Gun violence in the world

[Brain357]

So you seem to have no evidence there are millions of defenses.

There appears to be plenty of evidence for millions of DGUs annually.

All the evidence points to much fewer.

No. It doesn't. Really. It's your insistence that evidence is not evidence--that unless someone is killed, there's no DGU--that brings your estimates so low, Mr. Kellerman

If that were the case the estimate would be about 230. Instead the estimate is 108k. You fail.

Oh no, Mr. Kellerman, I don't fail... YOU fail. Big time.

You act like such a child.

Really? How so?

Are you going to back up anything you say?

I've got nothing new to present to you, that you have not already flatly and obtusely denied is valid. You accept no valid data, no valid studies, no valid logic, and no valid reasoning. What kind of back-up do you really expect from me?

There are only about 230 criminals killed in defense each year.

You do not need to kill the criminal to use your gund defensively, Mr. Kellerman.

If I believed someone needed to be killed that would be the estimate.

Oh. You don't need to actually discharge the firearm to use it defensively either, Mr. Kellerman.

Since the estimate is 108k obviously that includes DGUs with nobody killed.

And it only represents that portion of respondents willing to unilaterally volunteer their gun use to the government.

Now stop being so childish.

I'm not the one who is stamping their little pink bootie, Cupcake.

Yes you are actually. I give you arguments and all you have is I know you are but what am I.

What from reality backs up millions of defenses?

Not the news. Not justifiable homicide rate. Not the fact anyone with a valid defense is hard to come by. What do you have other than bad surveys?

 

[LOki]

There appears to be plenty of evidence for millions of DGUs annually.

No. It doesn't. Really. It's your insistence that evidence is not evidence--that unless someone is killed, there's no DGU--that brings your estimates so low, Mr. Kellerman

If that were the case the estimate would be about 230. Instead the estimate is 108k. You fail.

Oh no, Mr. Kellerman, I don't fail... YOU fail. Big time.

You act like such a child.

Really? How so?

Are you going to back up anything you say?

I've got nothing new to present to you, that you have not already flatly and obtusely denied is valid. You accept no valid data, no valid studies, no valid logic, and no valid reasoning. What kind of back-up do you really expect from me?

There are only about 230 criminals killed in defense each year.

You do not need to kill the criminal to use your gund defensively, Mr. Kellerman.

If I believed someone needed to be killed that would be the estimate.

Oh. You don't need to actually discharge the firearm to use it defensively either, Mr. Kellerman.

Since the estimate is 108k obviously that includes DGUs with nobody killed.

And it only represents that portion of respondents willing to unilaterally volunteer their gun use to the government.

Now stop being so childish.

I'm not the one who is stamping their little pink bootie, Cupcake.

Yes you are actually.

No Cupcake, not in the least bit.

I give you arguments and all you have is I know you are but what am I.

You give easily and routinely refuted arguments, but your superstition is impervious to such refutation. You're just a True-Believer(TM), Cupcake.

What from reality backs up millions of defenses?

The verifiable reality that you're in denial of. That precise one, exactly.

Not the news.

Despite intentional under-reporting, there are still plenty of DGUs in the news, Pumpkin. They just don't get a lot of national attention. After all, a failed mugging where the victim didn't even fire their gun, is hardly newsworthy--it certainly won't get national attention, nor should it.

Not justifiable homicide rate.

You do not need to kill the criminal to use your gun defensively, Mr. Kellerman.

Not the fact anyone with a valid defense is hard to come by.

This is not a "fact."

What do you have other than bad surveys?

What "bad" surveys Mr. Hemenway? The ones not approved by Shannon Watts, perhaps?

 

[Brain357]

If that were the case the estimate would be about 230. Instead the estimate is 108k. You fail.

Oh no, Mr. Kellerman, I don't fail... YOU fail. Big time.

You act like such a child.

Really? How so?

Are you going to back up anything you say?

I've got nothing new to present to you, that you have not already flatly and obtusely denied is valid. You accept no valid data, no valid studies, no valid logic, and no valid reasoning. What kind of back-up do you really expect from me?

