New research puts to death the “good guy with a gun” narrative

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Lol everything I said is supported by evidence. You have yet to to post a relevant study that contradicts it.

Also don’t pretend gun toting idiots with concealed carry don’t carry their guns wherever they want.

Correct.

"Gun free" zones are likewise a myth.

You mean they don't have laws that bar anyone with a gun from being on school property?

Clayton's right on this one.

If we (honest citizens) didn't have guns, then criminals wouldn't have them, they would be unnecessary. But we have guns , but then we tell criminals they can have guns too, but they can't have guns at schools. So they can have guns? They can't? See how it's our fault? Criminals are reasonably confused whether they are be allowed to shoot people or not

Citizens have the right to carry firearms pursuant to lawful self-defense – not act in the capacity of law enforcement, not to ‘deter’ crime, and not to fend off ‘tyranny.’

The notion that private citizens carrying guns will somehow ‘save the day’ and defend unarmed private citizens from criminal attack is as baseless as it is ridiculous.

Citizens are not required to ‘justify’ the exercising of a fundamental right as a ‘prerequisite’ to indeed do so.

That’s where conservatives get it wrong: they’re so desperate to ‘justify’ the carrying of firearms that they contrive these inane and wrongheaded rationalizations – such as ‘good guy with a gun’ – where no such rationalization is warranted.

Study: Concealed Handgun Permits Don't Affect Crime Rate

Supporters insist that allowing people to legally carry concealed handguns reduces crime, but that has not been the result in at least four states that have tried it, including Texas, according to a newly published academic study.

www.texastribune.org

 

[kaz]

And you make no effort. That's the whole point of your third grader playground insults. Total repetition, no effort

Lol, you figured that out all by yourself?

Nope. I just told you in my post.

LOL:

And you figured that out all by yourself? I've been telling you all along that your insults are third grade playground. You think you just realized that? Did you use a lifeline to realize what I already told you? Hope not ...

 

[kaz]

Lol everything I said is supported by evidence. You have yet to to post a relevant study that contradicts it.

Also don’t pretend gun toting idiots with concealed carry don’t carry their guns wherever they want.

Correct.

"Gun free" zones are likewise a myth.

You mean they don't have laws that bar anyone with a gun from being on school property?

Clayton's right on this one.

If we (honest citizens) didn't have guns, then criminals wouldn't have them, they would be unnecessary. But we have guns , but then we tell criminals they can have guns too, but they can't have guns at schools. So they can have guns? They can't? See how it's our fault? Criminals are reasonably confused whether they are be allowed to shoot people or not

Citizens have the right to carry firearms pursuant to lawful self-defense – not act in the capacity of law enforcement, not to ‘deter’ crime, and not to fend off ‘tyranny.’

The notion that private citizens carrying guns will somehow ‘save the day’ and defend unarmed private citizens from criminal attack is as baseless as it is ridiculous.

Citizens are not required to ‘justify’ the exercising of a fundamental right as a ‘prerequisite’ to indeed do so.

That’s where conservatives get it wrong: they’re so desperate to ‘justify’ the carrying of firearms that they contrive these inane and wrongheaded rationalizations – such as ‘good guy with a gun’ – where no such rationalization is warranted.

Study: Concealed Handgun Permits Don't Affect Crime Rate

Supporters insist that allowing people to legally carry concealed handguns reduces crime, but that has not been the result in at least four states that have tried it, including Texas, according to a newly published academic study.

www.texastribune.org

It depends on the situation. Most acts of self defense are people protecting themselves. I mean duh. You sir, are master of the obvious.

But many people also save others.

Let's see your proof this didn't happen since you claim it's a myth:

"He had an AR-15, but so did I." Sutherland Springs hero hailed by NRA

DALLAS - As horrific as the mass shooting at a Baptist church in Sutherland Springs, Tex. was, it could have been even worse had it not been for Stephen Willeford and his AR-15.

www.ajc.com

Or this

Texas church shooting: Gunman killed by churchgoer named

Keith Thomas Kinnunen was shot dead by a churchgoer, after he had killed two of the congregation.

www.bbc.com

You know you're lying of course

 

[Godboy]

New research puts the 'good guy with a gun' idea to rest: Loose concealed-carry laws are linked to more firearm homicides

States with looser concealed-carry laws have higher rates of gun homicide. And higher gun-ownership rates are associated with more mass shootings.

www.yahoo.com

A new study found that states with looser concealed-carry gun laws have higher rates of gun homicide.

