Fbi Report Ends Nra Nonsense About "good Guys With Guns"

[turtledude]

Fox has an anti gun bias? All news agencies in the entire country have an anti gun bias? Really? Sorry but that doesn't explain how such a TINY number get reported.

News organizations want to make money, they would report.

They also have an anti gun bias...and they like bodies on the ground not stories of criminals running away or surrendering...

again...over 15, seperate, independent studies confirm the 760,000 number as the lowest number of times a gun is used to save lives and stop violent crime...from actual researchers for both universities and the government...the last one, again...came from obama's CDC...and put the low number at 500,000 and the high number at 3 million and they studied 19 different studies to get those numbers...

Tell them...ask them...let them explain it...

try as I might, I fail to see any point you are trying to make

I get you are afraid of guns

 

[JoeB131]

[
suicide is not something that I worry about.
the CDC was being used as an anti gun tool but Democrat turds

Your studies are stupid. and they have been debunked

BTW I am just as safe if I chase a criminal off wit my gun as if I shoot him

But that's where it becomes unbelievable. You gun nuts come on here EVERY FUCKING DAY and share your snuff fantasies. So it's really hard to believe that there are supposedly 100,000 to 2 Million "Defensive Gun Uses" a year, but only 200 or so actually end up with a dead crook.

 

[JoeB131]

If I prove I worked for the DOJ will you say attempt to have sex with a wolverine or perform a french kiss on a hornet's nest?

I'm not going to accept any "proof" you provide.

 

[JoeB131]

I have used a firearm defensively several times. ONLY ONE made it to a police report and that is because I shot one of the muggers

And this is where it's just not believable. Come on, guy, you are supposedly "trained", and spend every day here telling us about all the people you just want to kill, and you only managed to shoot one of them?

 

[Noomi]

New FBI Report Casts Doubt on NRA s Good Guy Stops Bad Guy Nonsense Mike Weisser

"I'm referring to a report on active shooting incidents just released by the FBI which analyzed 160 "active shootings" resulting in injuries to 1,043 victims, including 486 deaths, between 2000 and 2013.
(snip)

Here's how these incidents ended. More than half (56 percent) were terminated by the shooter who either took his or her own life, simply stopped shooting or fled the scene. Another 26 percent ended in the traditional Hollywood-like fashion with the shooter and law enforcement personnel exchanging gunfire and in nearly all of those situations the shooter ended up either wounded or dead. In 13 percent of the shooting situations, the shooter was successfully disarmed and restrained by unarmed civilians, and in 3 percent of the incidents the shooter was confronted by armed civilians, of whom four were on-duty security guards and one person was just your average "good guy" who happened to be carrying a gun."

I knew that already, but it doesn't stop the gun lovers from claiming differently.

 

[JoeB131]

[
try as I might, I fail to see any point you are trying to make

I get you are afraid of guns

No, we are afraid of lunatics with guns like you who just spend every day thinking about all the people you just can't wait to kill.

 

[JoeB131]

F...

again, the one thing they all share in common...at least in the first 14 studies shown and then Dr. Gary Kleck's study ( he found 2.5 million times a gun was used to save lives and stop violent crime) is that the bottom number is 760,000 times a year...and when you average the numbers of Klecks and the other 13...it comes out to 1.4 million times a year...

Obama's CDC study...automatically has an anti gun bias...and it found at least 500,000 times a year...

So again...all the studies are against you Brain 357...so thanks for playing...

​

Contradictions of Kleck

DOJ study reported 83,000 annual defensive gun uses from 1987-1992. During same period, there were more than 135,000 total gun deaths and injuries in the U.S. annually.
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/ascii/hvfsdaft.txt

As for the notion that those using firearms to fend off attackers were more effective in avoiding injury than those using other weapons or no weapons, the DOJ study makes the following exclaimer: "Care should be used in interpreting these data because many aspects of crimes--including victim and offender characteristics, crime circumstances, and offender intent--contribute to victims' injury outcomes."

