Gun violence in the world

[M14 Shooter]

My intent was to communicate, your intent was to obfuscate and create confusion. Thus, the dishonesty is once again an issue with you. You seem old enough not to deny your hand was in the cookie jar, yet do so when your hand is still in the cookie jar; my advice to you is Grow Up!

Says the guy that ran away from the honest and open debate on gun control that he asked for.

 

[LOki]

Liberals want only the criminal thugs to be the ones that are armed, according to their anti-gun logic.

Many Americans want a sane gun policy, today's gun policy is not sane.

Don't presume to know what all liberals think on any single issue, there is no liberal mentor, like Coulter or Limbaugh, giving daily talking points which the echo chamber parrots.

1. no average citizen needs an assault rifle
2. Chicago has the most strict gun laws in the nation, and the highest rate of gun deaths
3. the 2nd amendment will never be repealed, and never should be
4. the Japanese were scared to invade the USA because "every american has a gun"
5. If guns were banned only criminals and the government would have guns
6. mentally ill people should not be allowed to buy, own, or posses guns
7. OJ murdered two people with a knife
8 McVeay murdered hundreds with a bomb
9. the 9/11 terrorists murdered thousands with airplanes
10. Cars kill more people than guns.

1. Correct

It is impossible to demonstrate this assertion is categorically true. And it's not your decision to make.

2. Correlation does not prove causation

Sure it does. It does all the time. ONE correlation does not prove causation.

3. The Second Amendment is not sacrosanct

The right to keep and bear arms is a fundamental political right, and it preserves a fundamental natural right. Sacrosanct enough for me.

4. One persons' apocryphal opinion does not reflect a nations'

I think this was bullshit from the beginning anyway.

5. Talking point and ridiculous - there is no effort to ban guns

A lie.

6. Mentally ill? A normal guy who drank too many shots of whiskey?

Seriously. "Mentally ill"--a person who questions authority? "Mentally ill"--a person who does not toe the party line? "Mentally ill"--a person who denies the divinity of our glorious leader?

7. Talking point, two dozen killed at Sandy Hook with a gun

Talking point--nobody shot back in defense of anybody in either case.

8. bombs are made to kill, and bombs are strictly regulated

And such regulation failed, for OBVIOUS reasons. And you know what? You can still buy fuel oil and fertilizer without even showing ID.

9. Talking point, planes are not made to kill

Contentious premise. False dichotomy.

10. Guns are made to kill, cars are not

Contentious premise. False dichotomy.

In re PTs 9 and 10:

Premise/Evidence Acceptability
"When it comes to value-based arguments (e.g., political, moral, and religious) we will often not be able to achieve 100% certainty of truth of the premises. Even something as intuitively obvious like "it's wrong to kill innocent people" will have counter-examples. However, simply because a premise cannot be 100% true in all cases, it doesn't necessarily mean that we should reject it or that the argument of which it is a part is poor. Instead, it means we need to be subtle in our evaluations and consider carefully what the logical consequences are of accepting certain premises."

Wrestling with Philosophy formerly Mission to Transition Critical Thinking Premise and Evidence Acceptability Unacceptability and Uncertainty Revisited

Good. "Guns are made to kill..." lacks subtlety and consideration. Maybe you'd like to refine or rephrase your premise.

8, The exception proves the rule.

Not in any way, what-so-ever.

7. Six and seven year old children don't commonly shoot back, K and first grade teachers are not trained in college to use deadly force.

Come on. Six and seven year olds? Are you so committed to just being obtuse?

I'm going to ask you to choose one of two positions regarding training: gun use is so difficult to master that it is rendered ineffective without rigorous training; or effective gun use is achievable with little to no training.

It seems to me that those who oppose the private possession of guns tend to disingenuously pick BOTH according to the way it serves their argument.

6. Mentally ill refers to a wide range of mental health conditions — disorders that affect your mood, thinking and behavior. Alcohol fits this defintion.

I don't disagree. Yet "mentally ill" is also applied capriciously and abusively. While nobody wants Chuck Manson to own a gun, neither do they want their rights violated because they had trouble sleeping.

5. There are those who want to ban all guns, I'm not one of them. There is no concerted effort to repeal the Second Amendment as there is to repeal Roe v. Wade, and Sec. 1 of the 14th, the 16th & the 17th.

Every gun registration and gun ban attempt is an attempt at confiscation. There is OBVIOUSLY a concerted effort to repeal the Second Amendment as there is to repeal Roe v. Wade, and Sec. 1 of the 14th, the 16th & the 17th.

4. Okay

Yeah. It helps no one to submit such bullshit.

3. The right of the people is infringed, and thus it has been ruled as not too valuable or important as you and others may wish

And you said there's no concerted effort to repeal the 2nd...tsk.