The results also showed that higher levels of gun ownership are associated with more mass shootings.

The study suggests the US could reduce gun violence by lowering levels of gun ownership and passing stricter concealed-carry laws.

Visit Business Insider's homepage for more stories.

The "good guy with a gun" theory goes like this: If more well-intentioned people carry guns, there's a higher chance of stopping a violent shooter.

Unfortunately, that's not how it works in real life, according to new research published in the journal Justice Quarterly. The study found that laws allowing more people to carry guns in public are associated with a rise in gun violence. The results also showed that the higher a state's gun-ownership rate, the more likely a mass shooting is.

Because a good guy with a gun defends themselves or their families with a gun, you are now using those self defense statistics to vilify them? Weve ALWAYS known that concealed carriers have been blowing away criminals. That is precisely why we have the 2nd amendment. Killing bad guys will never be unpopular in the US, or anywhere.

 

[Blues Man]

Lol everything I said is supported by evidence. You have yet to to post a relevant study that contradicts it.

Also don’t pretend gun toting idiots with concealed carry don’t carry their guns wherever they want.

Correct.

"Gun free" zones are likewise a myth.

You mean they don't have laws that bar anyone with a gun from being on school property?

Clayton's right on this one.

If we (honest citizens) didn't have guns, then criminals wouldn't have them, they would be unnecessary. But we have guns , but then we tell criminals they can have guns too, but they can't have guns at schools. So they can have guns? They can't? See how it's our fault? Criminals are reasonably confused whether they are be allowed to shoot people or not

Citizens have the right to carry firearms pursuant to lawful self-defense – not act in the capacity of law enforcement, not to ‘deter’ crime, and not to fend off ‘tyranny.’

The notion that private citizens carrying guns will somehow ‘save the day’ and defend unarmed private citizens from criminal attack is as baseless as it is ridiculous.

Citizens are not required to ‘justify’ the exercising of a fundamental right as a ‘prerequisite’ to indeed do so.

That’s where conservatives get it wrong: they’re so desperate to ‘justify’ the carrying of firearms that they contrive these inane and wrongheaded rationalizations – such as ‘good guy with a gun’ – where no such rationalization is warranted.

Study: Concealed Handgun Permits Don't Affect Crime Rate

Supporters insist that allowing people to legally carry concealed handguns reduces crime, but that has not been the result in at least four states that have tried it, including Texas, according to a newly published academic study.

www.texastribune.org

In my experience people with CC permits tend actively avoid situations that might require them to draw a weapon.

They are less likely to get into arguments in public and tend to be some of the most law abiding people in society.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Citizens have the right to carry firearms pursuant to lawful self-defense – not act in the capacity of law enforcement, not to ‘deter’ crime, and not to fend off ‘tyranny.’

The notion that private citizens carrying guns will somehow ‘save the day’ and defend unarmed private citizens from criminal attack is as baseless as it is ridiculous.

Yet most all of the cases where a legally armed citizen used their weapon, it didn't end up with anybody getting shot. Depending on what estimates you use, Americans draw their guns 1.2 million times a year to do what you said shouldn't happen, and that is to deter a crime.

An armed citizen does have the right to defend or come to the rescue of an unarmed person against an attacker. If I leave the store, and see a guy beating a woman with a bat, I'm allowed to use deadly force to stop him. I'm not required to, but I have the legal right.

Here is one great story of a CCW holder saving the life of a police officer:

Trooper shot in ‘ambush’ on Arizona highway; passerby fatally shoots suspect

PHOENIX — Two people are dead and a Department of Public Safety trooper who was wounded while responding to a shots fired call along Interstate 10 near Tonopah just might owe his life to an a…

fox8.com

But there are many stories like that where we stop crimes from taking place because we do have our firearm and legally allowed to use them. If you need some, just ask. I have several in my gun folder and I'll be happy to post them.