 

[turtledude]

[
suicide is not something that I worry about.
the CDC was being used as an anti gun tool but Democrat turds

Your studies are stupid. and they have been debunked

BTW I am just as safe if I chase a criminal off wit my gun as if I shoot him

But that's where it becomes unbelievable. You gun nuts come on here EVERY FUCKING DAY and share your snuff fantasies. So it's really hard to believe that there are supposedly 100,000 to 2 Million "Defensive Gun Uses" a year, but only 200 or so actually end up with a dead crook.

you are on record being a gun banner. You are in a conspiracy with violent criminals

 

[turtledude]

[
try as I might, I fail to see any point you are trying to make

I get you are afraid of guns

No, we are afraid of lunatics with guns like you who just spend every day thinking about all the people you just can't wait to kill.

you need some psychological counseling for that paranoia

 

[turtledude]

If I prove I worked for the DOJ will you say attempt to have sex with a wolverine or perform a french kiss on a hornet's nest?

I'm not going to accept any "proof" you provide.

of course not, you are a pathological liar and you project your status onto everyone else

 

[martybegan]

If I prove I worked for the DOJ will you say attempt to have sex with a wolverine or perform a french kiss on a hornet's nest?

I'm not going to accept any "proof" you provide.

of course not, you are a pathological liar and you project your status onto everyone else

JoeBlow isn't happy until his pants are down, and he's ready to take some government dick right up his ass.

 

[turtledude]

If I prove I worked for the DOJ will you say attempt to have sex with a wolverine or perform a french kiss on a hornet's nest?

I'm not going to accept any "proof" you provide.

of course not, you are a pathological liar and you project your status onto everyone else

JoeBlow isn't happy until his pants are down, and he's ready to take some government dick right up his ass.

he wants the taxpayers to fund the K-Y jelly I suspect

 

[Uncensored2008]

when it comes to ignorance the anti gun turds have no match

Indeed, there are only two kinds of gun control advocates

1) the stupid/ignorant

2) dishonest

If you actually believe that democrat gun control laws stop crime you are either ignorant or stupid

and if you support those seems knowing they don't you are dishonest

there are no other possibilities

so are you are moron or a liar Deri-licit

The post-1968 democrats value order above all. A tightly regimented society with regional overseers ensuring that everyone is the same, that the burger flipper is paid the same as an accountant, that a sales clerk has the same as a doctor. That no one excels at anything, lest those of lesser talents be unhappy.

Rulers from afar plan the economy, set prices and decide what products and services shall be offered to the masses. The perceived need of proles rather than the base desires of consumers drive production. The environment is protected because the rulers deem it so, soybean paste provides nutrition without the carbon dioxide that cows, pigs, and chickens emit. Public transportation will replace cars, which will aid in city planners ensuring that people travel only where they are allowed. Of course high density public housing in cities will replace the suburban homes. The 400 ft. living space allocated to each family will mean that there is little reason to travel. As proles are assigned jobs, federal planners will see to it that they labor close to their quarters.

democrats have a dream for society. An armed society could pose a significant challenge as some may resist the chains that democrats offer to each neck. democrats know that disarming the public increases crime - but crime is not their concern.

 

[2aguy]

Click to expand...
Contradictions of Kleck

DOJ study reported 83,000 annual defensive gun uses from 1987-1992. During same period, there were more than 135,000 total gun deaths and injuries in the U.S. annually.
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/ascii/hvfsdaft.txt

As for the notion that those using firearms to fend off attackers were more effective in avoiding injury than those using other weapons or no weapons, the DOJ study makes the following exclaimer: "Care should be used in interpreting these data because many aspects of crimes--including victim and offender characteristics, crime circumstances, and offender intent--contribute to victims' injury outcomes."

This isn't my first debate on the subject...Here is Dr. Kleck defending his methods, taking apart the National Crime vicimization survey and pointing out how flawed it is, and other odds and ends....

Klecks defense of his study

http://www.rkba.org/research/kleck/md-rebuttal.3sep95

defense of kleck by wolfgang

http://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=6854&context=jclc

kleck vs. national crime victimization survey

How Often Are Firearms Used in Self-Defense

kleck defends various methods

Kleck-Gertz DGU Freq Study gunsandcrime

 

[2aguy]

Contradictions of Kleck

DOJ study reported 83,000 annual defensive gun uses from 1987-1992. During same period, there were more than 135,000 total gun deaths and injuries in the U.S. annually.
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/ascii/hvfsdaft.txt

As for the notion that those using firearms to fend off attackers were more effective in avoiding injury than those using other weapons or no weapons, the DOJ study makes the following exclaimer: "Care should be used in interpreting these data because many aspects of crimes--including victim and offender characteristics, crime circumstances, and offender intent--contribute to victims' injury outcomes."

