Gun violence in the world

[Brain357]

So you haven't heard of Hemenway who uses actual facts to debunk Kleck?

I obviously have heard of David Hemenway, and one-sided speculation is not "actual facts" that debunk anything, Cupcake.

"It would be understandable if some readers thought that H did present, in his Section V, empirical evidence on the relative balance of false positives and false negatives. In fact, this section presents no empirical evidence at all. Instead, H's numerical examples demonstrate nothing more than that if one arbitrarily assumes particular rates of false positives and false negatives, along with extremely low actual DGU rates, one can come up with enormous overestimates. We cannot fault H for his arithmetic. If there were any credibility to the misreporting rates he assumes out of thin air, they would indeed imply huge overestimates."

You must be joking.

Maybe. But I'm not lying.

It's been over 20 years since Kleck came out with his survey. Please share all the peers.

I don't really know if I can provide the exhaustive list you fatuously demand, but I can submit what this gun-control advocate says:
Phillip J. Cook--"A somewhat more conservative NSPOF estimate is shown in the column of exhibit 7 that reflects the application of the criteria used by Kleck and Gertz to identify "genuine" defensive gun uses. Respondents were excluded on the basis of the most recent DGU description for any of the following reasons: the respondent did not see a perpetrator; the respondent could not state a specific crime that was involved in the incident; or the respondent did not actually display the gun or mention it to the perpetrator.

"Applying those restrictions leaves 19 NSPOF respondents (0.8 percent of the sample), representing 1.5 million defensive users. This estimate is directly comparable to the well-known estimate of Kleck and Gertz, shown in the last column of exhibit 7. While the NSPOF estimate is smaller, it is statistically plausible that the difference is due to sampling error. Inclusion of multiple DGUs reported by half of the 19 NSPOF respondents increases the estimate to 4.7 million DGUs."

And then of course there are these guys who you will predictably dissmiss off-hand:
Stephen G. Bronars
Donald B. Kates
William M. Landes
John R. Lott
David B. Mustard
Tom W. Smith
Harry L. Wilson

But if you are really looking for a list of the peers who reviewed the work of Kleck and Gertz, you can start with the peers at The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology where the work was published, and then search out all the peer-reviewed work that uses Kleck's and Gertz's work for support.

I've asked you many times for any real world fact and you provided nothing.

Another lie.

So if I'm lying provide it now.

"Armed Resistance to Crime: The Prevalence and Nature of Self-Defense with a Gun," by Gary Kleck and Marc Gertz.

So do you just believe the Kleck numbers?

"Just believe"? Nope.

How many DGUs do you believe there are each year?

On the order of 1 or 2 million.

"The (NSPOF) survey instrument was designed by Gary Kleck, Philip Cook, and David Hemenway and uses a sequence of defensive gun-use questions quite similar to those found with the 1993 Kleck and Gertz (1995) survey. Unlike the Kleck and Gertz survey, the NSPOF randomly selects one adult per sampled household, does not oversample telephone numbers from the South and the West, and uses standard sample-weighting techniques (Cook and Ludwig 1996). The results support an estimate of 1.3 million defensive gun users each year (table 2), which is within the 95 percent confidence interval of the Kleck and Gertz estimate (Cook and Ludwig 1998). A more recent national survey sponsored by the National Insitute of Justice suggests 1.5 million defensive gun uses per year (Hemenway an Azrael 1997, and forthcoming)."

So, you haven't heard of the David Hemenway who uses "actual facts" to affirm Kleck and Gertz?

Since crime has come down 30% since his debunked survey do you at least lower your estimate by that much?

The Kleck and Gertz survey was in no way "debunked", but it's certainly fair to assume the frequency DGUs should fall in response to falling call for defensive gun use.

All surveys have limitations.

Not in contention. The question is are those limitations recognized and accounted for; are they crippling because they are a function of a misapplied methodology, Mr. NotgoingtoaskaboutDGUs; or are they crippling because they are intentionally designed to support a pre-concieved conclusion, Mr. Gunuserequiresadeadguy?

That is why you have to find something in the real world to validate the results.

What's your point?

You obviously cannot do that.

This is untrue.

HEMENWAY CRITICISM OF KLECK

“Since a small percentage of people may report virtually anything on a telephone survey, there are serious risks of overestimation in using such surveys to measure rare events. The problem becomes particularly severe when the issue has even a remote possibility of positive social desirability response bias.

Consider the responses to a national random-digit-dial telephone survey of over 1,500 adults conducted in May 1994 by ABC News and the Washington Post. One question asked: "Have you yourself ever seen anything that you believe was a spacecraft from another planet?" 10% of respondents answered in the affirmative. These 150 individuals were then asked, "Have you personally ever been in contact with aliens from another planet or not?" and 6% answered "Yes."

By extrapolating to the national population, we might conclude that almost 20 million Americans have seen spacecraft from another planet, and over a million have been in personal contact with aliens from other planets. That more than a million Americans had contact with aliens would be incredible news—but not the kind actively publicized by reputable scientists. Yet the ABC News/Washington Post data on aliens are as good as or better than that from any of the thirteen surveys cited by K-G as supporting their conclusions about self-defense gun use.”

"An honest, scientifically based critique would have given balanced consideration to flaws that tend to make the estimate too low (e.g., people concealing DGUs because they involved unlawful behavior, and our failure to count any DGUs by adolescents), as well as those that contribute to making them too high.

...

"Hemenway's critical technique is simple: one-sided, and often implausible, speculation about flaws that might have afflicted our research, and that might have been consequential enough to significantly affect our conclusions. H devotes his attention almost exclusively to suspected flaws that might have contributed to the overestimation of defensive gun use (DGU) frequency. He either ignores well established sources of underreporting, or briefly and superficially discusses them only for the sake of dismissing them."

"Debunker" debunked.

Your real world defense of the survey numbers is the survey? You are a joke. Again the millions estimated in the survey aren't real. Your defense is fantasy.

Millions of defenses is not possible. You realize there are only about 9.8 million crimes each year right? And about 24% of the population owns guns. So thats about 2.35 million crimes against gun owners. And about 88% of crimes are property crimes where the victim isn't even there so now we are at about 282k crimes that could be defended. Of those only like 1/3 of violent crimes are at home. And only about 16% of gun owners carry. So that leaves only about 120k that are defendable. Then they of course aren't 100% successful in defense so the real number is clearly under 120k. The ncvs estimate of 108k is looking pretty solid. Backed by actual stats from the real world.

Let's try to discover what you find to be unbelievable.

2,000,000 DGU's/year means, 5480 DGUs/day, and that means, 230 DGUs/hour.

So. What do you find unbelievable?

Is it unbelievable that there are more than 230 metropolitan areas in the United States? Is that what's unbelievable?

It shouldn't be.

Is it unbelievable that in each metropolitan area, more than one serious crime is attempted every hour? Is that what's unbelievable? Could be.

Consider that the BJS claims a violent crime is reported at about 3,000,000 a year, and that an estimated 3,000,000+ violent crimes a year go unreported; about 41,000,000 property crimes are reported a year, while an estimated 80,000,000 go unreported.

That's like 126,000,000 criminal attempts each year; or 345,000 criminal attempts a day; or 14,000 attempts each hour.

That's somewhat more than 35 criminal attempts an hour for each metropolitan area.

Is it really unbeleivable, that among all those serious crimes attempted every hour in each of those metropolitan areas, that in only one instance, a person might use a gun to defend themselves, their property, or those they care for? Is that what's unbelievable?

What country are you living in? The U.S. has under 10 million crimes total each year.

United States Crime Rates1960 - 2013

That's not what your precious NCVS says.

You must have bad math. You realize they are giving rate per household?

FBI Property Crime

In 2013, there were an estimated 8,632,512 property crime offenses in the nation.

So when you come to reality with how many crimes we have, your dgu estimates are impossible.

 

[ChrisL]

"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.

Of course it isn't. Owning a gun or touching one doesn't make a person suddenly turn violent. Most of our violence stems from poor inner city black communities and gang violence.

 

[LOki]

I obviously have heard of David Hemenway, and one-sided speculation is not "actual facts" that debunk anything, Cupcake.

"It would be understandable if some readers thought that H did present, in his Section V, empirical evidence on the relative balance of false positives and false negatives. In fact, this section presents no empirical evidence at all. Instead, H's numerical examples demonstrate nothing more than that if one arbitrarily assumes particular rates of false positives and false negatives, along with extremely low actual DGU rates, one can come up with enormous overestimates. We cannot fault H for his arithmetic. If there were any credibility to the misreporting rates he assumes out of thin air, they would indeed imply huge overestimates."

Maybe. But I'm not lying.