 

[bripat9643]

New research puts the 'good guy with a gun' idea to rest: Loose concealed-carry laws are linked to more firearm homicides

States with looser concealed-carry laws have higher rates of gun homicide. And higher gun-ownership rates are associated with more mass shootings.

www.yahoo.com

A new study found that states with looser concealed-carry gun laws have higher rates of gun homicide.

The results also showed that higher levels of gun ownership are associated with more mass shootings.

The study suggests the US could reduce gun violence by lowering levels of gun ownership and passing stricter concealed-carry laws.

Visit Business Insider's homepage for more stories.

The "good guy with a gun" theory goes like this: If more well-intentioned people carry guns, there's a higher chance of stopping a violent shooter.

Unfortunately, that's not how it works in real life, according to new research published in the journal Justice Quarterly. The study found that laws allowing more people to carry guns in public are associated with a rise in gun violence. The results also showed that the higher a state's gun-ownership rate, the more likely a mass shooting is.

Bullshit. The crime rate went down in every state that adopted concealed carry. It's almost certain the study is based on flawed assumptions.

Should I even bother asking for a source?

Defensive Gun Use Is Not a Myth

Yeah dude. No one ever said people haven’t defended themselves with guns. That is completely besides the point of what this article is saying is that “a good guy with a gun” does nothing to prevent mass shootings. More gun ownership is correlated with more gun violence. These are the facts that matter.

And that right there exemplifies the stupidity of your post and study. You take one out of many possible factors and try to use that single issue alone to make this phony claim. We are right back to the liberal fallacy that people don't kill people, guns kill people.

Well we can all do that. Since the early 90's up until the Ferguson effect, gun and violent crime in the US was on a decline. What's proportional with that decline is more and more states adopting CCW programs, and changing laws that protect the victim instead of the criminal. How is that possible????

The amount of guns is irrelevant. More importantly are the demographics of these areas. In the United States, you are eight times more likely to be killed by a black than a white. Furthermore it's lower income areas where most murders happen. You are wrong. People kill people, not guns.

You and your study are not comparing apples to apples. Take two states with the same demographics and use one with lenient gun laws and one with strict gun laws, and then see what your conclusions are. No anti-gun organization has ever done that to my knowledge.

New research puts the 'good guy with a gun' idea to rest: Loose concealed-carry laws are linked to more firearm homicides

States with looser concealed-carry laws have higher rates of gun homicide. And higher gun-ownership rates are associated with more mass shootings.

www.yahoo.com

A new study found that states with looser concealed-carry gun laws have higher rates of gun homicide.

The results also showed that higher levels of gun ownership are associated with more mass shootings.

The study suggests the US could reduce gun violence by lowering levels of gun ownership and passing stricter concealed-carry laws.

Visit Business Insider's homepage for more stories.

The "good guy with a gun" theory goes like this: If more well-intentioned people carry guns, there's a higher chance of stopping a violent shooter.

Unfortunately, that's not how it works in real life, according to new research published in the journal Justice Quarterly. The study found that laws allowing more people to carry guns in public are associated with a rise in gun violence. The results also showed that the higher a state's gun-ownership rate, the more likely a mass shooting is.

Unless you can find a study that directly contradicts the SPECIFIC claims made in this study, anything you say doesn’t matter.

Did the study make any SPECIFIC claims? If so why don't you quote them?

I did in the OP, dummy.

Untrue. Your OP vs the information you linked:


A new study found that states with looser concealed-carry gun laws have higher rates of gun homicide.

The results also showed that higher levels of gun ownership are associated with more mass shootings.

The study suggests the US could reduce gun violence by lowering levels of gun ownership and passing stricter concealed-carry laws.

Visit Business Insider's homepage for more stories.

The "good guy with a gun" theory goes like this: If more well-intentioned people carry guns, there's a higher chance of stopping a violent shooter.