Infringing upon a right, doesn't change it's value. A thief steals a $100 worth of X, and that X has not been diminished in value. The right enumerated in the 2nd has been "infringed" under false pretenses... the reasonable and morally correct thing to do is end such infringement.

2. Correlation does not imply causation is a phrase used in science and statistics to emphasize that a correlation between two variables does not necessarily imply that one causes the other.

Statistics is it's own thing...in science, however, correlation certainly implies causation. It's not even arguable. If correlation did not imply causation, there would be ZERO reason to investigate correlations.

And do you know what generations of scientists from around the world, and in every single discipline have discovered? Effects are directly correlated to causes. Every. Single. Time.

1. okay

Good. The argument from "does not need" is prima facie bullshit.

 

[LOki]

1. no average citizen needs an assault rifle

But every law abiding citizen had a right to one.

Yes, but there should be limits.

All classes of firearms fall within these limits.

Sorry, but I do not think that the average citizen should be able to buy an M16.

Upon what moral authority do you make such decisions for others?

What can you hunt with that besides other humans?

Any thing but humans, for example. Do you not know what "hunt" means?

Besides, "hunting" isn't he issue. The issue is "legal use." Are you saying that it is IMPOSSIBLE for the average citizen to use an M16 in a legal manner?

If protection is the reason, a shotgun is much more effective.

Protection is a fine reason, and you are obviously wrong. The police don't prefer shotguns, why should the rest of us?

 

[Brain357]

And of course you fail to point out that Americans use guns to stop or prevent violent criminal attack and save lives 2million times a year on Average...that is 2 million fewer lives shattered by violent criminals.....

2 million crimes stopped vs.

Accidental gun deaths 2013...505

Gun murders 2013....8,454


Which number is bigger? Even you should be able to do that math...

Let's do the math. According to you, 2 million crimes are stopped by guns a year. Given there are 365 days in a year, you are saying that 5480 per day are prevented or about 230 an hour....230 an hour....every hour of every day of the year.

I think we can stop considering you to be a serious commentator at this point.

230! Wow, that must be impossible. Of course...

Well, because it is.

There were 9,795,658 crimes committed in 2013. This is a fact easily verified:
United States Crime Rates1960 - 2013
Given there are 365 days in a year, that means there are 26,837 per day are prevented or about 1,118 an hour....1,118 an hour every hour of every day of the year.

Huh? You're taking the number of crimes and dividing by 365 and claiming that they are prevented. Nothing supports that.

230 certainly is not impossible or even all that high considering that there are almost 5 times that number of crimes actually successfully committed AND reported.

Brought to you by the same folks who said Iraq would cost less than a billion and Reagan-nomics.

2 million is likely an over estimate but if it is even half that you are dealing with a SIGNIFICANT numbers of defensive uses.

It's nowhere near 2,000,000 or even half that.

Even you can do the math and see that it is not all that unreasonable at all.

Given that 2,000,000 fantasy, it translates into 230 preventions due to guns per hour....every single hour of every single day.

Pick a day in the future...lets say July 7...if you can show me 50 news stories on 7/7/15 detailing such preventions that occurred on 7/6/15...I'll buy the statistic.

Surely if there are 230 every hour of every day, 25% of them +/- get reported by the local newspapers/radio/tv...don't they?

Accept the challenge?

Given that that number comes from actual research, done over 40 years by both private and public researchers in economics and criminology it isn't fantasy....fantasy is when you anti gun extremists pull a number out of the air and say...that is the number.....

Here is the actual research and this isn't even all of it........

I just averaged the studies......which were conducted by different researchers, from both private and public researchers, over a period of 40 years looking specifically at guns and self defense....the name of the researcher is first, then the year then the number of times they determined guns were used for self defense......notice how many of them there are and how many of them were done by gun grabbers like the clinton Justice Dept. and the obama CDC

And these aren't all of the studies either...there are more...and they support the ones below.....

A quick guide to the studies and the numbers.....the full lay out of what was studied by each study is in the links....
GunCite-Gun Control-How Often Are Guns Used in Self-Defense

GunCite Frequency of Defensive Gun Use in Previous Surveys

Field...1976....3,052,717 ( no cops, military)
DMIa 1978...2,141,512 ( no cops, military)
L.A. TIMES...1994...3,609,68 ( no cops, military)
Kleck...2.5 million ( no cops, military)

Obama's CDC....2013....500,000--3million

--------------------


Bordua...1977...1,414,544

DMIb...1978...1,098,409 ( no cops, military)

Hart...1981...1.797,461 ( no cops, military)

Mauser...1990...1,487,342 ( no cops, military)

Gallup...1993...1,621,377 ( no cops, military)

DEPT. OF JUSTICE...1994...1.5 million

Journal of Quantitative Criminology--- 989,883 times per year."
-------------------------------------------
Ohio...1982...771,043

Gallup...1991...777,152

Tarrance... 1994... 764,036 (no cops, military)

Lawerence Southwich Jr. 400,000 fewer violent crimes and at least 800,000 violent crimes deterred..
*****************************************
If you take the studies from that Kleck cites in his paper, 16 of them....and you only average the ones that exclude military and police shootings..the average becomes 2 million...I use those studies because I have the details on them...and they are still 10 studies (including Kleck's)....

