy pickens.
Do you gift wrap?

I've never been robbed. With 232,000 guns stolen each year gun owners seem to be easy targets.

I concur.

• Theoretically, knowledge that potential victims have access to firearms could increase the perceived cost of committing a crime to a potential perpetrator and thus prevent the crime from occurring. However, there does not seem to be credible evidence that higher levels of gun ownership and availability actually deter crime. A criminologist once claimed that publicized police programs to train citizens in gun use in Orlando (to prevent rape) and in Kansas City (to prevent robbery) led to reductions in crime.[80] However, a careful analysis of the data found no evidence that crime rates changed in either location after the training.[81] The deterrent effects of civilian gun ownership on burglary rates were supposedly shown by the experiences of Morton Grove, Illinois—after it banned handguns—and Kennesaw, Georgia— after it required that firearms be kept in all homes.[80] Again, a careful analysis of the data did not show that guns reduced crime.[82] Instead, in Morton Grove, the banning of handguns was actually followed by a large and statistically significant decrease in burglary reports.[81]
  
  One study found an association between lower crime rates in states with higher levels of household gun ownership.[83] But the gun ownership data for the analysis were not valid. The source of the data (Voter News Service) stated that the data could not justifiably be used to determine state-level gunownership levels or changes in gun ownership rates.
  Some have argued that when gun prevalence is high, there are fewer burglaries[84] and fewer "hot" burglaries (when someone is at home) because burglars will seek out unoccupied dwellings to avoid being shot.[80,85] But the evidence does not show this. An international compilation of victimization surveys in 11 developed countries found that the United States (with the most guns) was average in terms of attempted and completed burglary rates,[86] and there was no relationship between gun prevalence and burglary rates.[12] Studies in the United States across states and counties found that in areas with higher levels of household gun ownership, there were actually more burglaries, and there were more burglaries when someone was at home, not less.[63,87] One reason may be that guns, like cash and jewelry, are attractive loot fo
  
  REPORT
  + QUOTEREPLY

• Jan 8, 2015#122

that issue is going to be debated for a long time.....however......what has turned out to be even more important.....increased levels of gun ownership, as more Americans not only buy guns, but also carry them for self defense, have not led to more crime......in fact, as more Americans have bought and carry guns.....the gun crime rate and the accidental gun death rate have gone down...substantially, and not up, as the anti gunners predicted they would....

Most gun sales are to people who already own. Ownership is down.

 

[2aguy]

In this event having a gun may be what got her almost dead. It would seem you are taking a chance by having the gun.

Do you also subscribe to the liberal anti rape advice. Piss herself to ruin his mood? And if he does still go through with it, just hope and pray he doesn't also murder her? Or just murder her because she fucked up his plan.

No thanks, that pacifist shit is for the 1950s. Anyone tries to harm my wife, she will put a very jagged piece of lead in their chest.
In that case you would indeed be right, a firearm was the reason for the harm, but not the cause.

I'm sure the woman who was shot dead by her 2 year old thought she was protecting herself.

I'm sure the 1.6 million Americans who use guns each year, on average, to stop violent criminal attack and save lives know they were protecting themselves......and the 6-700 times a year an accidental gun death occurs is sad and tragic.....but out of a country of 320 million people.....nothing to worry about.....considering there are over 310 million guns in the country.....

Per kleck most defenses are criminals defending against criminals. Why should I care so many criminals are defending themselves?

Not what kleck said.....even the quote you keep using doesn't say that.....it says criminal possession of a gun....it doesn't say career criminals engaged in criminal activities......and since his study was in the 90s, most states did not allow innocent, law abiding citizens to carry guns for protection....but being sensible, many did anyway...hence his quote......

 

[2aguy]

Well the police are calling it a burglary gone bad. So they must feel they were there to rob her, not kill her. So it is possible being armed got her shot.

If I were a criminal I would target people just like you. Talk about your easy pickens.
Do you gift wrap?

I've never been robbed. With 232,000 guns stolen each year gun owners seem to be easy targets.

I concur.

