230,000 guns stolen from "law abiding, responsible gun owners" every year

[WEATHER53]

I will bow out of this imbecilic charade and tough guy who wants me to fuck myself can try that face to face

 

[The Derp]

According to the dwerp if I buy a new TV I am responsible for providing an avenue for a criminal to steal it

No. Just your gun. Because the criminal isn't going to go commit more crimes with your TV.

 

[westwall]

I already looked at that link, the author has no mention of how she compiled the report.

What's with the lies, man? Seriously.

The link says very plainly that it comes from the National Crime Victim Survey that the DOJ has been running since 1973.

Why are you lying? I don't understand. This is the weakest gaslighting I've ever seen.

She has no link to her raw data that we could then use to verify her estimates. In other words it is her OPINION based on not a whole bunch of actual, observed data.

Idiot. If you bothered to actually read the link, you'd know that it comes from the National Crime Victim Survey that the DOJ has been running since 1973.

Here's the actual study.

No more gaslighting excuses.

Yes, but then she doesn't provide a link to the raw data. Nor does she provide a link or an explanation of which statistical method she used to arrive at her estimate. It's called Academia, we have rules that are supposed to be followed in matters such as these.

 

[westwall]

Wait, ALL owning a gun does is increase the supply for thieves? I'm pretty sure gun ownership can involve more than leaving a gun sitting around until someone steals it.

Nope.

Gun ownership does nothing more than increase the supply of available guns for thieves to steal. Any gun in the hands of a criminal was once ion the hands of a "responsible gun owner" who either lost it, sold it to someone shady because they needed the money, or had it stolen from them. And the real kicker is that when guns go missing from homes, they're only reported to the police less than 90% of the time. How come it's not 100%? If we are to believe that "responsible gun owners" exist, how come they can't even get an "A" when it comes to reporting their own weapons as stolen?

Oh? What about the 1.5 million who use them to defend themselves every year.

 

[Lucy Hamilton]

This is why I oppose gun ownership; because all it does is add to the supply of guns for thieves to steal and then use.

So the irony is that you buy a gun to protect your home from a break-in from criminals armed with guns they stole from home break-ins.

'Hot' Guns Fueling Crime, US Study Says
An estimated 230,000 guns per year are stolen in home burglaries and property crimes, according to a study by the Department of Justice.
​

And less than 90% of the time, the "law abiding, responsible gun owner" doesn't even report the gun stolen to the police.

Gun ownership isn't about personal defense or safety; it's about a sick fetish and fantasy of wanting to kill somebody.

In the time it took you to read this post, at least 1 gun was stolen from a "law abiding, responsible gun owner".

So an ESTIMATED 230,000 guns out of 300 MILLION PLUS guns, this means that 99.9% of the 100 MILLION PLUS gun owners are responsible gun owners which means that those 100 MILLION PLUS gun owners are NOT responsible for criminals getting guns, which is you idiotic point on another thread that it's the fault of gun owners that criminals have guns.

 

[The Derp]

And yet, less than 20,000 people per year are killed by murderers using guns, so even if all those murders involved stolen guns, more than 90% of the stolen guns were not involved in anybody killing anyone.

So what? You're just going to write off those murders? So you're writing off the victims too. Way to have empathy (NOT).

It's that monstrous position that is giving rise to a whole wave of anti-gun activists and lever-pullers. Look at what happened last night in Wisconsin if you want to see how poorly that strategy is working for the NRA. When you dismiss victims like that, all you do is turn them into martyrs which is then used to oust you and your positions from the conversation. Again, look at what happened in WI last night.

 

[Lucy Hamilton]

0.08% of all guns
Very very low rate of theft
38% of black males have been incarcerated
Now that's a number

Ah, but nearly 100% of the guns used by criminals are guns that were stolen from homes.

So you arm yourself with a gun to protect your home from criminals armed with guns they stole from homes.

So you're increasing the pool and availability of guns for criminals to steal.

^^^^ This:

 

[The Derp]

I will bow out of this imbecilic charade and tough guy who wants me to fuck myself can try that face to face

Without your gun, you'd be a weak, quivering little mass of puss, wouldn't you? That's why you need a gun, isn't it? To make you feel much stronger than you actually are.

Otherwise you wouldn't fantasize about these scenarios where we confront each other in person.