There are only about 230 criminals killed in defense each year.

You do not need to kill the criminal to use your gund defensively, Mr. Kellerman.

If I believed someone needed to be killed that would be the estimate.

Oh. You don't need to actually discharge the firearm to use it defensively either, Mr. Kellerman.

Since the estimate is 108k obviously that includes DGUs with nobody killed.

And it only represents that portion of respondents willing to unilaterally volunteer their gun use to the government.

Now stop being so childish.

I'm not the one who is stamping their little pink bootie, Cupcake.

Yes you are actually.

No Cupcake, not in the least bit.

I give you arguments and all you have is I know you are but what am I.

You give easily and routinely refuted arguments, but your superstition is impervious to such refutation. You're just a True-Believer(TM), Cupcake.

What from reality backs up millions of defenses?

The verifiable reality that you're in denial of. That precise one, exactly.

Not the news.

There are plenty of DGUs in the news, Pumpkin. They just don't get a lot of national attention. After all, a failed mugging where the victim didn't even fire their gun, is hardly newsworthy--it certainly won't get national attention, nor should it.

Not justifiable homicide rate.

You do not need to kill the criminal to use your gun defensively, Mr. Kellerman.

Not the fact anyone with a valid defense is hard to come by.

This is not a "fact."

What do you have other than bad surveys?

What "bad" surveys Mr. Hemenway? The ones not approved by Shannon Watts, perhaps?

So you have nothing obviously. Let me know if you come up with anything from reality to support millions of DGUs. You seem to just blindly believe.

 

[there4eyeM]

'357
These guys should form a comedy team. Are they in the same family or something?
Well, their kind will lead the reasonable people in America to pass unreasonable controls so that reasonable people will find in dishearteningly difficult to obtain and maintain firearms.

 

[LOki]

Oh no, Mr. Kellerman, I don't fail... YOU fail. Big time.

You act like such a child.

Really? How so?

Are you going to back up anything you say?

I've got nothing new to present to you, that you have not already flatly and obtusely denied is valid. You accept no valid data, no valid studies, no valid logic, and no valid reasoning. What kind of back-up do you really expect from me?

There are only about 230 criminals killed in defense each year.

You do not need to kill the criminal to use your gund defensively, Mr. Kellerman.

If I believed someone needed to be killed that would be the estimate.

Oh. You don't need to actually discharge the firearm to use it defensively either, Mr. Kellerman.

Since the estimate is 108k obviously that includes DGUs with nobody killed.

And it only represents that portion of respondents willing to unilaterally volunteer their gun use to the government.

Now stop being so childish.

I'm not the one who is stamping their little pink bootie, Cupcake.

Yes you are actually.

No Cupcake, not in the least bit.

I give you arguments and all you have is I know you are but what am I.

You give easily and routinely refuted arguments, but your superstition is impervious to such refutation. You're just a True-Believer(TM), Cupcake.

What from reality backs up millions of defenses?

The verifiable reality that you're in denial of. That precise one, exactly.

Not the news.

There are plenty of DGUs in the news, Pumpkin. They just don't get a lot of national attention. After all, a failed mugging where the victim didn't even fire their gun, is hardly newsworthy--it certainly won't get national attention, nor should it.

Not justifiable homicide rate.

You do not need to kill the criminal to use your gun defensively, Mr. Kellerman.

Not the fact anyone with a valid defense is hard to come by.

This is not a "fact."

What do you have other than bad surveys?

What "bad" surveys Mr. Hemenway? The ones not approved by Shannon Watts, perhaps?

So you have nothing obviously.

I just have nothing new, Pumpkin.

[Let me know if you come up with anything from reality to support millions of DGUs.

It's already been submitted, Cupcake. You just refuse to accept it's real. Like a proper thrall.

[You seem to just blindly believe.