• Theoretically, knowledge that potential victims have access to firearms could increase the perceived cost of committing a crime to a potential perpetrator and thus prevent the crime from occurring. However, there does not seem to be credible evidence that higher levels of gun ownership and availability actually deter crime. A criminologist once claimed that publicized police programs to train citizens in gun use in Orlando (to prevent rape) and in Kansas City (to prevent robbery) led to reductions in crime.[80] However, a careful analysis of the data found no evidence that crime rates changed in either location after the training.[81] The deterrent effects of civilian gun ownership on burglary rates were supposedly shown by the experiences of Morton Grove, Illinois—after it banned handguns—and Kennesaw, Georgia— after it required that firearms be kept in all homes.[80] Again, a careful analysis of the data did not show that guns reduced crime.[82] Instead, in Morton Grove, the banning of handguns was actually followed by a large and statistically significant decrease in burglary reports.[81]
  
  One study found an association between lower crime rates in states with higher levels of household gun ownership.[83] But the gun ownership data for the analysis were not valid. The source of the data (Voter News Service) stated that the data could not justifiably be used to determine state-level gunownership levels or changes in gun ownership rates.
  Some have argued that when gun prevalence is high, there are fewer burglaries[84] and fewer "hot" burglaries (when someone is at home) because burglars will seek out unoccupied dwellings to avoid being shot.[80,85] But the evidence does not show this. An international compilation of victimization surveys in 11 developed countries found that the United States (with the most guns) was average in terms of attempted and completed burglary rates,[86] and there was no relationship between gun prevalence and burglary rates.[12] Studies in the United States across states and counties found that in areas with higher levels of household gun ownership, there were actually more burglaries, and there were more burglaries when someone was at home, not less.[63,87] One reason may be that guns, like cash and jewelry, are attractive loot fo
  
  REPORT
  + QUOTEREPLY

• Jan 8, 2015#122

that issue is going to be debated for a long time.....however......what has turned out to be even more important.....increased levels of gun ownership, as more Americans not only buy guns, but also carry them for self defense, have not led to more crime......in fact, as more Americans have bought and carry guns.....the gun crime rate and the accidental gun death rate have gone down...substantially, and not up, as the anti gunners predicted they would....

Most gun sales are to people who already own. Ownership is down.

Actually, not true.....that is anti gunner propaganda hoping it is true.....there are more people buying guns for the first time....with huge increases in the number of women buying guns for the first time....and getting permits to carry them....

 

[Brain357]

In this event having a gun may be what got her almost dead. It would seem you are taking a chance by having the gun.

Do you also subscribe to the liberal anti rape advice. Piss herself to ruin his mood? And if he does still go through with it, just hope and pray he doesn't also murder her? Or just murder her because she fucked up his plan.

No thanks, that pacifist shit is for the 1950s. Anyone tries to harm my wife, she will put a very jagged piece of lead in their chest.
In that case you would indeed be right, a firearm was the reason for the harm, but not the cause.

I'm sure the woman who was shot dead by her 2 year old thought she was protecting herself.

I'm sure the 1.6 million Americans who use guns each year, on average, to stop violent criminal attack and save lives know they were protecting themselves......and the 6-700 times a year an accidental gun death occurs is sad and tragic.....but out of a country of 320 million people.....nothing to worry about.....considering there are over 310 million guns in the country.....

Per kleck most defenses are criminals defending against criminals. Why should I care so many criminals are defending themselves?

Not what kleck said.....even the quote you keep using doesn't say that.....it says criminal possession of a gun....it doesn't say career criminals engaged in criminal activities......and since his study was in the 90s, most states did not allow innocent, law abiding citizens to carry guns for protection....but being sensible, many did anyway...hence his quote......

Even in that case they are by definition not law abiding. So stop lying.

 

[Brain357]

If I were a criminal I would target people just like you. Talk about your easy pickens.
Do you gift wrap?

I've never been robbed. With 232,000 guns stolen each year gun owners seem to be easy targets.

I concur.