So the vast majority of studies are under 2 million. The much more accurate NCVS survey is 108k.

The CDC did not estimate DGUs. Please link to the department of justice study. La times and field are very high please link those also.

 

[Edgetho]

We don't have a gun problem, we have a Minority Problem.

Remove Minorities from the numbers and our gun fatalities/crimes are the lowest of any Western nation.

Virtually all gun crime in Inner Cities is from Minorities.

But dimocraps, being the scum of the earth, won't address that problem because -- Well, because that's where they get their power.

They NEED a permanent underclass. They MUST HAVE a permanent underclass. Otherwise they couldn't get elected Dog Catcher.

Just the way it is people, dimocraps are scum.

Period

 

[Edgetho]

Black America s real problem isn t white racism

In New York from January to June 2008, 83 percent of all gun assailants were black, according to witnesses and victims, though blacks were only 24 percent of the population. Blacks and Hispanics together accounted for 98 percent of all gun assailants. Forty-nine of every 50 muggings and murders in the Big Apple were the work of black or Hispanic criminals....

...Fernando Mateo, head of the New York taxicab union, urges his drivers to profile blacks and Hispanics for their own safety: “The God’s honest truth is that 99 percent of the people that are robbing, stealing, killing these drivers are blacks and Hispanics.”

“An analysis of ‘single offender victimization figures’ from the FBI for 2007 finds blacks committed 433,934 crimes against whites, eight times the 55,685 whites committed against blacks. Interracial rape is almost exclusively black on white — with 14,000 assaults on white women by African Americans in 2007. Not one case of a white sexual assault on a black female was found in the FBI study.”

Though blacks are outnumbered 5-to-1 in the population by whites, they commit eight times as many crimes against whites as the reverse. By those 2007 numbers, a black male was 40 times as likely to assault a white person as the reverse.

dimocraps are scum

fucking period

 

[Redfish]

1. no average citizen needs an assault rifle

But every law abiding citizen had a right to one.

Yes, but there should be limits.

All classes of firearms fall within these limits.

Sorry, but I do not think that the average citizen should be able to buy an M16.

Upon what moral authority do you make such decisions for others?

What can you hunt with that besides other humans?

Any thing but humans, for example. Do you not know what "hunt" means?

Besides, "hunting" isn't he issue. The issue is "legal use." Are you saying that it is IMPOSSIBLE for the average citizen to use an M16 in a legal manner?

If protection is the reason, a shotgun is much more effective.

Protection is a fine reason, and you are obviously wrong. The police don't prefer shotguns, why should the rest of us?

merely stating my opinions, as are you.

 

[Brain357]

Who dies in the US from guns each year?
20k suicides, gun owner
8,500 homicides innocent victim
500 accidental shooting, innocent victim
230 criminals in defenses

 

[Wry Catcher]

Many Americans want a sane gun policy, today's gun policy is not sane.

Don't presume to know what all liberals think on any single issue, there is no liberal mentor, like Coulter or Limbaugh, giving daily talking points which the echo chamber parrots.

1. no average citizen needs an assault rifle
2. Chicago has the most strict gun laws in the nation, and the highest rate of gun deaths
3. the 2nd amendment will never be repealed, and never should be
4. the Japanese were scared to invade the USA because "every american has a gun"
5. If guns were banned only criminals and the government would have guns
6. mentally ill people should not be allowed to buy, own, or posses guns
7. OJ murdered two people with a knife
8 McVeay murdered hundreds with a bomb
9. the 9/11 terrorists murdered thousands with airplanes
10. Cars kill more people than guns.

1. Correct

It is impossible to demonstrate this assertion is categorically true. And it's not your decision to make.

2. Correlation does not prove causation

Sure it does. It does all the time. ONE correlation does not prove causation.

3. The Second Amendment is not sacrosanct

The right to keep and bear arms is a fundamental political right, and it preserves a fundamental natural right. Sacrosanct enough for me.

4. One persons' apocryphal opinion does not reflect a nations'

I think this was bullshit from the beginning anyway.

5. Talking point and ridiculous - there is no effort to ban guns

A lie.

6. Mentally ill? A normal guy who drank too many shots of whiskey?

Seriously. "Mentally ill"--a person who questions authority? "Mentally ill"--a person who does not toe the party line? "Mentally ill"--a person who denies the divinity of our glorious leader?