I don't really know if I can provide the exhaustive list you fatuously demand, but I can submit what this gun-control advocate says:
Phillip J. Cook--"A somewhat more conservative NSPOF estimate is shown in the column of exhibit 7 that reflects the application of the criteria used by Kleck and Gertz to identify "genuine" defensive gun uses. Respondents were excluded on the basis of the most recent DGU description for any of the following reasons: the respondent did not see a perpetrator; the respondent could not state a specific crime that was involved in the incident; or the respondent did not actually display the gun or mention it to the perpetrator.

"Applying those restrictions leaves 19 NSPOF respondents (0.8 percent of the sample), representing 1.5 million defensive users. This estimate is directly comparable to the well-known estimate of Kleck and Gertz, shown in the last column of exhibit 7. While the NSPOF estimate is smaller, it is statistically plausible that the difference is due to sampling error. Inclusion of multiple DGUs reported by half of the 19 NSPOF respondents increases the estimate to 4.7 million DGUs."

And then of course there are these guys who you will predictably dissmiss off-hand:
Stephen G. Bronars
Donald B. Kates
William M. Landes
John R. Lott
David B. Mustard
Tom W. Smith
Harry L. Wilson

But if you are really looking for a list of the peers who reviewed the work of Kleck and Gertz, you can start with the peers at The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology where the work was published, and then search out all the peer-reviewed work that uses Kleck's and Gertz's work for support.

Another lie.

"Armed Resistance to Crime: The Prevalence and Nature of Self-Defense with a Gun," by Gary Kleck and Marc Gertz.

"Just believe"? Nope.

On the order of 1 or 2 million.

"The (NSPOF) survey instrument was designed by Gary Kleck, Philip Cook, and David Hemenway and uses a sequence of defensive gun-use questions quite similar to those found with the 1993 Kleck and Gertz (1995) survey. Unlike the Kleck and Gertz survey, the NSPOF randomly selects one adult per sampled household, does not oversample telephone numbers from the South and the West, and uses standard sample-weighting techniques (Cook and Ludwig 1996). The results support an estimate of 1.3 million defensive gun users each year (table 2), which is within the 95 percent confidence interval of the Kleck and Gertz estimate (Cook and Ludwig 1998). A more recent national survey sponsored by the National Insitute of Justice suggests 1.5 million defensive gun uses per year (Hemenway an Azrael 1997, and forthcoming)."

So, you haven't heard of the David Hemenway who uses "actual facts" to affirm Kleck and Gertz?

The Kleck and Gertz survey was in no way "debunked", but it's certainly fair to assume the frequency DGUs should fall in response to falling call for defensive gun use.

Not in contention. The question is are those limitations recognized and accounted for; are they crippling because they are a function of a misapplied methodology, Mr. NotgoingtoaskaboutDGUs; or are they crippling because they are intentionally designed to support a pre-concieved conclusion, Mr. Gunuserequiresadeadguy?

What's your point?

This is untrue.

"An honest, scientifically based critique would have given balanced consideration to flaws that tend to make the estimate too low (e.g., people concealing DGUs because they involved unlawful behavior, and our failure to count any DGUs by adolescents), as well as those that contribute to making them too high.

...

"Hemenway's critical technique is simple: one-sided, and often implausible, speculation about flaws that might have afflicted our research, and that might have been consequential enough to significantly affect our conclusions. H devotes his attention almost exclusively to suspected flaws that might have contributed to the overestimation of defensive gun use (DGU) frequency. He either ignores well established sources of underreporting, or briefly and superficially discusses them only for the sake of dismissing them."

"Debunker" debunked.

Your real world defense of the survey numbers is the survey? You are a joke. Again the millions estimated in the survey aren't real. Your defense is fantasy.

Millions of defenses is not possible. You realize there are only about 9.8 million crimes each year right? And about 24% of the population owns guns. So thats about 2.35 million crimes against gun owners. And about 88% of crimes are property crimes where the victim isn't even there so now we are at about 282k crimes that could be defended. Of those only like 1/3 of violent crimes are at home. And only about 16% of gun owners carry. So that leaves only about 120k that are defendable. Then they of course aren't 100% successful in defense so the real number is clearly under 120k. The ncvs estimate of 108k is looking pretty solid. Backed by actual stats from the real world.

Let's try to discover what you find to be unbelievable.

2,000,000 DGU's/year means, 5480 DGUs/day, and that means, 230 DGUs/hour.

So. What do you find unbelievable?

Is it unbelievable that there are more than 230 metropolitan areas in the United States? Is that what's unbelievable?

It shouldn't be.

Is it unbelievable that in each metropolitan area, more than one serious crime is attempted every hour? Is that what's unbelievable? Could be.

Consider that the BJS claims a violent crime is reported at about 3,000,000 a year, and that an estimated 3,000,000+ violent crimes a year go unreported; about 41,000,000 property crimes are reported a year, while an estimated 80,000,000 go unreported.

That's like 126,000,000 criminal attempts each year; or 345,000 criminal attempts a day; or 14,000 attempts each hour.

That's somewhat more than 35 criminal attempts an hour for each metropolitan area.

Is it really unbeleivable, that among all those serious crimes attempted every hour in each of those metropolitan areas, that in only one instance, a person might use a gun to defend themselves, their property, or those they care for? Is that what's unbelievable?

What country are you living in? The U.S. has under 10 million crimes total each year.

United States Crime Rates1960 - 2013

That's not what your precious NCVS says.

You must have bad math. You realize they are giving rate per household?

Ah yes! I multiplied by population... mea culpa. Allow me to recalculate:

2,000,000 DGU's/year means, 5480 DGUs/day, and that means, 230 DGUs/hour.

So. What do you find unbelievable?

Is it unbelievable that there are more than 230 metropolitan areas in the United States? Is that what's unbelievable?

It shouldn't be.

Is it unbelievable that in each metropolitan area, more than one serious crime is attempted every hour? Is that what's unbelievable? Could be.

Consider that the BJS claims a violent crime is reported at about 3,000,000 2,800,000 a year, and that an estimated 3,000,000+ violent crimes a year go unreported; about 41,000,000 16,000,000 property crimes are reported a year, while an estimated 80,000,000 48,000,000 go unreported.

That's like 126,000,000 53,600,000 criminal attempts each year; or 345,000 147,000 criminal attempts a day; or 14,000 6,125 attempts each hour.

That's somewhat more than 35 16 criminal attempts an hour for each metropolitan area.​

Is it really unbeleivable, that among all those serious crimes attempted every hour in each of those metropolitan areas, that in only one instance, a person might use a gun to defend themselves, their property, or those they care for? Is that what's unbelievable?

FBI Property Crime

In 2013, there were an estimated 8,632,512 property crime offenses in the nation.

So when you come to reality with how many crimes we have, your dgu estimates are impossible.

1) If you are saying that the NCVS is not a reliable source to be used for the estimation of DGUs, then I'm good with that.

2) The FBI figures don't seem to account for unreported crimes... the BJS says only half of violent crimes are reported, and only a third of property crimes are reported.

Using the FBI's (under-reporting) data still reveals that 2.5 crimes/hour are reported for each metropolitan area.

K-G estimates are not "impossible."

 

[Brain357]

Your real world defense of the survey numbers is the survey? You are a joke. Again the millions estimated in the survey aren't real. Your defense is fantasy.

Millions of defenses is not possible. You realize there are only about 9.8 million crimes each year right? And about 24% of the population owns guns. So thats about 2.35 million crimes against gun owners. And about 88% of crimes are property crimes where the victim isn't even there so now we are at about 282k crimes that could be defended. Of those only like 1/3 of violent crimes are at home. And only about 16% of gun owners carry. So that leaves only about 120k that are defendable. Then they of course aren't 100% successful in defense so the real number is clearly under 120k. The ncvs estimate of 108k is looking pretty solid. Backed by actual stats from the real world.

Let's try to discover what you find to be unbelievable.

2,000,000 DGU's/year means, 5480 DGUs/day, and that means, 230 DGUs/hour.

So. What do you find unbelievable?

Is it unbelievable that there are more than 230 metropolitan areas in the United States? Is that what's unbelievable?

It shouldn't be.

Is it unbelievable that in each metropolitan area, more than one serious crime is attempted every hour? Is that what's unbelievable? Could be.

Consider that the BJS claims a violent crime is reported at about 3,000,000 a year, and that an estimated 3,000,000+ violent crimes a year go unreported; about 41,000,000 property crimes are reported a year, while an estimated 80,000,000 go unreported.

That's like 126,000,000 criminal attempts each year; or 345,000 criminal attempts a day; or 14,000 attempts each hour.

That's somewhat more than 35 criminal attempts an hour for each metropolitan area.

Is it really unbeleivable, that among all those serious crimes attempted every hour in each of those metropolitan areas, that in only one instance, a person might use a gun to defend themselves, their property, or those they care for? Is that what's unbelievable?