 

[WEATHER53]

Indefensible liberal positions frequently result in hysterical profanity laced tirades because they have nothing else to support their ideas and no other way of communicating

 

[Leweman]

Do you realize how ridiculous it is to suggest that 100% of non stolen gun owner should be without guns due to 0.08% of them having a gun stolen AND stating that the ones who did have it stolen are responsible for the criminal act that was perpetrated upon them

It's not ridiculous at all.

What's ridiculous is buying a gun to protect your home from criminals armed with guns they stole from homes.

What's ridiculous is increasing the supply of guns available for criminals to steal.

What's ridiculous is even bringing a gun into your home knowing that most criminals get their guns from home break-ins.

Honestly, in the one year I have been here your posts on this are the most idiotic and irrational that I have seen on any subject
Can I get a second?

Go fuck yourself.

Dude. How much time computer time are you allowed in the institution?

 

[Lucy Hamilton]

he posts may continue, but the point of the thread ended with my pointing out this is a study that used the term "estimated".

They estimate it at 230,000 based on 5 years' worth of hard data they collected that shows 1.4 million guns were stolen, as responded to the NCVS survey that has been around since 1973.

So once again, your gaslighting fails and your point fails with it.

he posts may continue, but the point of the thread ended with my pointing out this is a study that used the term "estimated".

They estimate it at 230,000 based on 5 years' worth of hard data they collected that shows 1.4 million guns were stolen, as responded to the NCVS survey that has been around since 1973.

So once again, your gaslighting fails and your point fails with it.

^^^^ This:

Freaking out.

Melting Down.

 

[The Derp]

Yes, but then she doesn't provide a link to the raw data.

Ummm...the raw data exists in the NCVS. So maybe get off your fat, lazy ass and search for it if it's really something you require. She does cite it all over the place, though. Of course, I don't believe you even opened the link. I think you're just bullshitting and searching for a gaslighting excuse or red herring so you don't have to reconcile the fact that 230,000 guns get stolen every year and end up in the hands of criminals because "responsible gun owners" are a fallacy.

Nor does she provide a link or an explanation of which statistical method she used to arrive at her estimate.

Yes she does. They're literally all over the place here. All of them are cited too. You should take notes on that since you guys have deficiencies when it comes to supporting your own garbage.

t's called Academia, we have rules that are supposed to be followed in matters such as these.

LOL! You don't have shit because you're not an academic. Secondly, the studies are littered throughout with citations and sources, something none of you bother to do here when you post your garbage.

So all you're trying to do is gaslight something that completely undermines your entire argument.

And you can't even do that well. Most definitely not maximum effort on your part. Just laziness and sloppiness.

 

[Lucy Hamilton]

Wait, ALL owning a gun does is increase the supply for thieves? I'm pretty sure gun ownership can involve more than leaving a gun sitting around until someone steals it.

Nope.

Gun ownership does nothing more than increase the supply of available guns for thieves to steal. Any gun in the hands of a criminal was once ion the hands of a "responsible gun owner" who either lost it, sold it to someone shady because they needed the money, or had it stolen from them. And the real kicker is that when guns go missing from homes, they're only reported to the police less than 90% of the time. How come it's not 100%? If we are to believe that "responsible gun owners" exist, how come they can't even get an "A" when it comes to reporting their own weapons as stolen?

^^^^ The best post in the thread

 

[The Derp]

Yes, but then she doesn't provide a link to the raw data. Nor does she provide a link or an explanation of which statistical method she used to arrive at her estimate. It's called Academia, we have rules that are supposed to be followed in matters such as these.

What a fat, fucking liar you are. And a poor excuse for a Mod too. How did you get that gig anyway? I bet you had to pay a lot of money in order to attain such limited power on a message board. Was it worth it? Doesn't seem like it.

Anywho, with regard to the methodologies, here's what the study's author says in the first page of the link you didn't click on:

The data in this report were drawn from the Bureau of Justice Statistics’ (BJS) NCVS, which annually collects information on nonfatal victimizations reported and not reported to the police against persons age 12 or older from a nationally representative sample of U.S. households.

The NCVS collects data on criminal incidents for which theft or attempted theft is either a component of the victimization (i.e., robbery, personal larceny, burglary, motor vehicle theft, and other property theft) or could occur in connection with the victimization (i.e., rape or sexual assault).