7. Talking point, two dozen killed at Sandy Hook with a gun

Talking point--nobody shot back in defense of anybody in either case.

8. bombs are made to kill, and bombs are strictly regulated

And such regulation failed, for OBVIOUS reasons. And you know what? You can still buy fuel oil and fertilizer without even showing ID.

9. Talking point, planes are not made to kill

Contentious premise. False dichotomy.

10. Guns are made to kill, cars are not

Contentious premise. False dichotomy.

In re PTs 9 and 10:

Premise/Evidence Acceptability
"When it comes to value-based arguments (e.g., political, moral, and religious) we will often not be able to achieve 100% certainty of truth of the premises. Even something as intuitively obvious like "it's wrong to kill innocent people" will have counter-examples. However, simply because a premise cannot be 100% true in all cases, it doesn't necessarily mean that we should reject it or that the argument of which it is a part is poor. Instead, it means we need to be subtle in our evaluations and consider carefully what the logical consequences are of accepting certain premises."

Wrestling with Philosophy formerly Mission to Transition Critical Thinking Premise and Evidence Acceptability Unacceptability and Uncertainty Revisited

Good. "Guns are made to kill..." lacks subtlety and consideration. Maybe you'd like to refine or rephrase your premise.

8, The exception proves the rule.

Not in any way, what-so-ever.

7. Six and seven year old children don't commonly shoot back, K and first grade teachers are not trained in college to use deadly force.

Come on. Six and seven year olds? Are you so committed to just being obtuse?

I'm going to ask you to choose one of two positions regarding training: gun use is so difficult to master that it is rendered ineffective without rigorous training; or effective gun use is achievable with little to no training.

It seems to me that those who oppose the private possession of guns tend to disingenuously pick BOTH according to the way it serves their argument.

6. Mentally ill refers to a wide range of mental health conditions — disorders that affect your mood, thinking and behavior. Alcohol fits this defintion.

I don't disagree. Yet "mentally ill" is also applied capriciously and abusively. While nobody wants Chuck Manson to own a gun, neither do they want their rights violated because they had trouble sleeping.

5. There are those who want to ban all guns, I'm not one of them. There is no concerted effort to repeal the Second Amendment as there is to repeal Roe v. Wade, and Sec. 1 of the 14th, the 16th & the 17th.

Every gun registration and gun ban attempt is an attempt at confiscation. There is OBVIOUSLY a concerted effort to repeal the Second Amendment as there is to repeal Roe v. Wade, and Sec. 1 of the 14th, the 16th & the 17th.

4. Okay

Yeah. It helps no one to submit such bullshit.

3. The right of the people is infringed, and thus it has been ruled as not too valuable or important as you and others may wish

And you said there's no concerted effort to repeal the 2nd...tsk.

Infringing upon a right, doesn't change it's value. A thief steals a $100 worth of X, and that X has not been diminished in value. The right enumerated in the 2nd has been "infringed" under false pretenses... the reasonable and morally correct thing to do is end such infringement.

2. Correlation does not imply causation is a phrase used in science and statistics to emphasize that a correlation between two variables does not necessarily imply that one causes the other.

Statistics is it's own thing...in science, however, correlation certainly implies causation. It's not even arguable. If correlation did not imply causation, there would be ZERO reason to investigate correlations.

And do you know what generations of scientists from around the world, and in every single discipline have discovered? Effects are directly correlated to causes. Every. Single. Time.

1. okay

Good. The argument from "does not need" is prima facie bullshit.

Let's just agree to disagree, I tired of this "yes, but" bullshit. You love your gun and don't give a damn about other people - it's the badge of honor of callous conservatives.

 

[LOki]

And of course you fail to point out that Americans use guns to stop or prevent violent criminal attack and save lives 2million times a year on Average...that is 2 million fewer lives shattered by violent criminals.....

2 million crimes stopped vs.

Accidental gun deaths 2013...505

Gun murders 2013....8,454


Which number is bigger? Even you should be able to do that math...

Let's do the math. According to you, 2 million crimes are stopped by guns a year. Given there are 365 days in a year, you are saying that 5480 per day are prevented or about 230 an hour....230 an hour....every hour of every day of the year.

I think we can stop considering you to be a serious commentator at this point.

230! Wow, that must be impossible. Of course...

Well, because it is.

There were 9,795,658 crimes committed in 2013. This is a fact easily verified:
United States Crime Rates1960 - 2013
Given there are 365 days in a year, that means there are 26,837 per day are prevented or about 1,118 an hour....1,118 an hour every hour of every day of the year.

Huh? You're taking the number of crimes and dividing by 365 and claiming that they are prevented. Nothing supports that.