I'm open to the evidence of reality, Cupcake. And the reality is that guns are used defensively by orders of magnitude more often that they are used offensively. The statistics are rather consistent on this fact. Professional criminologists share the consensus. Detractors put OBVIOUSLY disingenuous limits upon what constitutes a DGU, and they simply REFUSE to accept that even peaceful decent folks have valid reasons to not be entirely candid with government agencies. And finally, they deny the OBVIOUS utility that guns have for self defense.

 

[Brain357]

You act like such a child.

Really? How so?

Are you going to back up anything you say?

I've got nothing new to present to you, that you have not already flatly and obtusely denied is valid. You accept no valid data, no valid studies, no valid logic, and no valid reasoning. What kind of back-up do you really expect from me?

There are only about 230 criminals killed in defense each year.

You do not need to kill the criminal to use your gund defensively, Mr. Kellerman.

If I believed someone needed to be killed that would be the estimate.

Oh. You don't need to actually discharge the firearm to use it defensively either, Mr. Kellerman.

Since the estimate is 108k obviously that includes DGUs with nobody killed.

And it only represents that portion of respondents willing to unilaterally volunteer their gun use to the government.

Now stop being so childish.

I'm not the one who is stamping their little pink bootie, Cupcake.

Yes you are actually.

No Cupcake, not in the least bit.

I give you arguments and all you have is I know you are but what am I.

You give easily and routinely refuted arguments, but your superstition is impervious to such refutation. You're just a True-Believer(TM), Cupcake.

What from reality backs up millions of defenses?

The verifiable reality that you're in denial of. That precise one, exactly.

Not the news.

There are plenty of DGUs in the news, Pumpkin. They just don't get a lot of national attention. After all, a failed mugging where the victim didn't even fire their gun, is hardly newsworthy--it certainly won't get national attention, nor should it.

Not justifiable homicide rate.

You do not need to kill the criminal to use your gun defensively, Mr. Kellerman.

Not the fact anyone with a valid defense is hard to come by.

This is not a "fact."

What do you have other than bad surveys?

What "bad" surveys Mr. Hemenway? The ones not approved by Shannon Watts, perhaps?

So you have nothing obviously.

I just have nothing new, Pumpkin.

[Let me know if you come up with anything from reality to support millions of DGUs.

It's already been submitted, Cupcake. You just refuse to accept it's real. Like a proper thrall.

[You seem to just blindly believe.

I'm open to the evidence of reality, Cupcake. And the reality is that guns are used defensively by orders of magnitude more often that they are used offensively. The statistics are rather consistent on this fact. Professional criminologists share the consensus. Detractors put OBVIOUSLY disingenuous limits upon what constitutes a DGU, and they simply REFUSE to accept that even peaceful decent folks have valid reasons to not be entirely candid with government agencies. And finally, they deny the OBVIOUS utility that guns have for self defense.

More nothing. I'm still waitng.

 

[LOki]

Really? How so?

I've got nothing new to present to you, that you have not already flatly and obtusely denied is valid. You accept no valid data, no valid studies, no valid logic, and no valid reasoning. What kind of back-up do you really expect from me?

You do not need to kill the criminal to use your gund defensively, Mr. Kellerman.

Oh. You don't need to actually discharge the firearm to use it defensively either, Mr. Kellerman.

And it only represents that portion of respondents willing to unilaterally volunteer their gun use to the government.

I'm not the one who is stamping their little pink bootie, Cupcake.

Yes you are actually.

No Cupcake, not in the least bit.

I give you arguments and all you have is I know you are but what am I.

You give easily and routinely refuted arguments, but your superstition is impervious to such refutation. You're just a True-Believer(TM), Cupcake.

What from reality backs up millions of defenses?

The verifiable reality that you're in denial of. That precise one, exactly.

Not the news.

There are plenty of DGUs in the news, Pumpkin. They just don't get a lot of national attention. After all, a failed mugging where the victim didn't even fire their gun, is hardly newsworthy--it certainly won't get national attention, nor should it.

Not justifiable homicide rate.

You do not need to kill the criminal to use your gun defensively, Mr. Kellerman.

