Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
"More People Use a Gun in Self-Defense Each Year Than Die in Car Accidents"
"Millions of people protect themselves and their families with guns every day in the United States."
None of the above statements are true if you are talking strictly about USA and not the whole world.
In USA on average there are approximately 35,000 traffic deaths per year. On average there are approximately 37,000 gun related deaths per year, the majority of which are homicides, not self defense and not for protection.
I think what you really meant was that in USA there are millions of people who possess guns for the purpose of protecting themselves if it should become necessary to defend themselves.
So what else is new? Everyone already knows that so what is your point?
In USA there are not millions of people who use guns or protect themselves with guns every day. If that were true there wouldn't be any people left in USA because they'd have all killed each other off within a single year.
.
I agree with your position but, I do have an issue with your last sentence.
" If that were true there wouldn't be any people left in USA because they'd have all killed each other off within a single year."
MOST people who use a gun for self defense NEVER FIRE A SHOT, according to the FBI!
The mere presence of the gun scares off the "bad guys" in most cases.
It was also discovered that the CDC had conducted a study to verify/falsify Gary Kleck’s research but they sat on the results. This study, never published, was just recently made public.
“In 1996, 1997, and 1998, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) conducted large-scale national surveys asking about defensive gun use (DGU). They never released the findings, or even acknowledged they had studied the topic. I obtained the unpublished raw data and computed the prevalence of DGU. CDC’s findings indicated that an average of 2.46 million U.S. adults used a gun for self-defense in each of the years from 1996 through 1998 – almost exactly confirming the estimate for 1992 of Kleck and Gertz (1995). Possible reasons for CDC’s suppression of these findings are discussed.”
"Let's say 2 (since 2 would be millions). Remove everyone under the age of 15. Sure, there might be some instances of legitimate gun defense in that age group"
Why does this lie of a statistic keep coming up. How can millions of people use guns to protect themselves every year when the U.S has only around 1.1 to 1.3 million violent crimes a year. Take in mind a high percentage of violent crimes involves zero guns. at best we are talking thousands a year. Take in mind 125,000 out of 300,000 robberies involved guns... So we are talking at best thousands of incidents and certainly not over 100,000.
You clearly live in Nigeria or Latin America. One: 90%+ of walled neighborhoods in America are a joke, it's an aesthetic look and it's at best tells the criminal, one way in, one way out and I'll have to wait at the gate for like 5 seconds when it opens for me to drive through, might just hit the neighborhood across the street. I have lived in gated areas in Nigeria and the U.S. In most U.S gated neighborhoods their's enough space under the gate to simply just roll under, and these neighborhoods will have easily scalable walls, and often the pass-code can be found on the internet.
If a crook from Nigeria saw what, American's called gated neighborhoods he would be laughing as he casually would walk into the neighborhood after a car goes through and rob the first house he stumbles across.
Also Gated neighborhoods are more likely to be in the suburbs of Sunbelt Cities, which don't swing heavy liberal/conservative at all.
"Why does this lie of a statistic keep coming up. How can millions of people use guns to protect themselves every year when the U.S has only around 1.1 to 1.3 million violent crimes a year."
Why don't you THINK ABOUT IT BEFORE MAKING ASSUMPTION.
MOST incidents are NOT REPORTED unless the gun is actually FIRED.
MOST people who own guns when surveyed about guns, do NOT admit owning a gun much less they used it in self defense if a shot was NOT fired.
So, with this information ANY "surrey" or "study" " is just MORE academia B.S.
When someone owns a gun that gun is more likely to kill someone the gun owner knows either by accident, by the gun owner shooting an acquaintance in a argument, or by another family member using the gun to commit a homicide or commit suicide. And women who live in a home with a gun are 2.7 times more likely to be murdered than women living in a home with no gun. Dangerous Gun Myths - The New York Times
"According to FBI data, nearly eight times more people were shot and killed in arguments than by civilians trying to stop a crime."
"The odds of an assault victim being shot were 4.5 times greater if he carried a gun. His odds of being killed were 4.2 times greater."
"For every time a gun is used in self-defense in the home, there are 7 assaults or murders, 11 suicide attempts, and 4 accidents involving guns in or around a home."
"More than 5 times more women were shot by husbands, boyfriends, and ex-partners than murdered by male strangers." 10 Pro-Gun Myths, Shot Down – Mother Jones
The first rule of owning a gun is responsible gun ownership. Like keeping guns out of the reach of children and keeping guns away from criminals, the mentally ill and terrorists (examples, keeping guns hidden from home invaders, keeping guns in a safe, and not selling or trading guns with criminals.)
Republicans have the gun safety rules of gun owners who leave loaded revolvers in reach of 7 year old children at birthday parties. And should people who don't follow the most basic gun safety rules even be allowed to own guns?