What country are you living in? The U.S. has under 10 million crimes total each year.

United States Crime Rates1960 - 2013

That's not what your precious NCVS says.

You must have bad math. You realize they are giving rate per household?

Ah yes! I multiplied by population... mea culpa. Allow me to recalculate:

2,000,000 DGU's/year means, 5480 DGUs/day, and that means, 230 DGUs/hour.

So. What do you find unbelievable?

Is it unbelievable that there are more than 230 metropolitan areas in the United States? Is that what's unbelievable?

It shouldn't be.

Is it unbelievable that in each metropolitan area, more than one serious crime is attempted every hour? Is that what's unbelievable? Could be.

Consider that the BJS claims a violent crime is reported at about 3,000,000 2,800,000 a year, and that an estimated 3,000,000+ violent crimes a year go unreported; about 41,000,000 16,000,000 property crimes are reported a year, while an estimated 80,000,000 48,000,000 go unreported.

That's like 126,000,000 53,600,000 criminal attempts each year; or 345,000 147,000 criminal attempts a day; or 14,000 6,125 attempts each hour.

That's somewhat more than 35 16 criminal attempts an hour for each metropolitan area.​

Is it really unbeleivable, that among all those serious crimes attempted every hour in each of those metropolitan areas, that in only one instance, a person might use a gun to defend themselves, their property, or those they care for? Is that what's unbelievable?

FBI Property Crime

In 2013, there were an estimated 8,632,512 property crime offenses in the nation.

So when you come to reality with how many crimes we have, your dgu estimates are impossible.

1) If you are saying that the NCVS is not a reliable source to be used for the estimation of DGUs, then I'm good with that.

2) The FBI figures don't seem to account for unreported crimes... the BJS says only half of violent crimes are reported, and only a third of property crimes are reported.

Using the FBI's (under-reporting) data still reveals that 2.5 crimes/hour are reported for each metropolitan area.

K-G estimates are not "impossible."

Sorry your numbers are just made up now. Please post a link where the ncvs claims there are 16,000,000 reported property crimes and 48,000,000 unreported.

Those numbers are obviously pure fantasy:
http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/cv12.pdf

Now come back to the real world and you will see millions of dgus is not a possibility.

BTW it is hilarious you need to try to distort the NCVS numbers to try and make your claim, but ignore their DGU numbers.

 

[CowboyTed]

Seems Americans are not on board with the gun grabbers....

According to the latest poll by Rasmussen Reports, American voters “overwhelmingly” prefer to live in neighborhoods with high gun ownership, as opposed to areas that don’t allow firearms.

The polling shows 68 percent of Americans “would feel safer” living in a neighborhood where firearms are readily available. Meanwhile, that number for those who want gun-free neighborhoods are much lower:

“A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that just 22% of Likely U.S. Voters would feel safer living in a neighborhood where nobody was allowed to own a gun over one where they could have a gun for their own protection.”

This only shows if you repeat a lie long enough people will start to believe you.

The evidence shows that a gun in your house makes it less safe.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

Seems Americans are not on board with the gun grabbers....

According to the latest poll by Rasmussen Reports, American voters “overwhelmingly” prefer to live in neighborhoods with high gun ownership, as opposed to areas that don’t allow firearms.

The polling shows 68 percent of Americans “would feel safer” living in a neighborhood where firearms are readily available. Meanwhile, that number for those who want gun-free neighborhoods are much lower:

“A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that just 22% of Likely U.S. Voters would feel safer living in a neighborhood where nobody was allowed to own a gun over one where they could have a gun for their own protection.”

This only shows if you repeat a lie long enough people will start to believe you.

The evidence shows that a gun in your house makes it less safe.

So show your "evidence"....bet you can't....oh and left loon gun grabbing sites don't count

 

[Wildman]

Gun violence in the world

why do idiots and fools use that term ? is there just one liberfool who can provide proof of a violent gun, photos and/or videos of one in action ?

i have been around and or used guns all my life and i have yet to encounter one.

 

[Wildman]

The evidence shows that a gun in your house makes it less safe.

ooooh really ?just because some libertard said so ?

my homes over these many years have been made safe simply because of the presence of guns.

 

[LOki]

Let's try to discover what you find to be unbelievable.

2,000,000 DGU's/year means, 5480 DGUs/day, and that means, 230 DGUs/hour.

So. What do you find unbelievable?

Is it unbelievable that there are more than 230 metropolitan areas in the United States? Is that what's unbelievable?

It shouldn't be.

Is it unbelievable that in each metropolitan area, more than one serious crime is attempted every hour? Is that what's unbelievable? Could be.

Consider that the BJS claims a violent crime is reported at about 3,000,000 a year, and that an estimated 3,000,000+ violent crimes a year go unreported; about 41,000,000 property crimes are reported a year, while an estimated 80,000,000 go unreported.

That's like 126,000,000 criminal attempts each year; or 345,000 criminal attempts a day; or 14,000 attempts each hour.

That's somewhat more than 35 criminal attempts an hour for each metropolitan area.

Is it really unbeleivable, that among all those serious crimes attempted every hour in each of those metropolitan areas, that in only one instance, a person might use a gun to defend themselves, their property, or those they care for? Is that what's unbelievable?

What country are you living in? The U.S. has under 10 million crimes total each year.

United States Crime Rates1960 - 2013

That's not what your precious NCVS says.

You must have bad math. You realize they are giving rate per household?

Ah yes! I multiplied by population... mea culpa. Allow me to recalculate:

2,000,000 DGU's/year means, 5480 DGUs/day, and that means, 230 DGUs/hour.

So. What do you find unbelievable?

Is it unbelievable that there are more than 230 metropolitan areas in the United States? Is that what's unbelievable?

It shouldn't be.

Is it unbelievable that in each metropolitan area, more than one serious crime is attempted every hour? Is that what's unbelievable? Could be.

Consider that the BJS claims a violent crime is reported at about 3,000,000 2,800,000 a year, and that an estimated 3,000,000+ violent crimes a year go unreported; about 41,000,000 16,000,000 property crimes are reported a year, while an estimated 80,000,000 48,000,000 go unreported.

That's like 126,000,000 53,600,000 criminal attempts each year; or 345,000 147,000 criminal attempts a day; or 14,000 6,125 attempts each hour.

That's somewhat more than 35 16 criminal attempts an hour for each metropolitan area.​

Is it really unbeleivable, that among all those serious crimes attempted every hour in each of those metropolitan areas, that in only one instance, a person might use a gun to defend themselves, their property, or those they care for? Is that what's unbelievable?

FBI Property Crime

In 2013, there were an estimated 8,632,512 property crime offenses in the nation.

So when you come to reality with how many crimes we have, your dgu estimates are impossible.

1) If you are saying that the NCVS is not a reliable source to be used for the estimation of DGUs, then I'm good with that.

2) The FBI figures don't seem to account for unreported crimes... the BJS says only half of violent crimes are reported, and only a third of property crimes are reported.

Using the FBI's (under-reporting) data still reveals that 2.5 crimes/hour are reported for each metropolitan area.

K-G estimates are not "impossible."

Sorry your numbers are just made up now. Please post a link where the ncvs claims there are 16,000,000 reported property crimes and 48,000,000 unreported.

Those numbers are obviously pure fantasy:
http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/cv12.pdf

Now come back to the real world and you will see millions of dgus is not a possibility.

BTW it is hilarious you need to try to distort the NCVS numbers to try and make your claim, but ignore their DGU numbers.

Now you're just an asshole.

 

[LOki]

Seems Americans are not on board with the gun grabbers....

According to the latest poll by Rasmussen Reports, American voters “overwhelmingly” prefer to live in neighborhoods with high gun ownership, as opposed to areas that don’t allow firearms.

The polling shows 68 percent of Americans “would feel safer” living in a neighborhood where firearms are readily available. Meanwhile, that number for those who want gun-free neighborhoods are much lower:

“A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that just 22% of Likely U.S. Voters would feel safer living in a neighborhood where nobody was allowed to own a gun over one where they could have a gun for their own protection.”

This only shows if you repeat a lie long enough people will start to believe you.

The evidence shows that a gun in your house makes it less safe.

There is no such evidence, Mr. Kellerman.

 

[Brain357]

What country are you living in? The U.S. has under 10 million crimes total each year.

United States Crime Rates1960 - 2013

That's not what your precious NCVS says.

You must have bad math. You realize they are giving rate per household?

Ah yes! I multiplied by population... mea culpa. Allow me to recalculate:

2,000,000 DGU's/year means, 5480 DGUs/day, and that means, 230 DGUs/hour.

So. What do you find unbelievable?

Is it unbelievable that there are more than 230 metropolitan areas in the United States? Is that what's unbelievable?