Not the fact anyone with a valid defense is hard to come by.

This is not a "fact."

What do you have other than bad surveys?

What "bad" surveys Mr. Hemenway? The ones not approved by Shannon Watts, perhaps?

So you have nothing obviously.

I just have nothing new, Pumpkin.

[Let me know if you come up with anything from reality to support millions of DGUs.

It's already been submitted, Cupcake. You just refuse to accept it's real. Like a proper thrall.

[You seem to just blindly believe.

I'm open to the evidence of reality, Cupcake. And the reality is that guns are used defensively by orders of magnitude more often that they are used offensively. The statistics are rather consistent on this fact. Professional criminologists share the consensus. Detractors put OBVIOUSLY disingenuous limits upon what constitutes a DGU, and they simply REFUSE to accept that even peaceful decent folks have valid reasons to not be entirely candid with government agencies. And finally, they deny the OBVIOUS utility that guns have for self defense.

More nothing. I'm still waitng.

More denial of reality from you, Cupcake.

I'm not waiting for you to disavow your superstitions.

 

[2aguy]

So, of course there are limits to what arms can be in general circulation.
The radical insistence on no reasonable limit only leads to over reaction and repression for those (of us) who are not afraid of firearms, like having the choice (because we are pro-choice in everything human) and aren't compensating for other short-comings.

Oh good...the penis reference....you anti gun extremists never get tired of that.....I wonder why......? And there are all kinds of limits on guns right now and even more in Europe....and when a criminal uses a gun to commit a crime they can be arrested. That is the only real gun control....criminal control, anything else is just punishing people because they want to own a gun.

 

[2aguy]

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

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

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

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....?

It is not the only study. You choose to ignore any studies with realistic numbers.

A study published in 2013 by the Violence Policy Center, using five years of nationwide statistics (2007-2011) compiled by the federal Bureau of Justice has found that defensive gun uses (DGU) occur at a dramatically lower magnitude than that suggested by Kleck: an average of 67,740 times per year.[11]

The violence policy center has been caught lying with their statistics, they are an anti gun advocacy group with no intentiton of doing honest research.........

 

[2aguy]

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....

They ask about crimes and what happened during the attempted crime. It would capture any DGUs. You need a crime for a dgu, well unless you are kleck.

Wrong......again the NCVS is not a study on using guns for self defense, the other 19 or more studies actually study defensive gun use. The NCVS never asks about guns, not once, they wait for the person being questioned to bring it up through several indirect questons......it would be like saying your study is a definitive work on orange juice consumption but it never asks the person if they drink orange juice.

 

[2aguy]

So you seem to have no evidence there are millions of defenses.

There appears to be plenty of evidence for millions of DGUs annually.

All the evidence points to much fewer.

No. It doesn't. Really. It's your insistence that evidence is not evidence--that unless someone is killed, there's no DGU--that brings your estimates so low, Mr. Kellerman

If that were the case the estimate would be about 230. Instead the estimate is 108k. You fail.

Oh no, Mr. Kellerman, I don't fail... YOU fail. Big time.

You act like such a child.

Really? How so?

Are you going to back up anything you say?

I've got nothing new to present to you, that you have not already flatly and obtusely denied is valid. You accept no valid data, no valid studies, no valid logic, and no valid reasoning. What kind of back-up do you really expect from me?

There are only about 230 criminals killed in defense each year.

You do not need to kill the criminal to use your gun defensively, Mr. Kellerman.

If I believed someone needed to be killed that would be the estimate.

Oh. You don't need to actually discharge the firearm to use it defensively either, Mr. Kellerman.

Since the estimate is 108k obviously that includes DGUs with nobody killed.

And it only represents that portion of respondents willing to unilaterally volunteer their gun use to the government.

Now stop being so childish.

I'm not the one who is stamping their little pink bootie, Cupcake.

Loki....great posts.....thanks.