230 certainly is not impossible or even all that high considering that there are almost 5 times that number of crimes actually successfully committed AND reported.

Brought to you by the same folks who said Iraq would cost less than a billion and Reagan-nomics.

2 million is likely an over estimate but if it is even half that you are dealing with a SIGNIFICANT numbers of defensive uses.

It's nowhere near 2,000,000 or even half that.

Even you can do the math and see that it is not all that unreasonable at all.

Given that 2,000,000 fantasy, it translates into 230 preventions due to guns per hour....every single hour of every single day.

Pick a day in the future...lets say July 7...if you can show me 50 news stories on 7/7/15 detailing such preventions that occurred on 7/6/15...I'll buy the statistic.

Surely if there are 230 every hour of every day, 25% of them +/- get reported by the local newspapers/radio/tv...don't they?

Accept the challenge?

Given that that number comes from actual research, done over 40 years by both private and public researchers in economics and criminology it isn't fantasy....fantasy is when you anti gun extremists pull a number out of the air and say...that is the number.....

Here is the actual research and this isn't even all of it........

I just averaged the studies......which were conducted by different researchers, from both private and public researchers, over a period of 40 years looking specifically at guns and self defense....the name of the researcher is first, then the year then the number of times they determined guns were used for self defense......notice how many of them there are and how many of them were done by gun grabbers like the clinton Justice Dept. and the obama CDC

And these aren't all of the studies either...there are more...and they support the ones below.....

A quick guide to the studies and the numbers.....the full lay out of what was studied by each study is in the links....
GunCite-Gun Control-How Often Are Guns Used in Self-Defense

GunCite Frequency of Defensive Gun Use in Previous Surveys

Field...1976....3,052,717 ( no cops, military)
DMIa 1978...2,141,512 ( no cops, military)
L.A. TIMES...1994...3,609,68 ( no cops, military)
Kleck...2.5 million ( no cops, military)

Obama's CDC....2013....500,000--3million

--------------------


Bordua...1977...1,414,544

DMIb...1978...1,098,409 ( no cops, military)

Hart...1981...1.797,461 ( no cops, military)

Mauser...1990...1,487,342 ( no cops, military)

Gallup...1993...1,621,377 ( no cops, military)

DEPT. OF JUSTICE...1994...1.5 million

Journal of Quantitative Criminology--- 989,883 times per year."
-------------------------------------------
Ohio...1982...771,043

Gallup...1991...777,152

Tarrance... 1994... 764,036 (no cops, military)

Lawerence Southwich Jr. 400,000 fewer violent crimes and at least 800,000 violent crimes deterred..
*****************************************
If you take the studies from that Kleck cites in his paper, 16 of them....and you only average the ones that exclude military and police shootings..the average becomes 2 million...I use those studies because I have the details on them...and they are still 10 studies (including Kleck's)....

So the vast majority of studies are under 2 million. The much more accurate NCVS survey is 108k.

The CDC did not estimate DGUs. Please link to the department of justice study. La times and field are very high please link those also.

The NCVS survey didn't ask about DGUs. How do you figure it's the most accurate... besides your obvious bias against the notion of valid DGUs.

 

[Wry Catcher]

But every law abiding citizen had a right to one.

Yes, but there should be limits.

All classes of firearms fall within these limits.

Sorry, but I do not think that the average citizen should be able to buy an M16.

Upon what moral authority do you make such decisions for others?

What can you hunt with that besides other humans?

Any thing but humans, for example. Do you not know what "hunt" means?

Besides, "hunting" isn't he issue. The issue is "legal use." Are you saying that it is IMPOSSIBLE for the average citizen to use an M16 in a legal manner?

If protection is the reason, a shotgun is much more effective.

Protection is a fine reason, and you are obviously wrong. The police don't prefer shotguns, why should the rest of us?

merely stating my opinions, as are you.

Police have use of force policies, one concern for them is innocent bystanders, something "the rest of" you don't consider.

 

[2aguy]

Let's do the math. According to you, 2 million crimes are stopped by guns a year. Given there are 365 days in a year, you are saying that 5480 per day are prevented or about 230 an hour....230 an hour....every hour of every day of the year.

I think we can stop considering you to be a serious commentator at this point.

230! Wow, that must be impossible. Of course...

Well, because it is.

There were 9,795,658 crimes committed in 2013. This is a fact easily verified:
United States Crime Rates1960 - 2013
Given there are 365 days in a year, that means there are 26,837 per day are prevented or about 1,118 an hour....1,118 an hour every hour of every day of the year.

Huh? You're taking the number of crimes and dividing by 365 and claiming that they are prevented. Nothing supports that.

230 certainly is not impossible or even all that high considering that there are almost 5 times that number of crimes actually successfully committed AND reported.

Brought to you by the same folks who said Iraq would cost less than a billion and Reagan-nomics.