It shouldn't be.

Is it unbelievable that in each metropolitan area, more than one serious crime is attempted every hour? Is that what's unbelievable? Could be.

Consider that the BJS claims a violent crime is reported at about 3,000,000 2,800,000 a year, and that an estimated 3,000,000+ violent crimes a year go unreported; about 41,000,000 16,000,000 property crimes are reported a year, while an estimated 80,000,000 48,000,000 go unreported.

That's like 126,000,000 53,600,000 criminal attempts each year; or 345,000 147,000 criminal attempts a day; or 14,000 6,125 attempts each hour.

That's somewhat more than 35 16 criminal attempts an hour for each metropolitan area.​

Is it really unbeleivable, that among all those serious crimes attempted every hour in each of those metropolitan areas, that in only one instance, a person might use a gun to defend themselves, their property, or those they care for? Is that what's unbelievable?

FBI Property Crime

In 2013, there were an estimated 8,632,512 property crime offenses in the nation.

So when you come to reality with how many crimes we have, your dgu estimates are impossible.

1) If you are saying that the NCVS is not a reliable source to be used for the estimation of DGUs, then I'm good with that.

2) The FBI figures don't seem to account for unreported crimes... the BJS says only half of violent crimes are reported, and only a third of property crimes are reported.

Using the FBI's (under-reporting) data still reveals that 2.5 crimes/hour are reported for each metropolitan area.

K-G estimates are not "impossible."

Sorry your numbers are just made up now. Please post a link where the ncvs claims there are 16,000,000 reported property crimes and 48,000,000 unreported.

Those numbers are obviously pure fantasy:
http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/cv12.pdf

Now come back to the real world and you will see millions of dgus is not a possibility.

BTW it is hilarious you need to try to distort the NCVS numbers to try and make your claim, but ignore their DGU numbers.

Now you're just an asshole.

So again millions of DGUs is not possible.

 

[Brain357]

You have provided one peer who said the results are limited by sample size.

That doesn't mean there's only one. But the one I submitted was THOROUGHLY qualified to evaluate the study, AND he was ENTIRELY disinclined to agree with the study's conclusion.

What do you bring, Cupcake?

There are many peers who have debunked your survey.

An obvious lie.

You have no real world fact to support your ridiculous claim.

Another obvious lie.

You still have nothing.

Yet another obvious lie.

So you haven't heard of Hemenway who uses actual facts to debunk Kleck?

I obviously have heard of David Hemenway, and one-sided speculation is not "actual facts" that debunk anything, Cupcake.

"It would be understandable if some readers thought that H did present, in his Section V, empirical evidence on the relative balance of false positives and false negatives. In fact, this section presents no empirical evidence at all. Instead, H's numerical examples demonstrate nothing more than that if one arbitrarily assumes particular rates of false positives and false negatives, along with extremely low actual DGU rates, one can come up with enormous overestimates. We cannot fault H for his arithmetic. If there were any credibility to the misreporting rates he assumes out of thin air, they would indeed imply huge overestimates."

You must be joking.

Maybe. But I'm not lying.

It's been over 20 years since Kleck came out with his survey. Please share all the peers.

I don't really know if I can provide the exhaustive list you fatuously demand, but I can submit what this gun-control advocate says:
Phillip J. Cook--"A somewhat more conservative NSPOF estimate is shown in the column of exhibit 7 that reflects the application of the criteria used by Kleck and Gertz to identify "genuine" defensive gun uses. Respondents were excluded on the basis of the most recent DGU description for any of the following reasons: the respondent did not see a perpetrator; the respondent could not state a specific crime that was involved in the incident; or the respondent did not actually display the gun or mention it to the perpetrator.

"Applying those restrictions leaves 19 NSPOF respondents (0.8 percent of the sample), representing 1.5 million defensive users. This estimate is directly comparable to the well-known estimate of Kleck and Gertz, shown in the last column of exhibit 7. While the NSPOF estimate is smaller, it is statistically plausible that the difference is due to sampling error. Inclusion of multiple DGUs reported by half of the 19 NSPOF respondents increases the estimate to 4.7 million DGUs."

And then of course there are these guys who you will predictably dissmiss off-hand:
Stephen G. Bronars
Donald B. Kates
William M. Landes
John R. Lott
David B. Mustard
Tom W. Smith
Harry L. Wilson

But if you are really looking for a list of the peers who reviewed the work of Kleck and Gertz, you can start with the peers at The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology where the work was published, and then search out all the peer-reviewed work that uses Kleck's and Gertz's work for support.

I've asked you many times for any real world fact and you provided nothing.

Another lie.

So if I'm lying provide it now.

"Armed Resistance to Crime: The Prevalence and Nature of Self-Defense with a Gun," by Gary Kleck and Marc Gertz.

So do you just believe the Kleck numbers?

"Just believe"? Nope.

How many DGUs do you believe there are each year?

On the order of 1 or 2 million.

"The (NSPOF) survey instrument was designed by Gary Kleck, Philip Cook, and David Hemenway and uses a sequence of defensive gun-use questions quite similar to those found with the 1993 Kleck and Gertz (1995) survey. Unlike the Kleck and Gertz survey, the NSPOF randomly selects one adult per sampled household, does not oversample telephone numbers from the South and the West, and uses standard sample-weighting techniques (Cook and Ludwig 1996). The results support an estimate of 1.3 million defensive gun users each year (table 2), which is within the 95 percent confidence interval of the Kleck and Gertz estimate (Cook and Ludwig 1998). A more recent national survey sponsored by the National Insitute of Justice suggests 1.5 million defensive gun uses per year (Hemenway an Azrael 1997, and forthcoming)."

So, you haven't heard of the David Hemenway who uses "actual facts" to affirm Kleck and Gertz?

Since crime has come down 30% since his debunked survey do you at least lower your estimate by that much?

The Kleck and Gertz survey was in no way "debunked", but it's certainly fair to assume the frequency DGUs should fall in response to falling call for defensive gun use.

All surveys have limitations.

Not in contention. The question is are those limitations recognized and accounted for; are they crippling because they are a function of a misapplied methodology, Mr. NotgoingtoaskaboutDGUs; or are they crippling because they are intentionally designed to support a pre-concieved conclusion, Mr. Gunuserequiresadeadguy?

That is why you have to find something in the real world to validate the results.

What's your point?

You obviously cannot do that.

This is untrue.

HEMENWAY CRITICISM OF KLECK

“Since a small percentage of people may report virtually anything on a telephone survey, there are serious risks of overestimation in using such surveys to measure rare events. The problem becomes particularly severe when the issue has even a remote possibility of positive social desirability response bias.

Consider the responses to a national random-digit-dial telephone survey of over 1,500 adults conducted in May 1994 by ABC News and the Washington Post. One question asked: "Have you yourself ever seen anything that you believe was a spacecraft from another planet?" 10% of respondents answered in the affirmative. These 150 individuals were then asked, "Have you personally ever been in contact with aliens from another planet or not?" and 6% answered "Yes."

By extrapolating to the national population, we might conclude that almost 20 million Americans have seen spacecraft from another planet, and over a million have been in personal contact with aliens from other planets. That more than a million Americans had contact with aliens would be incredible news—but not the kind actively publicized by reputable scientists. Yet the ABC News/Washington Post data on aliens are as good as or better than that from any of the thirteen surveys cited by K-G as supporting their conclusions about self-defense gun use.”

"An honest, scientifically based critique would have given balanced consideration to flaws that tend to make the estimate too low (e.g., people concealing DGUs because they involved unlawful behavior, and our failure to count any DGUs by adolescents), as well as those that contribute to making them too high.

...

"Hemenway's critical technique is simple: one-sided, and often implausible, speculation about flaws that might have afflicted our research, and that might have been consequential enough to significantly affect our conclusions. H devotes his attention almost exclusively to suspected flaws that might have contributed to the overestimation of defensive gun use (DGU) frequency. He either ignores well established sources of underreporting, or briefly and superficially discusses them only for the sake of dismissing them."

"Debunker" debunked.

Your real world defense of the survey numbers is the survey? You are a joke. Again the millions estimated in the survey aren't real. Your defense is fantasy.

Millions of defenses is not possible. You realize there are only about 9.8 million crimes each year right? And about 24% of the population owns guns. So thats about 2.35 million crimes against gun owners. And about 88% of crimes are property crimes where the victim isn't even there so now we are at about 282k crimes that could be defended. Of those only like 1/3 of violent crimes are at home. And only about 16% of gun owners carry. So that leaves only about 120k that are defendable. Then they of course aren't 100% successful in defense so the real number is clearly under 120k. The ncvs estimate of 108k is looking pretty solid. Backed by actual stats from the real world.