 

[westwall]

"The key facts are:

• The US has the highest gun ownership rate in the world - an average of 88 per 100 people. That puts it first in the world for gun ownership - and even the number two country, Yemen, has significantly fewer - 54.8 per 100 people
• But the US does not have the worst firearm murder rate - that prize belongs to Honduras, El Salvador and Jamaica. In fact, the US is number 28, with a rate of 2.97 per 100,000 people"

Gun homicides and gun ownership listed by country News The Guardian

So we have the highest gun ownership in the world, but despite that NOT the highest gun murder rate. We're 28th in the world in fact.

So how is gun availability linked to gun violence? It isn't. Simple as that.

Apples and antelopes isn't a comparison of worth. Compare the US with other Western Democracies and get back to us.

By SELECTED COUNTRIES. In other words they selected those that reinforced their biased viewpoint. Thank you for making that clear.

 

[Wry Catcher]

"The key facts are:

• The US has the highest gun ownership rate in the world - an average of 88 per 100 people. That puts it first in the world for gun ownership - and even the number two country, Yemen, has significantly fewer - 54.8 per 100 people
• But the US does not have the worst firearm murder rate - that prize belongs to Honduras, El Salvador and Jamaica. In fact, the US is number 28, with a rate of 2.97 per 100,000 people"

Gun homicides and gun ownership listed by country News The Guardian

So we have the highest gun ownership in the world, but despite that NOT the highest gun murder rate. We're 28th in the world in fact.

So how is gun availability linked to gun violence? It isn't. Simple as that.

Apples and antelopes isn't a comparison of worth. Compare the US with other Western Democracies and get back to us.

By SELECTED COUNTRIES. In other words they selected those that reinforced their biased viewpoint. Thank you for making that clear.

Who better to compare our country with than other Western Democracies?

 

[westwall]

"The key facts are:

• The US has the highest gun ownership rate in the world - an average of 88 per 100 people. That puts it first in the world for gun ownership - and even the number two country, Yemen, has significantly fewer - 54.8 per 100 people
• But the US does not have the worst firearm murder rate - that prize belongs to Honduras, El Salvador and Jamaica. In fact, the US is number 28, with a rate of 2.97 per 100,000 people"

Gun homicides and gun ownership listed by country News The Guardian

So we have the highest gun ownership in the world, but despite that NOT the highest gun murder rate. We're 28th in the world in fact.

So how is gun availability linked to gun violence? It isn't. Simple as that.

Apples and antelopes isn't a comparison of worth. Compare the US with other Western Democracies and get back to us.

By SELECTED COUNTRIES. In other words they selected those that reinforced their biased viewpoint. Thank you for making that clear.

Who better to compare our country with than other Western Democracies?

Until they have the racial diversity that we do. The land area that we do, and the population that we do they are not a reasonable comparison. That's why.

 

[Dragonlady]

"The key facts are:

• The US has the highest gun ownership rate in the world - an average of 88 per 100 people. That puts it first in the world for gun ownership - and even the number two country, Yemen, has significantly fewer - 54.8 per 100 people
• But the US does not have the worst firearm murder rate - that prize belongs to Honduras, El Salvador and Jamaica. In fact, the US is number 28, with a rate of 2.97 per 100,000 people"

Gun homicides and gun ownership listed by country News The Guardian

So we have the highest gun ownership in the world, but despite that NOT the highest gun murder rate. We're 28th in the world in fact.

So how is gun availability linked to gun violence? It isn't. Simple as that.

Apples and antelopes isn't a comparison of worth. Compare the US with other Western Democracies and get back to us.

By SELECTED COUNTRIES. In other words they selected those that reinforced their biased viewpoint. Thank you for making that clear.

Not "selected countries", by First World Countries, not Third World hell-holes, unless of course, you consider the US a Third World country.

 

[westwall]

"The key facts are:

• The US has the highest gun ownership rate in the world - an average of 88 per 100 people. That puts it first in the world for gun ownership - and even the number two country, Yemen, has significantly fewer - 54.8 per 100 people
• But the US does not have the worst firearm murder rate - that prize belongs to Honduras, El Salvador and Jamaica. In fact, the US is number 28, with a rate of 2.97 per 100,000 people"

Gun homicides and gun ownership listed by country News The Guardian

So we have the highest gun ownership in the world, but despite that NOT the highest gun murder rate. We're 28th in the world in fact.