Unfortunately, that's not how it works in real life, according to new research published in the journal Justice Quarterly. The study found that laws allowing more people to carry guns in public are associated with a rise in gun violence. The results also showed that the higher a state's gun-ownership rate, the more likely a mass shooting is.

OP: "A new study found that states with looser concealed-carry gun laws have higher rates of gun homicide."
Link: Although household gun ownership has been declining since the early 1990s (Smith & Son, 2015), gun purchases and permit applications spike dramatically in the wake of infamous mass shootings (Liu & Wiebe, 2019; Wallace, 2015), especially among individuals with no history of firearms ownership (Studdert, Zhang, Rodden, Hyndman, & Wintemute, 2017). In 2019 alone, 13% of Americans surveyed purchased a weapon to protect themselves against mass shootings, with an additional 16% seriously considering the option (Brenan, 2019).
Aside from influencing individual gun-purchasing behavior, mass shootings are often used to garner support for more restrictive or permissive firearms laws. For example, one study found each incident increased the number of firearm bills introduced in any given state’s legislature by 15% (Luca, Malhotra, & Poliquin, 2019). One of the most widely discussed—
and most widely implemented—policies to prevent mass shootings is permissive concealed carry legislation. Suzanna Gratia Hupp famously called for fewer restrictions on concealed carry, arguing that she could have stopped the 1991 massacre at Luby’s cafeteria in Killeen, Texas if she were not legally obligated to leave her firearm locked in her car (Hupp, 2009)
The results also showed that higher levels of gun ownership are associated with more mass shootings. Indeed, 56% of Americans believe that increased gun-carrying in public makes the nation safer (Newport, 2015). State laws have changed along with public opinion: while only 15 states maintained permissive concealed carry policies in the early 1990s, that number increased to 41 states as of 2018 (Siegel, Pahn et al. 2017).

Seems obvious to me that mass shootings tend to increase firearms ownership; rather than the other way around.

OP: The study suggests the US could reduce gun violence by lowering levels of gun ownership and passing stricter concealed-carry laws.

No.

Link: Even further, research has yet to determine whether the effects of gun ownership and concealed carry legislation vary for mass shootings and firearms homicide.

OP: The "good guy with a gun" theory goes like this: If more well-intentioned people carry guns, there's a higher chance of stopping a violent shooter.

Not a theory; simple fact.

Lol okay you posted a few studies (i guess?). None of them were actually relevant to specific facts in my post. You can’t just post supposedly pro-gun research and expect it to matter if the actual content doesn't apply the original claims I made. You’re just linking random shit in a wall post that isn’t relevant to the conversation at hand and expect me to be overwhelmed or something.

Let me summarize this another way. What study from your post is directly relevant to the specific claims I made in my post? I didn’t see anything relevant.

Your study isn't relevant. It says states with looser gun laws have higher rates of gun deaths. How is the term "looser" defined? The term is so vague you could drive a semi through it. What is really relevent is the crime rate before concealed was passed and the crime rate after it was passed, and it's lower in every case.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

New research puts the 'good guy with a gun' idea to rest: Loose concealed-carry laws are linked to more firearm homicides

States with looser concealed-carry laws have higher rates of gun homicide. And higher gun-ownership rates are associated with more mass shootings.

www.yahoo.com

A new study found that states with looser concealed-carry gun laws have higher rates of gun homicide.

The results also showed that higher levels of gun ownership are associated with more mass shootings.

The study suggests the US could reduce gun violence by lowering levels of gun ownership and passing stricter concealed-carry laws.

Visit Business Insider's homepage for more stories.

The "good guy with a gun" theory goes like this: If more well-intentioned people carry guns, there's a higher chance of stopping a violent shooter.

Unfortunately, that's not how it works in real life, according to new research published in the journal Justice Quarterly. The study found that laws allowing more people to carry guns in public are associated with a rise in gun violence. The results also showed that the higher a state's gun-ownership rate, the more likely a mass shooting is.

Bullshit. The crime rate went down in every state that adopted concealed carry. It's almost certain the study is based on flawed assumptions.

Should I even bother asking for a source?