Let's try to discover what you find to be unbelievable.

2,000,000 DGU's/year means, 5480 DGUs/day, and that means, 230 DGUs/hour.

So. What do you find unbelievable?

Is it unbelievable that there are more than 230 metropolitan areas in the United States? Is that what's unbelievable?

It shouldn't be.

Is it unbelievable that in each metropolitan area, more than one serious crime is attempted every hour? Is that what's unbelievable? Could be.

Consider that the BJS claims a violent crime is reported at about 3,000,000 a year, and that an estimated 3,000,000+ violent crimes a year go unreported; about 41,000,000 property crimes are reported a year, while an estimated 80,000,000 go unreported.

That's like 126,000,000 criminal attempts each year; or 345,000 criminal attempts a day; or 14,000 attempts each hour.

That's somewhat more than 35 criminal attempts an hour for each metropolitan area.

Is it really unbeleivable, that among all those serious crimes attempted every hour in each of those metropolitan areas, that in only one instance, a person might use a gun to defend themselves, their property, or those they care for? Is that what's unbelievable?

Now that you know we have only about 10% of the crime you thought, shouldn't your dgu estimate now be 10% of what it was? So 100-200k?

Amazing you lack the common sense to not realize over a 100 million crimes was ridiculous. Great job embarrassing yourself cupcake.

 

[M14 Shooter]

This only shows if you repeat a lie long enough people will start to believe you.
The evidence shows that a gun in your house makes it less safe.

Speaking of repeating a lie....

 

[LOki]

That's not what your precious NCVS says.

You must have bad math. You realize they are giving rate per household?

Ah yes! I multiplied by population... mea culpa. Allow me to recalculate:

2,000,000 DGU's/year means, 5480 DGUs/day, and that means, 230 DGUs/hour.

So. What do you find unbelievable?

Is it unbelievable that there are more than 230 metropolitan areas in the United States? Is that what's unbelievable?

It shouldn't be.

Is it unbelievable that in each metropolitan area, more than one serious crime is attempted every hour? Is that what's unbelievable? Could be.

Consider that the BJS claims a violent crime is reported at about 3,000,000 2,800,000 a year, and that an estimated 3,000,000+ violent crimes a year go unreported; about 41,000,000 16,000,000 property crimes are reported a year, while an estimated 80,000,000 48,000,000 go unreported.

That's like 126,000,000 53,600,000 criminal attempts each year; or 345,000 147,000 criminal attempts a day; or 14,000 6,125 attempts each hour.

That's somewhat more than 35 16 criminal attempts an hour for each metropolitan area.​

Is it really unbeleivable, that among all those serious crimes attempted every hour in each of those metropolitan areas, that in only one instance, a person might use a gun to defend themselves, their property, or those they care for? Is that what's unbelievable?

FBI Property Crime

In 2013, there were an estimated 8,632,512 property crime offenses in the nation.

So when you come to reality with how many crimes we have, your dgu estimates are impossible.

1) If you are saying that the NCVS is not a reliable source to be used for the estimation of DGUs, then I'm good with that.

2) The FBI figures don't seem to account for unreported crimes... the BJS says only half of violent crimes are reported, and only a third of property crimes are reported.

Using the FBI's (under-reporting) data still reveals that 2.5 crimes/hour are reported for each metropolitan area.

K-G estimates are not "impossible."

Sorry your numbers are just made up now. Please post a link where the ncvs claims there are 16,000,000 reported property crimes and 48,000,000 unreported.

Those numbers are obviously pure fantasy:
http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/cv12.pdf

Now come back to the real world and you will see millions of dgus is not a possibility.

BTW it is hilarious you need to try to distort the NCVS numbers to try and make your claim, but ignore their DGU numbers.

Now you're just an asshole.

So again millions of DGUs is not possible.

So again millions of DGUs is not impossible.

 

[LOki]

That doesn't mean there's only one. But the one I submitted was THOROUGHLY qualified to evaluate the study, AND he was ENTIRELY disinclined to agree with the study's conclusion.

What do you bring, Cupcake?

An obvious lie.

Another obvious lie.

Yet another obvious lie.

So you haven't heard of Hemenway who uses actual facts to debunk Kleck?

I obviously have heard of David Hemenway, and one-sided speculation is not "actual facts" that debunk anything, Cupcake.

"It would be understandable if some readers thought that H did present, in his Section V, empirical evidence on the relative balance of false positives and false negatives. In fact, this section presents no empirical evidence at all. Instead, H's numerical examples demonstrate nothing more than that if one arbitrarily assumes particular rates of false positives and false negatives, along with extremely low actual DGU rates, one can come up with enormous overestimates. We cannot fault H for his arithmetic. If there were any credibility to the misreporting rates he assumes out of thin air, they would indeed imply huge overestimates."

You must be joking.

Maybe. But I'm not lying.

It's been over 20 years since Kleck came out with his survey. Please share all the peers.

I don't really know if I can provide the exhaustive list you fatuously demand, but I can submit what this gun-control advocate says:
Phillip J. Cook--"A somewhat more conservative NSPOF estimate is shown in the column of exhibit 7 that reflects the application of the criteria used by Kleck and Gertz to identify "genuine" defensive gun uses. Respondents were excluded on the basis of the most recent DGU description for any of the following reasons: the respondent did not see a perpetrator; the respondent could not state a specific crime that was involved in the incident; or the respondent did not actually display the gun or mention it to the perpetrator.

"Applying those restrictions leaves 19 NSPOF respondents (0.8 percent of the sample), representing 1.5 million defensive users. This estimate is directly comparable to the well-known estimate of Kleck and Gertz, shown in the last column of exhibit 7. While the NSPOF estimate is smaller, it is statistically plausible that the difference is due to sampling error. Inclusion of multiple DGUs reported by half of the 19 NSPOF respondents increases the estimate to 4.7 million DGUs."

And then of course there are these guys who you will predictably dissmiss off-hand:
Stephen G. Bronars
Donald B. Kates
William M. Landes
John R. Lott
David B. Mustard
Tom W. Smith
Harry L. Wilson

But if you are really looking for a list of the peers who reviewed the work of Kleck and Gertz, you can start with the peers at The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology where the work was published, and then search out all the peer-reviewed work that uses Kleck's and Gertz's work for support.

I've asked you many times for any real world fact and you provided nothing.

Another lie.

So if I'm lying provide it now.

"Armed Resistance to Crime: The Prevalence and Nature of Self-Defense with a Gun," by Gary Kleck and Marc Gertz.

So do you just believe the Kleck numbers?

"Just believe"? Nope.

How many DGUs do you believe there are each year?

On the order of 1 or 2 million.

"The (NSPOF) survey instrument was designed by Gary Kleck, Philip Cook, and David Hemenway and uses a sequence of defensive gun-use questions quite similar to those found with the 1993 Kleck and Gertz (1995) survey. Unlike the Kleck and Gertz survey, the NSPOF randomly selects one adult per sampled household, does not oversample telephone numbers from the South and the West, and uses standard sample-weighting techniques (Cook and Ludwig 1996). The results support an estimate of 1.3 million defensive gun users each year (table 2), which is within the 95 percent confidence interval of the Kleck and Gertz estimate (Cook and Ludwig 1998). A more recent national survey sponsored by the National Insitute of Justice suggests 1.5 million defensive gun uses per year (Hemenway an Azrael 1997, and forthcoming)."

So, you haven't heard of the David Hemenway who uses "actual facts" to affirm Kleck and Gertz?

Since crime has come down 30% since his debunked survey do you at least lower your estimate by that much?

The Kleck and Gertz survey was in no way "debunked", but it's certainly fair to assume the frequency DGUs should fall in response to falling call for defensive gun use.

All surveys have limitations.

Not in contention. The question is are those limitations recognized and accounted for; are they crippling because they are a function of a misapplied methodology, Mr. NotgoingtoaskaboutDGUs; or are they crippling because they are intentionally designed to support a pre-concieved conclusion, Mr. Gunuserequiresadeadguy?

That is why you have to find something in the real world to validate the results.

What's your point?

You obviously cannot do that.

This is untrue.

HEMENWAY CRITICISM OF KLECK

“Since a small percentage of people may report virtually anything on a telephone survey, there are serious risks of overestimation in using such surveys to measure rare events. The problem becomes particularly severe when the issue has even a remote possibility of positive social desirability response bias.

Consider the responses to a national random-digit-dial telephone survey of over 1,500 adults conducted in May 1994 by ABC News and the Washington Post. One question asked: "Have you yourself ever seen anything that you believe was a spacecraft from another planet?" 10% of respondents answered in the affirmative. These 150 individuals were then asked, "Have you personally ever been in contact with aliens from another planet or not?" and 6% answered "Yes."