"Republicans have" How many repubs did they actually talk with? How many dems
PEW does NOT give the methodology on WHO they talked with. It DOES make a difference in the "results".
2nd. MOST gun owners do NOT respond to surveys which skews the "results".
Come back when you have credible sources and NOT ALL LIBERAL anti gun sites.
The liberal media reports about how many children get killed by guns, and the conservative media reports about people stopping crimes with guns. And both sides exaggerate and withhold facts to push their agenda.
But each side has their own different perspective, and one can't learn the full truth about any issue without knowing both sides. And when people automatically dismiss all information from one side as lies and being un-credible it is a dangerous thing.
Where are credible sources for this issue?
And what information in my sources was inaccurate?
But you did not answer the above questions, instead you just implied that all liberal sources are not credible and not even worth reading.
There are (2) facts here,
Fact #1- Guns unnecessarily kill lots of innocent people each year
Fact #2- Guns stop crimes and keep people safe
And when someone ignores either one of the above facts, it is a very dangerous thing.
It was also discovered that the CDC had conducted a study to verify/falsify Gary Kleck’s research but they sat on the results. This study, never published, was just recently made public.
“In 1996, 1997, and 1998, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) conducted large-scale national surveys asking about defensive gun use (DGU). They never released the findings, or even acknowledged they had studied the topic. I obtained the unpublished raw data and computed the prevalence of DGU. CDC’s findings indicated that an average of 2.46 million U.S. adults used a gun for self-defense in each of the years from 1996 through 1998 – almost exactly confirming the estimate for 1992 of Kleck and Gertz (1995). Possible reasons for CDC’s suppression of these findings are discussed.”
I think the problem lies in the definition of a Defensive Gun Use. The National Self-Defense Survey (Kleck's research) asked the following question:
Quote:
The respondents were asked if over the past five years they had used a gun—even if not fired—for self-protection or protection of property at work, home, or elsewhere.
That's fairly vague. Some people might respond that they "use a gun" if they simply carry it. "Well, I use my gun to protect myself." When you consider the number of gun owners in America, that would likely inflate the number of supposed "Defensive Gun Uses." Carrying your gun isn't "using your gun."
Whereas, if "use a gun" meant to use in a manner to ward off an aggressor which could involve displaying it to a possible aggressor, drawing it or firing it... the number of "Defensive Gun Uses" would likely drop closer to the 50k or whatever was mentioned in some other study.
If people still want to stick by that 2.5M US adults "used" a gun in self-defense - meaning a "good guy with a gun" type scenario, then you'd agree with my logic and common sense from my earlier post that states that if 1% of the US population used a gun for self-defense, then by now, most of us would either have hero stories of our own or would only have a one degree separation of knowing someone that did use a gun for self-defense.
That's simply not the case. I know some people might not be good with math, but unless we have people that over the last 20 years have been repeat "gun heroes", then by now, 1 in 5 Americans would have their own stories to tell. If 20% of Americans were gun heroes, it would be as commonplace to discuss their heroics as the same 1 in 5 Americans that can share their stories of receiving a traffic ticket.
Think about that. Sit down at a table with 5 people and discuss your last traffic ticket. Someone else will likely speak up "well, I got a ticket for doing 90 in a 55, but I told the cop I pay his salary" (or some other such nonsense). You see this all time.
Yet, now speak up about how you saved some damsel in distress with your gun. Wait you haven't. And no one else at the table has either. But you probably ALL have a story about how you carried your gun somewhere to make you feel safe.
That's not "defensive gun use." The number is flawed.
I see your point about certain gun owners not responding to surveys. And if the surveys get 22% of Americans owning a gun what do you believe the actual figure is?
I think the problem lies in the definition of a Defensive Gun Use. The National Self-Defense Survey (Kleck's research) asked the following question:
That's fairly vague. Some people might respond that they "use a gun" if they simply carry it. "Well, I use my gun to protect myself." When you consider the number of gun owners in America, that would likely inflate the number of supposed "Defensive Gun Uses." Carrying your gun isn't "using your gun."
Whereas, if "use a gun" meant to use in a manner to ward off an aggressor which could involve displaying it to a possible aggressor, drawing it or firing it... the number of "Defensive Gun Uses" would likely drop closer to the 50k or whatever was mentioned in some other study.
If people still want to stick by that 2.5M US adults "used" a gun in self-defense - meaning a "good guy with a gun" type scenario, then you'd agree with my logic and common sense from my earlier post that states that if 1% of the US population used a gun for self-defense, then by now, most of us would either have hero stories of our own or would only have a one degree separation of knowing someone that did use a gun for self-defense.
That's simply not the case. I know some people might not be good with math, but unless we have people that over the last 20 years have been repeat "gun heroes", then by now, 1 in 5 Americans would have their own stories to tell. If 20% of Americans were gun heroes, it would be as commonplace to discuss their heroics as the same 1 in 5 Americans that can share their stories of receiving a traffic ticket.