2 million is likely an over estimate but if it is even half that you are dealing with a SIGNIFICANT numbers of defensive uses.

It's nowhere near 2,000,000 or even half that.

Even you can do the math and see that it is not all that unreasonable at all.

Given that 2,000,000 fantasy, it translates into 230 preventions due to guns per hour....every single hour of every single day.

Pick a day in the future...lets say July 7...if you can show me 50 news stories on 7/7/15 detailing such preventions that occurred on 7/6/15...I'll buy the statistic.

Surely if there are 230 every hour of every day, 25% of them +/- get reported by the local newspapers/radio/tv...don't they?

Accept the challenge?

Given that that number comes from actual research, done over 40 years by both private and public researchers in economics and criminology it isn't fantasy....fantasy is when you anti gun extremists pull a number out of the air and say...that is the number.....

Here is the actual research and this isn't even all of it........

I just averaged the studies......which were conducted by different researchers, from both private and public researchers, over a period of 40 years looking specifically at guns and self defense....the name of the researcher is first, then the year then the number of times they determined guns were used for self defense......notice how many of them there are and how many of them were done by gun grabbers like the clinton Justice Dept. and the obama CDC

And these aren't all of the studies either...there are more...and they support the ones below.....

A quick guide to the studies and the numbers.....the full lay out of what was studied by each study is in the links....
GunCite-Gun Control-How Often Are Guns Used in Self-Defense

GunCite Frequency of Defensive Gun Use in Previous Surveys

Field...1976....3,052,717 ( no cops, military)
DMIa 1978...2,141,512 ( no cops, military)
L.A. TIMES...1994...3,609,68 ( no cops, military)
Kleck...2.5 million ( no cops, military)

Obama's CDC....2013....500,000--3million

--------------------


Bordua...1977...1,414,544

DMIb...1978...1,098,409 ( no cops, military)

Hart...1981...1.797,461 ( no cops, military)

Mauser...1990...1,487,342 ( no cops, military)

Gallup...1993...1,621,377 ( no cops, military)

DEPT. OF JUSTICE...1994...1.5 million

Journal of Quantitative Criminology--- 989,883 times per year."
-------------------------------------------
Ohio...1982...771,043

Gallup...1991...777,152

Tarrance... 1994... 764,036 (no cops, military)

Lawerence Southwich Jr. 400,000 fewer violent crimes and at least 800,000 violent crimes deterred..
*****************************************
If you take the studies from that Kleck cites in his paper, 16 of them....and you only average the ones that exclude military and police shootings..the average becomes 2 million...I use those studies because I have the details on them...and they are still 10 studies (including Kleck's)....

So the vast majority of studies are under 2 million. The much more accurate NCVS survey is 108k.

The CDC did not estimate DGUs. Please link to the department of justice study. La times and field are very high please link those also.

The NCVS survey didn't ask about DGUs. How do you figure it's the most accurate... besides your obvious bias against the notion of valid DGUs.

He figures that is the number because it is the only study....I repeat, the only study with the number that low.....and of course to get the number that low they have to use a study that isn't a gun study...and doesn't actually ask about guns in the study......

That is some research technique isn't it....?

 

[there4eyeM]

Missiles and nuclear devices covered, are they?

 

[M14 Shooter]

Police have use of force policies, one concern for them is innocent bystanders, something "the rest of" you don't consider.

This is, of course, either abject ignorance, or a lie.
Typical of an anti-gun loon.

 

[2aguy]

Yes, but there should be limits.

All classes of firearms fall within these limits.

Sorry, but I do not think that the average citizen should be able to buy an M16.

Upon what moral authority do you make such decisions for others?

What can you hunt with that besides other humans?

Any thing but humans, for example. Do you not know what "hunt" means?

Besides, "hunting" isn't he issue. The issue is "legal use." Are you saying that it is IMPOSSIBLE for the average citizen to use an M16 in a legal manner?

If protection is the reason, a shotgun is much more effective.

Protection is a fine reason, and you are obviously wrong. The police don't prefer shotguns, why should the rest of us?

merely stating my opinions, as are you.

Police have use of force policies, one concern for them is innocent bystanders, something "the rest of" you don't consider.

Sorry, story after story, the one in particular at the mall shooting right after Sandy Hook ,the concealed carrier pointed his weapon at the shooter and did not shoot him because there were people behind him....the guy then killed himself rather than be taken into custody...

Dittos the concealed carriers at the Gabby giffords shooting, he took control of the man he thought was the shooter but did not shoot him either.....

You are wrong....again....

 

[M14 Shooter]

Let's just agree to disagree, I tired of this "yes, but" bullshit. You love your gun and don't give a damn about other people - it's the badge of honor of callous conservatives.