By extrapolating to the national population, we might conclude that almost 20 million Americans have seen spacecraft from another planet, and over a million have been in personal contact with aliens from other planets. That more than a million Americans had contact with aliens would be incredible news—but not the kind actively publicized by reputable scientists. Yet the ABC News/Washington Post data on aliens are as good as or better than that from any of the thirteen surveys cited by K-G as supporting their conclusions about self-defense gun use.”

"An honest, scientifically based critique would have given balanced consideration to flaws that tend to make the estimate too low (e.g., people concealing DGUs because they involved unlawful behavior, and our failure to count any DGUs by adolescents), as well as those that contribute to making them too high.

...

"Hemenway's critical technique is simple: one-sided, and often implausible, speculation about flaws that might have afflicted our research, and that might have been consequential enough to significantly affect our conclusions. H devotes his attention almost exclusively to suspected flaws that might have contributed to the overestimation of defensive gun use (DGU) frequency. He either ignores well established sources of underreporting, or briefly and superficially discusses them only for the sake of dismissing them."

"Debunker" debunked.

Your real world defense of the survey numbers is the survey? You are a joke. Again the millions estimated in the survey aren't real. Your defense is fantasy.

Millions of defenses is not possible. You realize there are only about 9.8 million crimes each year right? And about 24% of the population owns guns. So thats about 2.35 million crimes against gun owners. And about 88% of crimes are property crimes where the victim isn't even there so now we are at about 282k crimes that could be defended. Of those only like 1/3 of violent crimes are at home. And only about 16% of gun owners carry. So that leaves only about 120k that are defendable. Then they of course aren't 100% successful in defense so the real number is clearly under 120k. The ncvs estimate of 108k is looking pretty solid. Backed by actual stats from the real world.

Let's try to discover what you find to be unbelievable.

2,000,000 DGU's/year means, 5480 DGUs/day, and that means, 230 DGUs/hour.

So. What do you find unbelievable?

Is it unbelievable that there are more than 230 metropolitan areas in the United States? Is that what's unbelievable?

It shouldn't be.

Is it unbelievable that in each metropolitan area, more than one serious crime is attempted every hour? Is that what's unbelievable? Could be.

Consider that the BJS claims a violent crime is reported at about 3,000,000 a year, and that an estimated 3,000,000+ violent crimes a year go unreported; about 41,000,000 property crimes are reported a year, while an estimated 80,000,000 go unreported.

That's like 126,000,000 criminal attempts each year; or 345,000 criminal attempts a day; or 14,000 attempts each hour.

That's somewhat more than 35 criminal attempts an hour for each metropolitan area.

Is it really unbeleivable, that among all those serious crimes attempted every hour in each of those metropolitan areas, that in only one instance, a person might use a gun to defend themselves, their property, or those they care for? Is that what's unbelievable?

Now that you know we have only about 10% of the crime you thought, shouldn't your dgu estimate now be 10% of what it was? So 100-200k?

Amazing you lack the common sense to not realize over a 100 million crimes was ridiculous. Great job embarrassing yourself cupcake.

2,000,000 DGU's/year means, 5480 DGUs/day, and that means, 230 DGUs/hour.

So. What do you find impossible?

Is it unbelievable that there are more than 230 metropolitan areas in the United States? Is that what's impossible?

It shouldn't be.

Is it unbelievable that in each metropolitan area, more than one serious crime is attempted every hour? Is that what's impossible? Could be.

Consider that the BJS claims a violent crime is reported at about 2,800,000 a year, and that an estimated 3,000,000+ violent crimes a year go unreported; about 16,000,000 property crimes are reported a year, while an estimated 48,000,000 go unreported.

That's like 53,600,000 criminal attempts each year; or 147,000 criminal attempts a day; or 6,125 attempts each hour.

That's somewhat more than 16 criminal attempts an hour for each metropolitan area.

Is it really impossible, that among all those serious crimes attempted every hour in each of those metropolitan areas, that in only one instance, a person might use a gun to defend themselves, their property, or those they care for? Is that what's impossible?

 

[Brain357]

You must have bad math. You realize they are giving rate per household?

Ah yes! I multiplied by population... mea culpa. Allow me to recalculate:

2,000,000 DGU's/year means, 5480 DGUs/day, and that means, 230 DGUs/hour.

So. What do you find unbelievable?

Is it unbelievable that there are more than 230 metropolitan areas in the United States? Is that what's unbelievable?

It shouldn't be.

Is it unbelievable that in each metropolitan area, more than one serious crime is attempted every hour? Is that what's unbelievable? Could be.

Consider that the BJS claims a violent crime is reported at about 3,000,000 2,800,000 a year, and that an estimated 3,000,000+ violent crimes a year go unreported; about 41,000,000 16,000,000 property crimes are reported a year, while an estimated 80,000,000 48,000,000 go unreported.

That's like 126,000,000 53,600,000 criminal attempts each year; or 345,000 147,000 criminal attempts a day; or 14,000 6,125 attempts each hour.

That's somewhat more than 35 16 criminal attempts an hour for each metropolitan area.​

Is it really unbeleivable, that among all those serious crimes attempted every hour in each of those metropolitan areas, that in only one instance, a person might use a gun to defend themselves, their property, or those they care for? Is that what's unbelievable?

FBI Property Crime

In 2013, there were an estimated 8,632,512 property crime offenses in the nation.

So when you come to reality with how many crimes we have, your dgu estimates are impossible.

1) If you are saying that the NCVS is not a reliable source to be used for the estimation of DGUs, then I'm good with that.

2) The FBI figures don't seem to account for unreported crimes... the BJS says only half of violent crimes are reported, and only a third of property crimes are reported.

Using the FBI's (under-reporting) data still reveals that 2.5 crimes/hour are reported for each metropolitan area.

K-G estimates are not "impossible."

Sorry your numbers are just made up now. Please post a link where the ncvs claims there are 16,000,000 reported property crimes and 48,000,000 unreported.

Those numbers are obviously pure fantasy:
http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/cv12.pdf

Now come back to the real world and you will see millions of dgus is not a possibility.

BTW it is hilarious you need to try to distort the NCVS numbers to try and make your claim, but ignore their DGU numbers.

Now you're just an asshole.

So again millions of DGUs is not possible.

So again millions of DGUs is not impossible.

It is impossible if you use accurate crime numbers from this country. Use accurate crime numbers and show me how it is possible.

 

[LOki]

Ah yes! I multiplied by population... mea culpa. Allow me to recalculate:

2,000,000 DGU's/year means, 5480 DGUs/day, and that means, 230 DGUs/hour.

So. What do you find unbelievable?

Is it unbelievable that there are more than 230 metropolitan areas in the United States? Is that what's unbelievable?

It shouldn't be.

Is it unbelievable that in each metropolitan area, more than one serious crime is attempted every hour? Is that what's unbelievable? Could be.

Consider that the BJS claims a violent crime is reported at about 3,000,000 2,800,000 a year, and that an estimated 3,000,000+ violent crimes a year go unreported; about 41,000,000 16,000,000 property crimes are reported a year, while an estimated 80,000,000 48,000,000 go unreported.

That's like 126,000,000 53,600,000 criminal attempts each year; or 345,000 147,000 criminal attempts a day; or 14,000 6,125 attempts each hour.

That's somewhat more than 35 16 criminal attempts an hour for each metropolitan area.​

Is it really unbeleivable, that among all those serious crimes attempted every hour in each of those metropolitan areas, that in only one instance, a person might use a gun to defend themselves, their property, or those they care for? Is that what's unbelievable?

1) If you are saying that the NCVS is not a reliable source to be used for the estimation of DGUs, then I'm good with that.

2) The FBI figures don't seem to account for unreported crimes... the BJS says only half of violent crimes are reported, and only a third of property crimes are reported.

Using the FBI's (under-reporting) data still reveals that 2.5 crimes/hour are reported for each metropolitan area.

K-G estimates are not "impossible."

Sorry your numbers are just made up now. Please post a link where the ncvs claims there are 16,000,000 reported property crimes and 48,000,000 unreported.

Those numbers are obviously pure fantasy:
http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/cv12.pdf

Now come back to the real world and you will see millions of dgus is not a possibility.

BTW it is hilarious you need to try to distort the NCVS numbers to try and make your claim, but ignore their DGU numbers.

Now you're just an asshole.

So again millions of DGUs is not possible.

So again millions of DGUs is not impossible.

It is impossible if you use accurate crime numbers from this country. Use accurate crime numbers and show me how it is possible.

2,000,000 DGU's/year means, 5480 DGUs/day, and that means, 230 DGUs/hour.

So. What do you find impossible?

Is it impossible that there are more than 230 metropolitan areas in the United States? Is that what's impossible?

It shouldn't be.