This report examines the theft of firearms in criminal victimizations, focusing on the rate, number, amount of loss, and recovery of guns taken during burglaries and other property crimes, which include motor vehicle theft and other theft. It presents information on how firearms may end up in the hands of persons to whom they do not belong. Trend estimates are based on two year rolling averages centered on the most recent year (figure 1). For example, estimates reported for 2010 represent the average estimates for 2009 and 2010. This method improves the reliability and stability of estimate comparisons over time. For all tables in this report, aggregate data for the time from 2005 through 2010 are the focus.​

That last sentence is particularly back-breaking to you: For example, estimates reported for 2010 represent the average estimates for 2009 and 2010. This method improves the reliability and stability of estimate comparisons over time. For all tables in this report, aggregate data for the time from 2005 through 2010 are the focus.

Why? Because she actually spells out the methodology and the aggregate data sets.

So why did you lie when you said she didn't say anything?

Pretty shady, dude. Pretty fuckin' shady.

 

[The Derp]

Oh? What about the 1.5 million who use them to defend themselves every year.

That number is shady and comes from a report where the report's own authors say it could be as few as 100,000, but that they require much further study in order to reasonably provide a range that isn't 100,000 - 1,500,000.

Nice try with the whatabout, though. It almost worked and would have if I wasn't informed of the thing you're trying to misrepresent.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Indefensible liberal positions frequently result in hysterical profanity laced tirades because they have nothing else to support their ideas and no other way of communicating

Keeping one's guns properly secured is a perfectly defensible liberal position.

 

[The Derp]

So an ESTIMATED 230,000 guns out of 300 MILLION PLUS guns, this means that 99.9% of the 100 MILLION PLUS gun owners are responsible gun owners which means that those 100 MILLION PLUS gun owners are NOT responsible for criminals getting guns, which is you idiotic point on another thread that it's the fault of gun owners that criminals have guns.

Ummm...that's not 230,000 aggregate. That's 230,000 a year. Which means in five years, that's north of 1,000,000 guns. And in ten years, it's north of 2,000,000 guns. The aggregate number continues to grow each year. Also, there are fewer gun owners every year, which means more guns are being concentrated in the hands of a dwindling number of people.

In 40 years, 9.2 million guns are likely stolen. So 9.2 million criminals got their hands on 9.2 million guns, most of which were taken from the homes they were bought to protect.

And also, while it may be a small percentage of guns, it's nearly 100% of guns used by criminals. So you're trying to sell me on "responsible gun ownership" when it's not because reporting stolen guns 100% of the time is responsible, yet 86% of the time ain't.

 

[boedicca]

And yet, less than 20,000 people per year are killed by murderers using guns, so even if all those murders involved stolen guns, more than 90% of the stolen guns were not involved in anybody killing anyone.

So what? You're just going to write off those murders? So you're writing off the victims too. Way to have empathy (NOT).

It's that monstrous position that is giving rise to a whole wave of anti-gun activists and lever-pullers. Look at what happened last night in Wisconsin if you want to see how poorly that strategy is working for the NRA. When you dismiss victims like that, all you do is turn them into martyrs which is then used to oust you and your positions from the conversation. Again, look at what happened in WI last night.

Of course not. But if you are going to play games with statistics, you should actually think about what they may indicate.

BTW, I reject your fantasy that in an imperfect world full of fallible human beings we can completely eliminate all risks of evil and danger.

 

[The Derp]

0.08% of all guns
Very very low rate of theft
38% of black males have been incarcerated
Now that's a number

Ah, but nearly 100% of the guns used by criminals are guns that were stolen from homes.

So you arm yourself with a gun to protect your home from criminals armed with guns they stole from homes.

So you're increasing the pool and availability of guns for criminals to steal.

^^^^ This:

Yeah, I agree your shitty gun arguments are epic fails.

You buy a gun to protect your home from criminals who are armed with guns they stole from homes.

That is face-palm worthy.

 

[The Derp]

Indefensible liberal positions frequently result in hysterical profanity laced tirades because they have nothing else to support their ideas and no other way of communicating

Conservatives love to play victims because seeking out pity is the only thing that helps their crippling insecurities.