Ultimate Gun Defense

[Van Canna]

A study by Professor Gary Kleck at the University of Florida indicates that civilians alone use firearms somewhere around 1.5 million to 2 million times each year to thwart a crime or to protect themselves.

Further, his study indicated that very few of these incidents resulted in death and only a slightly higher number resulted in injury.

It seems that most criminals either flee or submit when confronted by a citizen with a firearm rather than risk being shot. What's this mean? This means that without firearms it is likely that a majority of these crimes could be successful!

[Van Canna]

We can also draw some parallels from the U.K. here too. In the mid 1990's the British severely restricted firearms after a shooting in Dublane. Handguns were turned in after being banned.

Rifles and shotguns, those that are still allowed, must be stored in an "inoperable" condition. The theory was that this way, no one could use the firearm in a moment of rage or anger. Their already tough licensing program was tightened even further, reducing the number of firearms in civilian hands. And what has been the result?

In Britian, the rate of "hot burglaries" (what we call home-invasion robberies here in the U.S.) took an alarming jump.

It seems that the criminals figured out that with guns locked up and many people having alarms on their homes the best way was to wait until their victims were home, the alarms were off and then force their way in to terrorize the victims in their own homes.

And many of these incidents involve several criminals ganging up on the victim. This does not happen in the U.S. because, as one incarcerated burglar said, stating the obvious, "that's a good way to get shot".

[Van Canna]

The consensus seems to hold that many criminals fear the
uncertainty that that old lady walking down the street might have a gun in her purse.

And this is seen as keeping people safer.

[Van Canna]

The top five killers of children in this country are: motor vehicle accidents, fires, choking, poisoning, and drowning.

Gun deaths are nowhere near the top.

The fact is, guns are safe when used responsibly. According to the CDC's latest statistics, 0-14 year old mortality is:

auto (2,608), drowning (1010), pedestrian (675), bicycle (201), and gun accidents (142).

Gun homicides in the same age group totaled 346, and that includes legal intervention and self defense.

Based on US Consumer Product Safety Commision data:
Most Common Reasons for Emergency Room Visits


Baseball/softball 404,000
Dog bites 334,000
Playground 267, 000
ATV's, mopeds 125, 000
Volleyball 98, 000
In-line skating 76, 000
Horseback riding 71, 000
Baby walkers 28, 000
Skateboards 25, 000

[MikeK]

And those numbers don't really have any bearing on the discussion. A lot more people play baseball and softball so those numbers would naturally be high. Same with everything else on that list. I'm going to take a crazy wild ass guess and thing that kids who shoot or carry handguns as an activity would be much lower. To be injured by a handgun one has to be somewhere in the area, which of course is obvious.

The numbers that do matter is what percentage of accidental or intentional/inappropriate discharges of a firearm by children happen. What ages? Then break that down into how many were killed, how many severely wounded, how many slightly wounded or injured, how many were lucky enough to have nothing happen to them and how many injured someone else.

[Glenn]

The consensus seems to hold that many criminals fear the
uncertainty that that old lady walking down the street might have a gun in her purse.

And this is seen as keeping people safer.

That's one reason why I support concealed carry laws, the potential spillover effect that it keeps the bad guys guessing about who is carrying and who is not. Although depending on gun and person, it is sometimes obvious. One female plain-clothes police officer frequents the same c-store I do, and the combination of her small frame, the size of the service weapon, and the typical style of female jackets makes it obvious she is carrying her weapon under her left arm.

[Glenn]

Actually, Valk pops up pretty reliably whenever Bill or I get in a debate/argument with Glenn or Ian.

Moi...debate/argue?!?!
I'll claim it if I ever get good at it!

[MikeK]

I think that may be more of a deterrent than a well concealed weapon. After all I think most of us who can carry concealed do so in order not to draw the attention of the average person.

[Glenn]

Guns are only critically necessary for survival 'when they are' _and this is a very personal position taken by people with different experiences, such as Panther, for one, whom you continually piss off with your diatribes.