Is it unbelievable that in each metropolitan area, more than one serious crime is attempted every hour? Is that what's impossible? Could be.

Consider that the BJS claims a violent crime is reported at about 2,800,000 a year, and that an estimated 3,000,000+ violent crimes a year go unreported; about 16,000,000 property crimes are reported a year, while an estimated 48,000,000 go unreported.

That's like 53,600,000 criminal attempts each year; or 147,000 criminal attempts a day; or 6,125 attempts each hour.

That's somewhat more than 16 criminal attempts an hour for each metropolitan area.

Is it really impossible, that among all those serious crimes attempted every hour in each of those metropolitan areas, that in only one instance, a person might use a gun to defend themselves, their property, or those they care for? Is that what's impossible?

 

[Brain357]

So you haven't heard of Hemenway who uses actual facts to debunk Kleck?

I obviously have heard of David Hemenway, and one-sided speculation is not "actual facts" that debunk anything, Cupcake.

"It would be understandable if some readers thought that H did present, in his Section V, empirical evidence on the relative balance of false positives and false negatives. In fact, this section presents no empirical evidence at all. Instead, H's numerical examples demonstrate nothing more than that if one arbitrarily assumes particular rates of false positives and false negatives, along with extremely low actual DGU rates, one can come up with enormous overestimates. We cannot fault H for his arithmetic. If there were any credibility to the misreporting rates he assumes out of thin air, they would indeed imply huge overestimates."

You must be joking.

Maybe. But I'm not lying.

It's been over 20 years since Kleck came out with his survey. Please share all the peers.

I don't really know if I can provide the exhaustive list you fatuously demand, but I can submit what this gun-control advocate says:
Phillip J. Cook--"A somewhat more conservative NSPOF estimate is shown in the column of exhibit 7 that reflects the application of the criteria used by Kleck and Gertz to identify "genuine" defensive gun uses. Respondents were excluded on the basis of the most recent DGU description for any of the following reasons: the respondent did not see a perpetrator; the respondent could not state a specific crime that was involved in the incident; or the respondent did not actually display the gun or mention it to the perpetrator.

"Applying those restrictions leaves 19 NSPOF respondents (0.8 percent of the sample), representing 1.5 million defensive users. This estimate is directly comparable to the well-known estimate of Kleck and Gertz, shown in the last column of exhibit 7. While the NSPOF estimate is smaller, it is statistically plausible that the difference is due to sampling error. Inclusion of multiple DGUs reported by half of the 19 NSPOF respondents increases the estimate to 4.7 million DGUs."

And then of course there are these guys who you will predictably dissmiss off-hand:
Stephen G. Bronars
Donald B. Kates
William M. Landes
John R. Lott
David B. Mustard
Tom W. Smith
Harry L. Wilson

But if you are really looking for a list of the peers who reviewed the work of Kleck and Gertz, you can start with the peers at The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology where the work was published, and then search out all the peer-reviewed work that uses Kleck's and Gertz's work for support.

I've asked you many times for any real world fact and you provided nothing.

Another lie.

So if I'm lying provide it now.

"Armed Resistance to Crime: The Prevalence and Nature of Self-Defense with a Gun," by Gary Kleck and Marc Gertz.

So do you just believe the Kleck numbers?

"Just believe"? Nope.

How many DGUs do you believe there are each year?

On the order of 1 or 2 million.

"The (NSPOF) survey instrument was designed by Gary Kleck, Philip Cook, and David Hemenway and uses a sequence of defensive gun-use questions quite similar to those found with the 1993 Kleck and Gertz (1995) survey. Unlike the Kleck and Gertz survey, the NSPOF randomly selects one adult per sampled household, does not oversample telephone numbers from the South and the West, and uses standard sample-weighting techniques (Cook and Ludwig 1996). The results support an estimate of 1.3 million defensive gun users each year (table 2), which is within the 95 percent confidence interval of the Kleck and Gertz estimate (Cook and Ludwig 1998). A more recent national survey sponsored by the National Insitute of Justice suggests 1.5 million defensive gun uses per year (Hemenway an Azrael 1997, and forthcoming)."

So, you haven't heard of the David Hemenway who uses "actual facts" to affirm Kleck and Gertz?

Since crime has come down 30% since his debunked survey do you at least lower your estimate by that much?

The Kleck and Gertz survey was in no way "debunked", but it's certainly fair to assume the frequency DGUs should fall in response to falling call for defensive gun use.

All surveys have limitations.

Not in contention. The question is are those limitations recognized and accounted for; are they crippling because they are a function of a misapplied methodology, Mr. NotgoingtoaskaboutDGUs; or are they crippling because they are intentionally designed to support a pre-concieved conclusion, Mr. Gunuserequiresadeadguy?

That is why you have to find something in the real world to validate the results.

What's your point?

You obviously cannot do that.

This is untrue.

HEMENWAY CRITICISM OF KLECK

“Since a small percentage of people may report virtually anything on a telephone survey, there are serious risks of overestimation in using such surveys to measure rare events. The problem becomes particularly severe when the issue has even a remote possibility of positive social desirability response bias.

Consider the responses to a national random-digit-dial telephone survey of over 1,500 adults conducted in May 1994 by ABC News and the Washington Post. One question asked: "Have you yourself ever seen anything that you believe was a spacecraft from another planet?" 10% of respondents answered in the affirmative. These 150 individuals were then asked, "Have you personally ever been in contact with aliens from another planet or not?" and 6% answered "Yes."

By extrapolating to the national population, we might conclude that almost 20 million Americans have seen spacecraft from another planet, and over a million have been in personal contact with aliens from other planets. That more than a million Americans had contact with aliens would be incredible news—but not the kind actively publicized by reputable scientists. Yet the ABC News/Washington Post data on aliens are as good as or better than that from any of the thirteen surveys cited by K-G as supporting their conclusions about self-defense gun use.”

"An honest, scientifically based critique would have given balanced consideration to flaws that tend to make the estimate too low (e.g., people concealing DGUs because they involved unlawful behavior, and our failure to count any DGUs by adolescents), as well as those that contribute to making them too high.

...

"Hemenway's critical technique is simple: one-sided, and often implausible, speculation about flaws that might have afflicted our research, and that might have been consequential enough to significantly affect our conclusions. H devotes his attention almost exclusively to suspected flaws that might have contributed to the overestimation of defensive gun use (DGU) frequency. He either ignores well established sources of underreporting, or briefly and superficially discusses them only for the sake of dismissing them."

"Debunker" debunked.

Your real world defense of the survey numbers is the survey? You are a joke. Again the millions estimated in the survey aren't real. Your defense is fantasy.

Millions of defenses is not possible. You realize there are only about 9.8 million crimes each year right? And about 24% of the population owns guns. So thats about 2.35 million crimes against gun owners. And about 88% of crimes are property crimes where the victim isn't even there so now we are at about 282k crimes that could be defended. Of those only like 1/3 of violent crimes are at home. And only about 16% of gun owners carry. So that leaves only about 120k that are defendable. Then they of course aren't 100% successful in defense so the real number is clearly under 120k. The ncvs estimate of 108k is looking pretty solid. Backed by actual stats from the real world.

Let's try to discover what you find to be unbelievable.

2,000,000 DGU's/year means, 5480 DGUs/day, and that means, 230 DGUs/hour.

So. What do you find unbelievable?

Is it unbelievable that there are more than 230 metropolitan areas in the United States? Is that what's unbelievable?

It shouldn't be.

Is it unbelievable that in each metropolitan area, more than one serious crime is attempted every hour? Is that what's unbelievable? Could be.

Consider that the BJS claims a violent crime is reported at about 3,000,000 a year, and that an estimated 3,000,000+ violent crimes a year go unreported; about 41,000,000 property crimes are reported a year, while an estimated 80,000,000 go unreported.

That's like 126,000,000 criminal attempts each year; or 345,000 criminal attempts a day; or 14,000 attempts each hour.

That's somewhat more than 35 criminal attempts an hour for each metropolitan area.

Is it really unbeleivable, that among all those serious crimes attempted every hour in each of those metropolitan areas, that in only one instance, a person might use a gun to defend themselves, their property, or those they care for? Is that what's unbelievable?

Now that you know we have only about 10% of the crime you thought, shouldn't your dgu estimate now be 10% of what it was? So 100-200k?

Amazing you lack the common sense to not realize over a 100 million crimes was ridiculous. Great job embarrassing yourself cupcake.

2,000,000 DGU's/year means, 5480 DGUs/day, and that means, 230 DGUs/hour.

So. What do you find impossible?

Is it unbelievable that there are more than 230 metropolitan areas in the United States? Is that what's impossible?

It shouldn't be.

Is it unbelievable that in each metropolitan area, more than one serious crime is attempted every hour? Is that what's impossible? Could be.