• Theoretically, knowledge that potential victims have access to firearms could increase the perceived cost of committing a crime to a potential perpetrator and thus prevent the crime from occurring. However, there does not seem to be credible evidence that higher levels of gun ownership and availability actually deter crime. A criminologist once claimed that publicized police programs to train citizens in gun use in Orlando (to prevent rape) and in Kansas City (to prevent robbery) led to reductions in crime.[80] However, a careful analysis of the data found no evidence that crime rates changed in either location after the training.[81] The deterrent effects of civilian gun ownership on burglary rates were supposedly shown by the experiences of Morton Grove, Illinois—after it banned handguns—and Kennesaw, Georgia— after it required that firearms be kept in all homes.[80] Again, a careful analysis of the data did not show that guns reduced crime.[82] Instead, in Morton Grove, the banning of handguns was actually followed by a large and statistically significant decrease in burglary reports.[81]
  
  One study found an association between lower crime rates in states with higher levels of household gun ownership.[83] But the gun ownership data for the analysis were not valid. The source of the data (Voter News Service) stated that the data could not justifiably be used to determine state-level gunownership levels or changes in gun ownership rates.
  Some have argued that when gun prevalence is high, there are fewer burglaries[84] and fewer "hot" burglaries (when someone is at home) because burglars will seek out unoccupied dwellings to avoid being shot.[80,85] But the evidence does not show this. An international compilation of victimization surveys in 11 developed countries found that the United States (with the most guns) was average in terms of attempted and completed burglary rates,[86] and there was no relationship between gun prevalence and burglary rates.[12] Studies in the United States across states and counties found that in areas with higher levels of household gun ownership, there were actually more burglaries, and there were more burglaries when someone was at home, not less.[63,87] One reason may be that guns, like cash and jewelry, are attractive loot fo
  
  REPORT
  + QUOTEREPLY

• Jan 8, 2015#122

that issue is going to be debated for a long time.....however......what has turned out to be even more important.....increased levels of gun ownership, as more Americans not only buy guns, but also carry them for self defense, have not led to more crime......in fact, as more Americans have bought and carry guns.....the gun crime rate and the accidental gun death rate have gone down...substantially, and not up, as the anti gunners predicted they would....

Most gun sales are to people who already own. Ownership is down.

Actually, not true.....that is anti gunner propaganda hoping it is true.....there are more people buying guns for the first time....with huge increases in the number of women buying guns for the first time....and getting permits to carry them....

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2013/03/1...ship-is-down-survey-shows.html?pagewanted=all

 

[Brain357]

They brought guns didnt they? seeing as they are the ones who are the criminals, brought the guns, Id lay the blame on them, if they pointed the guns at her then she was right to shoot.

.





Nah, braino doesn't think like a reasonable person.. The perps only brought the guns to scare the people. They had no intention of actually hurting anyone don't ya know. They just wanted to frighten them a little.

That is often the case. If every criminal with a gun started shooting people we'd have a much higher homicide rate. The police are treating it as a burglary gone bad, not murder. So it is quite possible that having a gun is the only reason she was shot.

You can't be serious........thugs cross the line of civilized behavior by breaking into someones home, armed, and you think her getting shot is her fault....? You need some help Brain....

I'm saying the gun may have put her in more danger

More likely it saved her from an opportunity rape, or a beating or being murdered......

The police think it is a burglary gone bad. They know more than you or I.

 

[2aguy]

Well, Brain....Dr. John Lott just responded to my email on this topic....here is what he sent to me.....

Thanks for the note, Bill. My 2002 survey discussed in The Bias Against Guns is different than Gary’s in some ways and similar in terms of the total defensive gun uses. As far as we could tell, all the people who reported using guns defensively were law-abiding citizens and all of our cases were either in a home or on a person’s property. Of course, there were relative few permits issued back then. New Report from Crime Prevention Research Center shows 11.1 million Americans Hold Concealed Carry Permits - Crime Prevention Research Center

I hope that this helps.

Thanks.

John R. Lott, Jr., Ph.D.
President
Crime Prevention Research Center
Crime Prevention Research Center - To subscribe to the CPRC write us at info crimeresearch.org put subscribe in subject line
johnrlott@crimeresearch.org
(484) 802-5373

And since the Right to Keep and Bear arms is a right, not a gift from the government, they were not breaking the law, they were excercising their Right......hence, they were not criminals....any more than the Black republicans sitting at lunch counters against democrat jim crow laws were......

 

[Brain357]

Well, Brain....Dr. John Lott just responded to my email on this topic....here is what he sent to me.....

Thanks for the note, Bill. My 2002 survey discussed in The Bias Against Guns is different than Gary’s in some ways and similar in terms of the total defensive gun uses. As far as we could tell, all the people who reported using guns defensively were law-abiding citizens and all of our cases were either in a home or on a person’s property. Of course, there were relative few permits issued back then. New Report from Crime Prevention Research Center shows 11.1 million Americans Hold Concealed Carry Permits - Crime Prevention Research Center

I hope that this helps.