So how is gun availability linked to gun violence? It isn't. Simple as that.

Apples and antelopes isn't a comparison of worth. Compare the US with other Western Democracies and get back to us.

By SELECTED COUNTRIES. In other words they selected those that reinforced their biased viewpoint. Thank you for making that clear.

Not "selected countries", by First World Countries, not Third World hell-holes, unless of course, you consider the US a Third World country.

There are certainly parts of it that resemble a Third World country. Take any ghetto area in a large city. That is where the majority of the crime is occurring. That is where the overwhelming majority of gun violence occurs, and that is the standard that you hold the rest of the country to.

That's ridiculous.

 

[Brain357]

Yes you are actually.

No Cupcake, not in the least bit.

I give you arguments and all you have is I know you are but what am I.

You give easily and routinely refuted arguments, but your superstition is impervious to such refutation. You're just a True-Believer(TM), Cupcake.

What from reality backs up millions of defenses?

The verifiable reality that you're in denial of. That precise one, exactly.

Not the news.

There are plenty of DGUs in the news, Pumpkin. They just don't get a lot of national attention. After all, a failed mugging where the victim didn't even fire their gun, is hardly newsworthy--it certainly won't get national attention, nor should it.

Not justifiable homicide rate.

You do not need to kill the criminal to use your gun defensively, Mr. Kellerman.

Not the fact anyone with a valid defense is hard to come by.

This is not a "fact."

What do you have other than bad surveys?

What "bad" surveys Mr. Hemenway? The ones not approved by Shannon Watts, perhaps?

So you have nothing obviously.

I just have nothing new, Pumpkin.

[Let me know if you come up with anything from reality to support millions of DGUs.

It's already been submitted, Cupcake. You just refuse to accept it's real. Like a proper thrall.

[You seem to just blindly believe.

I'm open to the evidence of reality, Cupcake. And the reality is that guns are used defensively by orders of magnitude more often that they are used offensively. The statistics are rather consistent on this fact. Professional criminologists share the consensus. Detractors put OBVIOUSLY disingenuous limits upon what constitutes a DGU, and they simply REFUSE to accept that even peaceful decent folks have valid reasons to not be entirely candid with government agencies. And finally, they deny the OBVIOUS utility that guns have for self defense.

More nothing. I'm still waitng.

More denial of reality from you, Cupcake.

I'm not waiting for you to disavow your superstitions.

Nope you have still given no reason to believe the ridiculous. I'll keep waiting.

 

[Brain357]

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....

They ask about crimes and what happened during the attempted crime. It would capture any DGUs. You need a crime for a dgu, well unless you are kleck.

Wrong......again the NCVS is not a study on using guns for self defense, the other 19 or more studies actually study defensive gun use. The NCVS never asks about guns, not once, they wait for the person being questioned to bring it up through several indirect questons......it would be like saying your study is a definitive work on orange juice consumption but it never asks the person if they drink orange juice.

Not wrong. They ask about crimes and what occurred. They would get any real DGUs. You find anything from reality yet to support your ridiculous claim?

 

[Brain357]

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....?

It is not the only study. You choose to ignore any studies with realistic numbers.

A study published in 2013 by the Violence Policy Center, using five years of nationwide statistics (2007-2011) compiled by the federal Bureau of Justice has found that defensive gun uses (DGU) occur at a dramatically lower magnitude than that suggested by Kleck: an average of 67,740 times per year.[11]

The violence policy center has been caught lying with their statistics, they are an anti gun advocacy group with no intentiton of doing honest research.........

So you don't count anything with low numbers. Waiting for you to post a link to that la times survey.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Who better to compare our country with than other Western Democracies?

In which Western democracies are more than 99.99712% of the guns NOT involved in a murder?
Please be sure to cite the difference per country.