Think about that. Sit down at a table with 5 people and discuss your last traffic ticket. Someone else will likely speak up "well, I got a ticket for doing 90 in a 55, but I told the cop I pay his salary" (or some other such nonsense). You see this all time.
Yet, now speak up about how you saved some damsel in distress with your gun. Wait you haven't. And no one else at the table has either. But you probably ALL have a story about how you carried your gun somewhere to make you feel safe.
That's not "defensive gun use." The number is flawed.
If a gun was used, in any manner at all, the gun becomes part of the defense. It doesn’t matter whether it was fired, brandished, whatever, it was used in defense. The point is, the number of times a firearm has been useful in some sort of self defense scenario dwarfs the number of times guns are used to commit non-justifiable homicide or murder.
I agree with the earlier statement also, this whole thing is not about the numbers of people dying or defending themselves, it’s about the fact that certain segments of our population intensely dislike guns and want them gone.
However, this is reality right now. There is a constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms. This is clearly stated in the constitution as a “right of the people.” This has been recently confirmed by the SCOTUS in Heller v. DC. The country is founded on the concept of individual liberty, meaning that any of us are completely free to go about our business as long as we do not interfere with the rights of others. So, within the constraints of the law of the land, I have an individual right to go and buy and use anything I want as long as I don’t interefere in any one else’s rights.
We can probably agree to disagree about whether one is likely to have encountered someone who has used a gun defensively. It is anecdotal evidence at best. However, it is not something one talks about causually especially if it was not reported. I’m not a very sociable person and I know at least two people I can recall. It depends a lot on the people you know and the local environment where you live.
Fact #1- Guns unnecessarily kill lots of innocent people each year
Fact #2- Guns stop crimes and keep people safe
And when someone ignores either one of the above facts, it is a very dangerous thing.
Context and perspective.
CDC reports say an average of 30k per year die on the basis of a firearm being involved in their death. The so called "gun violence".
Of that 30k 22/23k are suicide.
Homicides as according to both FBI and CDC average 8-10k per year where a firearm was used to extinguish another's life.
FBI goes further than the CDC and shows exactly where the bulk of the murders occur by state and by city. LA Chicago Baltimore Dallas Austin New Orleans etc.
So when a liberal likes to mock and throw the stereotype of "a red neck with an arsenal" and they look at where the murders occurr, it's not the redneck with an arsenal they should be concerned about, their democrat held cities are.
Accidents/negligence makes up for less than 5k on average per year.
The idea that children are bullet magnets and must be saved from firearms? CDC shows more children die from drownings than they do firearms. Where CDC data is flawed is its age groupings. It doesn't fit the narrative for if the basis of regulating and legislating based on emotion is to be followed they'd ban swimming pools ponds lakes rivers creeks streams beaches oceans bath tubs etc. Private modes of transportation too.
There is nothing common sense about their proposals. None at all. Emotional? Yes. Common sense? No.
If they truly were honest they'd just say, we'll, instead of focusing on firearms, arbitrary features, and magazine capacity, they would say we should focus on Motive. Incentive. Intent. for it is the individual that commits an atrocity. Not an inanimate object incapable of thought or action by itself.
I see your point about certain gun owners not responding to surveys. And if the surveys get 22% of Americans owning a gun what do you believe the actual figure is?
FBI released the amount of background checks it has performed since 1998.
The long drawn out BS claims there's only 300 million firearms? Uhh... There's been firearms in production and circulation for a very long time before background checks were being performed. You can purchase multiple firearms/receivers on a 4473 form.
There are states that do not perform a background check if you are a concealed carry permit holder. So there's a big kick in the ass for the figures.
On a 4473 you can do a transfer of multiple firearms/receivers as well. So the number of background checks performed are not directly proportional to how many firearms are sold as you only do 1 background check for multiple transfers.
And then there's the ultimate middle finger to researchers and the .gov as 80% receivers do not count as firearms. And alot of them are completed at home...
Considering the numbers.
If you believe that only 22% of Americans own firearms. And we can assume the same 22% are the only ones continually buying firearms. And the estimation of 300 million was revised recently to a more realistic number of 500 million...
You're suggesting 70,400,000 own firearms. Going by what I've said about being able to transfer MULTIPLE firearms and receivers on one 4473 and having only 1 background check performed to transfer multiple unless living in a state where a concealed carry permit circumvents the background check. And the ultimate middle finger to research and the .gov being 80% home builds as 80% receivers do not require a serial number as they are not considered firearms.
The realistic number of firearms in existence and circulation being between 500 million and 900 million. You're insisting 70 million 400 thousand individuals own an average of 7,102 firearms each? with the realistic figure of 500 million firearms owned/in circulation of private hands?
LOL
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