Thanks.

John R. Lott, Jr., Ph.D.
President
Crime Prevention Research Center
Crime Prevention Research Center - To subscribe to the CPRC write us at info crimeresearch.org put subscribe in subject line
johnrlott@crimeresearch.org
(484) 802-5373

And since the Right to Keep and Bear arms is a right, not a gift from the government, they were not breaking the law, they were excercising their Right......hence, they were not criminals....any more than the Black republicans sitting at lunch counters against democrat jim crow laws were......

As far as he could tell? Haha.

If you break the law you are not law abiding. Stop playing games.

 

[2aguy]

I've never been robbed. With 232,000 guns stolen each year gun owners seem to be easy targets.

I concur.

• Theoretically, knowledge that potential victims have access to firearms could increase the perceived cost of committing a crime to a potential perpetrator and thus prevent the crime from occurring. However, there does not seem to be credible evidence that higher levels of gun ownership and availability actually deter crime. A criminologist once claimed that publicized police programs to train citizens in gun use in Orlando (to prevent rape) and in Kansas City (to prevent robbery) led to reductions in crime.[80] However, a careful analysis of the data found no evidence that crime rates changed in either location after the training.[81] The deterrent effects of civilian gun ownership on burglary rates were supposedly shown by the experiences of Morton Grove, Illinois—after it banned handguns—and Kennesaw, Georgia— after it required that firearms be kept in all homes.[80] Again, a careful analysis of the data did not show that guns reduced crime.[82] Instead, in Morton Grove, the banning of handguns was actually followed by a large and statistically significant decrease in burglary reports.[81]
  
  One study found an association between lower crime rates in states with higher levels of household gun ownership.[83] But the gun ownership data for the analysis were not valid. The source of the data (Voter News Service) stated that the data could not justifiably be used to determine state-level gunownership levels or changes in gun ownership rates.
  Some have argued that when gun prevalence is high, there are fewer burglaries[84] and fewer "hot" burglaries (when someone is at home) because burglars will seek out unoccupied dwellings to avoid being shot.[80,85] But the evidence does not show this. An international compilation of victimization surveys in 11 developed countries found that the United States (with the most guns) was average in terms of attempted and completed burglary rates,[86] and there was no relationship between gun prevalence and burglary rates.[12] Studies in the United States across states and counties found that in areas with higher levels of household gun ownership, there were actually more burglaries, and there were more burglaries when someone was at home, not less.[63,87] One reason may be that guns, like cash and jewelry, are attractive loot fo
  
  REPORT
  + QUOTEREPLY

• Jan 8, 2015#122

that issue is going to be debated for a long time.....however......what has turned out to be even more important.....increased levels of gun ownership, as more Americans not only buy guns, but also carry them for self defense, have not led to more crime......in fact, as more Americans have bought and carry guns.....the gun crime rate and the accidental gun death rate have gone down...substantially, and not up, as the anti gunners predicted they would....

Most gun sales are to people who already own. Ownership is down.

Actually, not true.....that is anti gunner propaganda hoping it is true.....there are more people buying guns for the first time....with huge increases in the number of women buying guns for the first time....and getting permits to carry them....

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2013/03/1...ship-is-down-survey-shows.html?pagewanted=all

You do realize Brain that NICS background checks are up......also, your article says that ownership is going down in the South and West....the very people least likely to answer a phone survey about wether or not they own guns.....the left wing anti gunners are trying to convince people that gun ownership is on the decline......they are pushing a false narrative to help their anti gun agenda.....the fact is more people are refusing to acknowledge ownership, and more people are buying and carrying guns...especially women....who are now buying guns for protection in larger numbers than ever before.....

 

[Brain357]

I concur.