This is, of course, either abject ignorance, or a lie.
Typical of an anti-gun loon.

 

[Brain357]

Let's do the math. According to you, 2 million crimes are stopped by guns a year. Given there are 365 days in a year, you are saying that 5480 per day are prevented or about 230 an hour....230 an hour....every hour of every day of the year.

I think we can stop considering you to be a serious commentator at this point.

230! Wow, that must be impossible. Of course...

Well, because it is.

There were 9,795,658 crimes committed in 2013. This is a fact easily verified:
United States Crime Rates1960 - 2013
Given there are 365 days in a year, that means there are 26,837 per day are prevented or about 1,118 an hour....1,118 an hour every hour of every day of the year.

Huh? You're taking the number of crimes and dividing by 365 and claiming that they are prevented. Nothing supports that.

230 certainly is not impossible or even all that high considering that there are almost 5 times that number of crimes actually successfully committed AND reported.

Brought to you by the same folks who said Iraq would cost less than a billion and Reagan-nomics.

2 million is likely an over estimate but if it is even half that you are dealing with a SIGNIFICANT numbers of defensive uses.

It's nowhere near 2,000,000 or even half that.

Even you can do the math and see that it is not all that unreasonable at all.

Given that 2,000,000 fantasy, it translates into 230 preventions due to guns per hour....every single hour of every single day.

Pick a day in the future...lets say July 7...if you can show me 50 news stories on 7/7/15 detailing such preventions that occurred on 7/6/15...I'll buy the statistic.

Surely if there are 230 every hour of every day, 25% of them +/- get reported by the local newspapers/radio/tv...don't they?

Accept the challenge?

Given that that number comes from actual research, done over 40 years by both private and public researchers in economics and criminology it isn't fantasy....fantasy is when you anti gun extremists pull a number out of the air and say...that is the number.....

Here is the actual research and this isn't even all of it........

I just averaged the studies......which were conducted by different researchers, from both private and public researchers, over a period of 40 years looking specifically at guns and self defense....the name of the researcher is first, then the year then the number of times they determined guns were used for self defense......notice how many of them there are and how many of them were done by gun grabbers like the clinton Justice Dept. and the obama CDC

And these aren't all of the studies either...there are more...and they support the ones below.....

A quick guide to the studies and the numbers.....the full lay out of what was studied by each study is in the links....
GunCite-Gun Control-How Often Are Guns Used in Self-Defense

GunCite Frequency of Defensive Gun Use in Previous Surveys

Field...1976....3,052,717 ( no cops, military)
DMIa 1978...2,141,512 ( no cops, military)
L.A. TIMES...1994...3,609,68 ( no cops, military)
Kleck...2.5 million ( no cops, military)

Obama's CDC....2013....500,000--3million

--------------------


Bordua...1977...1,414,544

DMIb...1978...1,098,409 ( no cops, military)

Hart...1981...1.797,461 ( no cops, military)

Mauser...1990...1,487,342 ( no cops, military)

Gallup...1993...1,621,377 ( no cops, military)

DEPT. OF JUSTICE...1994...1.5 million

Journal of Quantitative Criminology--- 989,883 times per year."
-------------------------------------------
Ohio...1982...771,043

Gallup...1991...777,152

Tarrance... 1994... 764,036 (no cops, military)

Lawerence Southwich Jr. 400,000 fewer violent crimes and at least 800,000 violent crimes deterred..
*****************************************
If you take the studies from that Kleck cites in his paper, 16 of them....and you only average the ones that exclude military and police shootings..the average becomes 2 million...I use those studies because I have the details on them...and they are still 10 studies (including Kleck's)....

So the vast majority of studies are under 2 million. The much more accurate NCVS survey is 108k.

The CDC did not estimate DGUs. Please link to the department of justice study. La times and field are very high please link those also.

The NCVS survey didn't ask about DGUs. How do you figure it's the most accurate... besides your obvious bias against the notion of valid DGUs.

It asks about crimes and what happened during the crime. You need a crime for a dgu. Gun studies go right into guns which leads to many false positives. Many people claim a DGU when it was really intimidating someone. The ncvs also surveys 95k households. No gun study is anywhere close to that. Larger sample equals more accurate results.

The real world is biased against millions of DGUs. Only about 50 make the news each year. People who claim to have one are very rare. Most people don't know anyone who has had one. Only about 230 justifiable homicides each year. Nothing from the real world supports millions of DGUs each year.

 

[2aguy]

230! Wow, that must be impossible. Of course...

Well, because it is.

There were 9,795,658 crimes committed in 2013. This is a fact easily verified:
United States Crime Rates1960 - 2013
Given there are 365 days in a year, that means there are 26,837 per day are prevented or about 1,118 an hour....1,118 an hour every hour of every day of the year.