Consider that the BJS claims a violent crime is reported at about 2,800,000 a year, and that an estimated 3,000,000+ violent crimes a year go unreported; about 16,000,000 property crimes are reported a year, while an estimated 48,000,000 go unreported.

That's like 53,600,000 criminal attempts each year; or 147,000 criminal attempts a day; or 6,125 attempts each hour.

That's somewhat more than 16 criminal attempts an hour for each metropolitan area.

Is it really impossible, that among all those serious crimes attempted every hour in each of those metropolitan areas, that in only one instance, a person might use a gun to defend themselves, their property, or those they care for? Is that what's impossible?

Back to making up numbers? Don't be so pathetic. Please link support for your crazy claim. Fbi and ncvs are way below your fantasy claims for attempted crimes. You really lack common sense.

 

[LOki]

I obviously have heard of David Hemenway, and one-sided speculation is not "actual facts" that debunk anything, Cupcake.

"It would be understandable if some readers thought that H did present, in his Section V, empirical evidence on the relative balance of false positives and false negatives. In fact, this section presents no empirical evidence at all. Instead, H's numerical examples demonstrate nothing more than that if one arbitrarily assumes particular rates of false positives and false negatives, along with extremely low actual DGU rates, one can come up with enormous overestimates. We cannot fault H for his arithmetic. If there were any credibility to the misreporting rates he assumes out of thin air, they would indeed imply huge overestimates."

Maybe. But I'm not lying.

I don't really know if I can provide the exhaustive list you fatuously demand, but I can submit what this gun-control advocate says:
Phillip J. Cook--"A somewhat more conservative NSPOF estimate is shown in the column of exhibit 7 that reflects the application of the criteria used by Kleck and Gertz to identify "genuine" defensive gun uses. Respondents were excluded on the basis of the most recent DGU description for any of the following reasons: the respondent did not see a perpetrator; the respondent could not state a specific crime that was involved in the incident; or the respondent did not actually display the gun or mention it to the perpetrator.

"Applying those restrictions leaves 19 NSPOF respondents (0.8 percent of the sample), representing 1.5 million defensive users. This estimate is directly comparable to the well-known estimate of Kleck and Gertz, shown in the last column of exhibit 7. While the NSPOF estimate is smaller, it is statistically plausible that the difference is due to sampling error. Inclusion of multiple DGUs reported by half of the 19 NSPOF respondents increases the estimate to 4.7 million DGUs."

And then of course there are these guys who you will predictably dissmiss off-hand:
Stephen G. Bronars
Donald B. Kates
William M. Landes
John R. Lott
David B. Mustard
Tom W. Smith
Harry L. Wilson

But if you are really looking for a list of the peers who reviewed the work of Kleck and Gertz, you can start with the peers at The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology where the work was published, and then search out all the peer-reviewed work that uses Kleck's and Gertz's work for support.

Another lie.

"Armed Resistance to Crime: The Prevalence and Nature of Self-Defense with a Gun," by Gary Kleck and Marc Gertz.

"Just believe"? Nope.

On the order of 1 or 2 million.

"The (NSPOF) survey instrument was designed by Gary Kleck, Philip Cook, and David Hemenway and uses a sequence of defensive gun-use questions quite similar to those found with the 1993 Kleck and Gertz (1995) survey. Unlike the Kleck and Gertz survey, the NSPOF randomly selects one adult per sampled household, does not oversample telephone numbers from the South and the West, and uses standard sample-weighting techniques (Cook and Ludwig 1996). The results support an estimate of 1.3 million defensive gun users each year (table 2), which is within the 95 percent confidence interval of the Kleck and Gertz estimate (Cook and Ludwig 1998). A more recent national survey sponsored by the National Insitute of Justice suggests 1.5 million defensive gun uses per year (Hemenway an Azrael 1997, and forthcoming)."

So, you haven't heard of the David Hemenway who uses "actual facts" to affirm Kleck and Gertz?

The Kleck and Gertz survey was in no way "debunked", but it's certainly fair to assume the frequency DGUs should fall in response to falling call for defensive gun use.

Not in contention. The question is are those limitations recognized and accounted for; are they crippling because they are a function of a misapplied methodology, Mr. NotgoingtoaskaboutDGUs; or are they crippling because they are intentionally designed to support a pre-concieved conclusion, Mr. Gunuserequiresadeadguy?

What's your point?

This is untrue.

"An honest, scientifically based critique would have given balanced consideration to flaws that tend to make the estimate too low (e.g., people concealing DGUs because they involved unlawful behavior, and our failure to count any DGUs by adolescents), as well as those that contribute to making them too high.

...

"Hemenway's critical technique is simple: one-sided, and often implausible, speculation about flaws that might have afflicted our research, and that might have been consequential enough to significantly affect our conclusions. H devotes his attention almost exclusively to suspected flaws that might have contributed to the overestimation of defensive gun use (DGU) frequency. He either ignores well established sources of underreporting, or briefly and superficially discusses them only for the sake of dismissing them."

"Debunker" debunked.

Your real world defense of the survey numbers is the survey? You are a joke. Again the millions estimated in the survey aren't real. Your defense is fantasy.

Millions of defenses is not possible. You realize there are only about 9.8 million crimes each year right? And about 24% of the population owns guns. So thats about 2.35 million crimes against gun owners. And about 88% of crimes are property crimes where the victim isn't even there so now we are at about 282k crimes that could be defended. Of those only like 1/3 of violent crimes are at home. And only about 16% of gun owners carry. So that leaves only about 120k that are defendable. Then they of course aren't 100% successful in defense so the real number is clearly under 120k. The ncvs estimate of 108k is looking pretty solid. Backed by actual stats from the real world.

Let's try to discover what you find to be unbelievable.

2,000,000 DGU's/year means, 5480 DGUs/day, and that means, 230 DGUs/hour.

So. What do you find unbelievable?

Is it unbelievable that there are more than 230 metropolitan areas in the United States? Is that what's unbelievable?

It shouldn't be.

Is it unbelievable that in each metropolitan area, more than one serious crime is attempted every hour? Is that what's unbelievable? Could be.

Consider that the BJS claims a violent crime is reported at about 3,000,000 a year, and that an estimated 3,000,000+ violent crimes a year go unreported; about 41,000,000 property crimes are reported a year, while an estimated 80,000,000 go unreported.

That's like 126,000,000 criminal attempts each year; or 345,000 criminal attempts a day; or 14,000 attempts each hour.

That's somewhat more than 35 criminal attempts an hour for each metropolitan area.

Is it really unbeleivable, that among all those serious crimes attempted every hour in each of those metropolitan areas, that in only one instance, a person might use a gun to defend themselves, their property, or those they care for? Is that what's unbelievable?

Now that you know we have only about 10% of the crime you thought, shouldn't your dgu estimate now be 10% of what it was? So 100-200k?

Amazing you lack the common sense to not realize over a 100 million crimes was ridiculous. Great job embarrassing yourself cupcake.

2,000,000 DGU's/year means, 5480 DGUs/day, and that means, 230 DGUs/hour.

So. What do you find impossible?

Is it unbelievable that there are more than 230 metropolitan areas in the United States? Is that what's impossible?

It shouldn't be.

Is it unbelievable that in each metropolitan area, more than one serious crime is attempted every hour? Is that what's impossible? Could be.

Consider that the BJS claims a violent crime is reported at about 2,800,000 a year, and that an estimated 3,000,000+ violent crimes a year go unreported; about 16,000,000 property crimes are reported a year, while an estimated 48,000,000 go unreported.

That's like 53,600,000 criminal attempts each year; or 147,000 criminal attempts a day; or 6,125 attempts each hour.

That's somewhat more than 16 criminal attempts an hour for each metropolitan area.

Is it really impossible, that among all those serious crimes attempted every hour in each of those metropolitan areas, that in only one instance, a person might use a gun to defend themselves, their property, or those they care for? Is that what's impossible?

Back to making up numbers? Don't be so pathetic. Please link support for your crazy claim. Fbi and ncvs are way below your fantasy claims for attempted crimes. You really lack common sense.

You're just an asshole that's doesn't click links.

I "made up" no numbers. Not ever. You just refuse to accept that they are valid... validated by your preferred sources.

 

[Cecilie1200]

A hilarious Australian stand-up comic explains what U.S. gun laws look like to the rest of the world

In 2008-2012, guns were used in 42,419 criminal homicides and only 1,108 justifiable homicides (defined as the killing of a felon during the commission of a felony by a private citizen), according to the report -- a ratio of 38 to 1.

What's hilarious is that you think anyone gives a fat rat's ass what some Aussie thinks.

When the rest of the world starts having anxiety attacks over what Americans think of their countries, MAYBE I'll reciprocate . . . but probably not.