• Theoretically, knowledge that potential victims have access to firearms could increase the perceived cost of committing a crime to a potential perpetrator and thus prevent the crime from occurring. However, there does not seem to be credible evidence that higher levels of gun ownership and availability actually deter crime. A criminologist once claimed that publicized police programs to train citizens in gun use in Orlando (to prevent rape) and in Kansas City (to prevent robbery) led to reductions in crime.[80] However, a careful analysis of the data found no evidence that crime rates changed in either location after the training.[81] The deterrent effects of civilian gun ownership on burglary rates were supposedly shown by the experiences of Morton Grove, Illinois—after it banned handguns—and Kennesaw, Georgia— after it required that firearms be kept in all homes.[80] Again, a careful analysis of the data did not show that guns reduced crime.[82] Instead, in Morton Grove, the banning of handguns was actually followed by a large and statistically significant decrease in burglary reports.[81]
  
  One study found an association between lower crime rates in states with higher levels of household gun ownership.[83] But the gun ownership data for the analysis were not valid. The source of the data (Voter News Service) stated that the data could not justifiably be used to determine state-level gunownership levels or changes in gun ownership rates.
  Some have argued that when gun prevalence is high, there are fewer burglaries[84] and fewer "hot" burglaries (when someone is at home) because burglars will seek out unoccupied dwellings to avoid being shot.[80,85] But the evidence does not show this. An international compilation of victimization surveys in 11 developed countries found that the United States (with the most guns) was average in terms of attempted and completed burglary rates,[86] and there was no relationship between gun prevalence and burglary rates.[12] Studies in the United States across states and counties found that in areas with higher levels of household gun ownership, there were actually more burglaries, and there were more burglaries when someone was at home, not less.[63,87] One reason may be that guns, like cash and jewelry, are attractive loot fo
  
  REPORT
  + QUOTEREPLY

• Jan 8, 2015#122

that issue is going to be debated for a long time.....however......what has turned out to be even more important.....increased levels of gun ownership, as more Americans not only buy guns, but also carry them for self defense, have not led to more crime......in fact, as more Americans have bought and carry guns.....the gun crime rate and the accidental gun death rate have gone down...substantially, and not up, as the anti gunners predicted they would....

Most gun sales are to people who already own. Ownership is down.

Actually, not true.....that is anti gunner propaganda hoping it is true.....there are more people buying guns for the first time....with huge increases in the number of women buying guns for the first time....and getting permits to carry them....

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2013/03/1...ship-is-down-survey-shows.html?pagewanted=all

You do realize Brain that NICS background checks are up......also, your article says that ownership is going down in the South and West....the very people least likely to answer a phone survey about wether or not they own guns.....the left wing anti gunners are trying to convince people that gun ownership is on the decline......they are pushing a false narrative to help their anti gun agenda.....the fact is more people are refusing to acknowledge ownership, and more people are buying and carrying guns...especially women....who are now buying guns for protection in larger numbers than ever before.....

Sales are up yes. But it's the same people buying more guns. Ownership is down.

 

[EatMorChikin]

.





Nah, braino doesn't think like a reasonable person.. The perps only brought the guns to scare the people. They had no intention of actually hurting anyone don't ya know. They just wanted to frighten them a little.

That is often the case. If every criminal with a gun started shooting people we'd have a much higher homicide rate. The police are treating it as a burglary gone bad, not murder. So it is quite possible that having a gun is the only reason she was shot.

You can't be serious........thugs cross the line of civilized behavior by breaking into someones home, armed, and you think her getting shot is her fault....? You need some help Brain....

I'm saying the gun may have put her in more danger

More likely it saved her from an opportunity rape, or a beating or being murdered......

The police think it is a burglary gone bad. They know more than you or I.

As opposed to a burglary gone good? It went bad because she had a firearm.

 

[Brain357]

That is often the case. If every criminal with a gun started shooting people we'd have a much higher homicide rate. The police are treating it as a burglary gone bad, not murder. So it is quite possible that having a gun is the only reason she was shot.

You can't be serious........thugs cross the line of civilized behavior by breaking into someones home, armed, and you think her getting shot is her fault....? You need some help Brain....

I'm saying the gun may have put her in more danger

More likely it saved her from an opportunity rape, or a beating or being murdered......

The police think it is a burglary gone bad. They know more than you or I.

As opposed to a burglary gone good? It went bad because she had a firearm.

Well she is the only one who got shot. Would she have is she wasn't armed? They wanted to rob, not kill.

 

[EatMorChikin]

Well she is the only one who got shot. Would she have is she wasn't armed? They wanted to rob, not kill.

That is why they came armed? And what should she have done, let them take what they needed and go on with their day?

 

[August West]

Meanwhile in Hicksville Pa. they`re extending an invite to armed criminals.
Conoy Township warns visitors 8220 Not a gun-free zone 8221 WPMT FOX43