Huh? You're taking the number of crimes and dividing by 365 and claiming that they are prevented. Nothing supports that.

230 certainly is not impossible or even all that high considering that there are almost 5 times that number of crimes actually successfully committed AND reported.

Brought to you by the same folks who said Iraq would cost less than a billion and Reagan-nomics.

2 million is likely an over estimate but if it is even half that you are dealing with a SIGNIFICANT numbers of defensive uses.

It's nowhere near 2,000,000 or even half that.

Even you can do the math and see that it is not all that unreasonable at all.

Given that 2,000,000 fantasy, it translates into 230 preventions due to guns per hour....every single hour of every single day.

Pick a day in the future...lets say July 7...if you can show me 50 news stories on 7/7/15 detailing such preventions that occurred on 7/6/15...I'll buy the statistic.

Surely if there are 230 every hour of every day, 25% of them +/- get reported by the local newspapers/radio/tv...don't they?

Accept the challenge?

Given that that number comes from actual research, done over 40 years by both private and public researchers in economics and criminology it isn't fantasy....fantasy is when you anti gun extremists pull a number out of the air and say...that is the number.....

Here is the actual research and this isn't even all of it........

I just averaged the studies......which were conducted by different researchers, from both private and public researchers, over a period of 40 years looking specifically at guns and self defense....the name of the researcher is first, then the year then the number of times they determined guns were used for self defense......notice how many of them there are and how many of them were done by gun grabbers like the clinton Justice Dept. and the obama CDC

And these aren't all of the studies either...there are more...and they support the ones below.....

A quick guide to the studies and the numbers.....the full lay out of what was studied by each study is in the links....
GunCite-Gun Control-How Often Are Guns Used in Self-Defense

GunCite Frequency of Defensive Gun Use in Previous Surveys

Field...1976....3,052,717 ( no cops, military)
DMIa 1978...2,141,512 ( no cops, military)
L.A. TIMES...1994...3,609,68 ( no cops, military)
Kleck...2.5 million ( no cops, military)

Obama's CDC....2013....500,000--3million

--------------------


Bordua...1977...1,414,544

DMIb...1978...1,098,409 ( no cops, military)

Hart...1981...1.797,461 ( no cops, military)

Mauser...1990...1,487,342 ( no cops, military)

Gallup...1993...1,621,377 ( no cops, military)

DEPT. OF JUSTICE...1994...1.5 million

Journal of Quantitative Criminology--- 989,883 times per year."
-------------------------------------------
Ohio...1982...771,043

Gallup...1991...777,152

Tarrance... 1994... 764,036 (no cops, military)

Lawerence Southwich Jr. 400,000 fewer violent crimes and at least 800,000 violent crimes deterred..
*****************************************
If you take the studies from that Kleck cites in his paper, 16 of them....and you only average the ones that exclude military and police shootings..the average becomes 2 million...I use those studies because I have the details on them...and they are still 10 studies (including Kleck's)....

So the vast majority of studies are under 2 million. The much more accurate NCVS survey is 108k.

The CDC did not estimate DGUs. Please link to the department of justice study. La times and field are very high please link those also.

The NCVS survey didn't ask about DGUs. How do you figure it's the most accurate... besides your obvious bias against the notion of valid DGUs.

It asks about crimes and what happened during the crime. You need a crime for a dgu. Gun studies go right into guns which leads to many false positives. Many people claim a DGU when it was really intimidating someone. The ncvs also surveys 95k households. No gun study is anywhere close to that. Larger sample equals more accurate results.

The real world is biased against millions of DGUs. Only about 50 make the news each year. People who claim to have one are very rare. Most people don't know anyone who has had one. Only about 230 justifiable homicides each year. Nothing from the real world supports millions of DGUs each year.

You haven't found wisdom yet....the NCVS is not a gun study and does not ask the people questioned if they used a gun for self defense....like doing a study on soft drinks and never asking the people if they drink soft drinks......just hoping someone will mention soft drinks in an off hand way......not smart brain.....try again....


And as the girl with the shotgun shows....she didn't shoot anyone and they ran away.....why are you guys so fucking stupid....

 

[there4eyeM]

Remember, any arm limit is the 'slippery slope'!

 

[candycorn]

We don't have a gun problem, we have a Minority Problem.

Remove Minorities from the numbers and our gun fatalities/crimes are the lowest of any Western nation.

Virtually all gun crime in Inner Cities is from Minorities.

But dimocraps, being the scum of the earth, won't address that problem because -- Well, because that's where they get their power.

They NEED a permanent underclass. They MUST HAVE a permanent underclass. Otherwise they couldn't get elected Dog Catcher.

Just the way it is people, dimocraps are scum.

Period

Yours is a minority opinion (for good reason)
And it's no problem ignoring you; you'll go away soon.