You know, don't you, that Kleck's study is one of about 15 studies... and that at least 2 others put the numbers at 3 million times guns are used to save lives and stop violent crime...and 11 others have the numbers over 760,000...so how do you explain all those other studies and their findings? And why do they always single out Dr. Kleck when there are so many other studies that also found high numbers?

 

[Brain357]

The body count does not support these drastically wrong surveys. But they all contradict each other which should be your first hint. Then there is the fact virtually none make the news. Somehow people shooting people in defense doesn't make the news, impossible.

Contradictions of Kleck

DOJ study reported 83,000 annual defensive gun uses from 1987-1992. During same period, there were more than 135,000 total gun deaths and injuries in the U.S. annually.
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/ascii/hvfsdaft.txt

As for the notion that those using firearms to fend off attackers were more effective in avoiding injury than those using other weapons or no weapons, the DOJ study makes the following exclaimer: "Care should be used in interpreting these data because many aspects of crimes--including victim and offender characteristics, crime circumstances, and offender intent--contribute to victims' injury outcomes."

You know, don't you, that Kleck's study is one of about 15 studies... and that at least 2 others put the numbers at 3 million times guns are used to save lives and stop violent crime...and 11 others have the numbers over 760,000...so how do you explain all those other studies and their findings? And why do they always single out Dr. Kleck when there are so many other studies that also found high numbers?

 

[turtledude]

The body count does not support these drastically wrong surveys. But they all contradict each other which should be your first hint. Then there is the fact virtually none make the news. Somehow people shooting people in defense doesn't make the news, impossible.

Contradictions of Kleck

DOJ study reported 83,000 annual defensive gun uses from 1987-1992. During same period, there were more than 135,000 total gun deaths and injuries in the U.S. annually.
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/ascii/hvfsdaft.txt

As for the notion that those using firearms to fend off attackers were more effective in avoiding injury than those using other weapons or no weapons, the DOJ study makes the following exclaimer: "Care should be used in interpreting these data because many aspects of crimes--including victim and offender characteristics, crime circumstances, and offender intent--contribute to victims' injury outcomes."

You know, don't you, that Kleck's study is one of about 15 studies... and that at least 2 others put the numbers at 3 million times guns are used to save lives and stop violent crime...and 11 others have the numbers over 760,000...so how do you explain all those other studies and their findings? And why do they always single out Dr. Kleck when there are so many other studies that also found high numbers?

who cares? seriously. The default position in a free society is FREEDOM. we don't have a duty to prove guns are GOOD. You gun haters have to prove

1) gun restrictions aimed at honest people actually decrease crime

2) are the least intrusive manner to increase public safety


Since you and YOUR ILK can do neither, you fail


EVERYONE who works around criminals-cops, judges, parole officers, etc tend to be armed

why?

how many retired cops choose to be unarmed?

exactly

 

[2aguy]

The post-1968 democrats value order above all.

The pre 1968 democrats valued order...and control above all...hence when they were forced to give up slavery, the democrats moved onto the New Deal, and then when jim crow was failing to keep control over black Americans they started the Great Society...in each case they wanted control over as many people as possible...

 

[2aguy]

Now with a little time...in response to this post....

Contradictions of Kleck

DOJ study reported 83,000 annual defensive gun uses from 1987-1992. During same period, there were more than 135,000 total gun deaths and injuries in the U.S. annually.
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/ascii/hvfsdaft.txt

As for the notion that those using firearms to fend off attackers were more effective in avoiding injury than those using other weapons or no weapons, the DOJ study makes the following exclaimer: "Care should be used in interpreting these data because many aspects of crimes--including victim and offender characteristics, crime circumstances, and offender intent--contribute to victims' injury outcomes."

Here is the beginning of a dismantling of the National Crime Vicitmization Survey...and it also includes yet another study...this time a Dept. of Justice sponsored survey that found 1.5 million times that a gun was used to save a life and stop violent crime.

How Often Are Firearms Used in Self-Defense

How Often Are Firearms Used in Self-Defense?