The problem is that some let themselves get too emotionally highjacked as soon as this topic pops up in a thread. What started as a civil discussion on a specific aspect of safety and with reasonable questions quickly degraded to the usual charges of anti-gun attacks when none existed.

And seriously Van, do we really need 5 pages of the same old Myths-Facts in EVERY gun-related thread? Few applied to the topic of this thread and all that distraction makes the actual thread hard to follow.

[Van Canna]

And seriously Van, do we really need 5 pages of the same old Myths-Facts in EVERY gun-related thread? Few applied to the topic of this thread and all that distraction makes the actual thread hard to follow.
_________________
Glenn

Well let's see…here is some of what was posted:


Justin > think an important statistic here is, how many of those homicides were something other than gang or drug-related? How many are domestic violence or Not to dismiss the gravity of any homicide, but I think the important statistic here is, how many homicides were part of a home invasion? That's the real number you need to look at when weighing whether you want a gun to defend yourself in case of home invasion.

> If you're going to routinely carry it, then that's another question, and another set of statistics.

> Generally speaking, when it comes to homicide, there are a few very high risk groups with very high murder rates, and everyone else has a very low risk. Those 13,000ish homicides aren't evenly distributed across the country.< Justin

~~~

With this, as far as I am concerned, the door was opened to any kind of gun discussions...

And Panther writes

All of the ramifications of gun ownership should be studied and understood completely by each person contemplating that choice. There are things that need to be understood before, during and after each gun ownership decision is made.

So in my view, any and all aspects of gun ownership bear on the subject matter. If hard to follow, my apologies.

[MikeK]

Agreed.
I'm not a fan of "facts" being quoted that don't show where they were copied from, and I especially find them suspect when they aren't sourced to actual studies.

[Van Canna]

Then Justin wrote

repeat…not saying "don't get a gun." What I'm saying is "don't feel you have to get a gun because you/your family are going to get murdered otherwise."

What's that got to do with keeping guns safe?

~~

And Justin

I don't have a problem with guns, I'm just not madly in love with them the way you are, ready to freak out if someone says anything that might hint that they're not critically necessary to survival at all times.

And here is something you need to understand Justin_

It is not a 'madly in love thing' but a healthy interest in combat weaponry engendered primarily by my military service in the US Army Infantry where I was an NCO weapons specialist. You know the song "What's love got to do with it"?

And 'not critically necessary' ?

What's that got to do with keeping them safe?

[Van Canna]

...on this ridiculous remark, Justin

I don't have a problem with guns, I'm just not madly in love with them the way you are, ready to freak outif someone says anything that might hint that they're not critically necessary to survival at all times.

Well....you are the one we have seen freak out in the past in these discussions about guns...when someone like Panther handed your ass to you on a platter

And I have also seen the same thing done to you when posting on other forums.... [other than Uechi forums] you know the ones Justin.

[Valkenar]

The reasons those things are relevant because they are part of the spectrum of gun availability.

That is, you have a spectrum that includes (among other options):

No Gun
Unloaded Gun In Safe
Loaded Gun with safety lock
Multiple Loaded Guns

"No Gun" is a valid choice in that spectrum, and whether you choose it or not may depend, in part, on your risk factors for being a victim of crime.

And I have also seen the same thing done to you when posting on other forums.... [other than Uechi forums] you know the ones Justin.

Actually I have no idea what other forums you could possibly be talking about. Slashdot? World of Warcraft? SomethingAwful? Carrion Fields? I'm seriously baffled here. Carrion Fields is the only one I post on much, and I would be stunned if you were one those forums. Or I guess you could be cyber-stalking me, but that's creepier than I'd expect of you.

[Van Canna]

Justin,

You are paranoid in addition to being dead wrong on the gun issues we have discussed over the years.

No 'Cyber stalking, pal...your name did come up once during a web search on an unrelated item...you are certainly not worth a 'stalk' ...