Introduction

There are approximately two million defensive gun uses (DGU's) per year by law abiding citizens. That was one of the findings in a national survey conducted by Gary Kleck, a Florida State University criminologist in 1993. Prior to Dr. Kleck's survey, thirteen other surveys indicated a range of between 800,000 to 2.5 million DGU's annually. However these surveys each had their flaws which prompted Dr. Kleck to conduct his own study specifically tailored to estimate the number of DGU's annually.

Subsequent to Kleck's study, the Department of Justice sponsored a survey in 1994 titled, Guns in America: National Survey on Private Ownership and Use of Firearms (text, PDF). Using a smaller sample size than Kleck's, this survey estimated 1.5 million DGU's annually.

There is one study, the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), which in 1993, estimated 108,000 DGU's annually. Why the huge discrepancy between this survey and fourteen others?

Dr. Kleck's Answer

Why is the NCVS an unacceptable estimate of annual DGU's? Dr. Kleck states, "Equally important, those who take the NCVS-based estimates seriously have consistently ignored the most pronounced limitations of the NCVS for estimating DGU frequency. The NCVS is a non-anonymous national survey conducted by a branch of the federal government, the U.S. Bureau of the Census. Interviewers identify themselves to respondents as federal government employees, even displaying, in face-to-face contacts, an identification card with a badge. Respondents are told that the interviews are being conducted on behalf of the U.S. Department of Justice, the law enforcement branch of the federal government.

As a preliminary to asking questions about crime victimization experiences, interviewers establish the address, telephone number, and full names of all occupants, age twelve and over, in each household they contact. In short, it is made very clear to respondents that they are, in effect, speaking to a law enforcement arm of the federal government, whose employees know exactly who the respondents and their family members are, where they live, and how they can be recontacted."

"It is not hard for gun-using victims interviewed in the NCVS to withhold information about their use of a gun, especially since they are never directly asked whether they used a gun for self-protection. They are asked only general questions about whether they did anything to protect themselves. In short, respondents are merely give the opportunity to volunteer the information that they have used a gun defensively. All it takes for a respondents to conceal a DGU is to simply refrain from mentioning it, i.e., to leave it out of what may be an otherwise accurate and complete account of the crime incident."

 

[2aguy]

Guys...I hate to tell you this...I followed the link from Breitbart that has on of the actual studies hufpo uses....for you anti gunners who swear by this hufpo piece....er....Dr. Kleck did this study...

Huffington Post Twists Studies to Claim Armed Resistance Doesn t Help in Shootings

To bolster their contention, HuffPo also cites a 2005 study "funded by the Justice Department" which "showed that persons that resisted assaults by running away or calling the police had a better chance of escaping injury than if they resisted the assault with a gun."

In reality, the study says:

In assault incidents, most Self Protection (SP) tactics appear to reduce the risk of injury and serious injury compared to nonresistance. The only SP actions that appear to significantly raise the risk of injury and serious injury are were ambiguous, non-forceful tactics [like] "stalling/cooperation" and "screaming from pain or fear." Thus we found no evidence that female victims' forceful SP actions are more dangerous than non-forceful SP actions.

Follow the link in that post....look at the names of the people who did the study...notice Dr. Gary Kleck's name....

The author(s) shown below used Federal funds provided by the U.S. Department of Justice and prepared the following final report:
Document Title: Draft Final Technical Report: The Impact of Victim Self Protection on Rape Completion and Injury
Author(s): Gary Kleck and Jongyeon Tark
Document No.: 211201
Date Received: September 2005
Award Number: 2004-IJ-CX-0046

In reality, the study says:

In assault incidents, most Self Protection (SP) tactics appear to reduce the risk of injury and serious injury compared to nonresistance. The only SP actions that appear to significantly raise the risk of injury and serious injury are were ambiguous, non-forceful tactics [like] "stalling/cooperation" and "screaming from pain or fear." Thus we found no evidence that female victims' forceful SP actions are more dangerous than non-forceful SP actions.

And what did this study the hufpo uses actual say about rape victims...SP = Self Protective in the study...

We found that most SP actions, both forceful and non-forceful, significantly reduce the risk of rape completion. In particular, SP actions such as “attacking without weapons,” “struggling,” “run away/hide,” “warning” appear to reduce the risk of rape more than 80 percent compared to nonresistance. The findings clearly do not support the argument that forceful SP actions are not as effective as nonforceful SP actions.