Defensive Gun Use Is Not a Myth

Yeah dude. No one ever said people haven’t defended themselves with guns. That is completely besides the point of what this article is saying is that “a good guy with a gun” does nothing to prevent mass shootings. More gun ownership is correlated with more gun violence. These are the facts that matter.

And that right there exemplifies the stupidity of your post and study. You take one out of many possible factors and try to use that single issue alone to make this phony claim. We are right back to the liberal fallacy that people don't kill people, guns kill people.

Well we can all do that. Since the early 90's up until the Ferguson effect, gun and violent crime in the US was on a decline. What's proportional with that decline is more and more states adopting CCW programs, and changing laws that protect the victim instead of the criminal. How is that possible????

The amount of guns is irrelevant. More importantly are the demographics of these areas. In the United States, you are eight times more likely to be killed by a black than a white. Furthermore it's lower income areas where most murders happen. You are wrong. People kill people, not guns.

You and your study are not comparing apples to apples. Take two states with the same demographics and use one with lenient gun laws and one with strict gun laws, and then see what your conclusions are. No anti-gun organization has ever done that to my knowledge.

New research puts the 'good guy with a gun' idea to rest: Loose concealed-carry laws are linked to more firearm homicides

States with looser concealed-carry laws have higher rates of gun homicide. And higher gun-ownership rates are associated with more mass shootings.

www.yahoo.com

A new study found that states with looser concealed-carry gun laws have higher rates of gun homicide.

The results also showed that higher levels of gun ownership are associated with more mass shootings.

The study suggests the US could reduce gun violence by lowering levels of gun ownership and passing stricter concealed-carry laws.

Visit Business Insider's homepage for more stories.

The "good guy with a gun" theory goes like this: If more well-intentioned people carry guns, there's a higher chance of stopping a violent shooter.

Unfortunately, that's not how it works in real life, according to new research published in the journal Justice Quarterly. The study found that laws allowing more people to carry guns in public are associated with a rise in gun violence. The results also showed that the higher a state's gun-ownership rate, the more likely a mass shooting is.

Unless you can find a study that directly contradicts the SPECIFIC claims made in this study, anything you say doesn’t matter.

Sure it matters. Look at it this way:

You take a nice middle-class or upper-middle-class white suburb. You create a law that all residents of that suburb must own a firearm. Do you think the murder or assault rate would change? No it won't. At the same time, go to a high-crime lower income area, make a law that nobody is allowed to own a gun, their crime rate won't change either.

That's why your article is apples to oranges. The author just took the anecdotal findings cherry picked by him, and make claim that's the cause of the problem. Guns don't shoot people. People shoot people.

None of this logic of yours matters if you can’t back it up with facts.

Very well. Since you made the challenge, I'll let you decide. Give me two states or cities, identical in demographics, that shows the one with more guns has more crime. Better yet......forget that. Go to your article and give me two cities or states the author outlines. I will show you the difference in demographics that support my point, thus proving guns have nothing to do with it.

I’ve already given you evidence that clearly states there is a positive correlation with gun ownership and mass shootings. It is now up to you to prove that claim false. It’s stupid and lame to expect me to do all the work. You do get that right?

Oh, so you want me to make the fair comparisons? No problem. I'll get to work on that tomorrow. But don't cry foul when I pick two cities or states and show you how it's the demographics that make the difference and not the amount of firearms.

Demographics? Why do you think demographics are relevant to this? Okay so gun violence is more common with black people. Okay and? What’s your point?

My point is that there are many factors when it comes to violence, and particularly, gun violence.

If group A and group B of people are more renown for being violent than group C, but a particular area has more group A and B people than another place, you will likely see the correlation between those groups of people more so than the amount of guns. How do I know this? I experienced it.

The suburb I live in was predominantly white 35 years ago. We had perhaps one murder ever 15 years if that. Now it's 70% black. We have on average 3 murders a year, on top of dozens of shootings. Why was it never like that when it was a white suburb? Did we get more guns? No, it's the people--not the guns.

So of course it's a huge factor, and a much larger factor than who has how many guns. It's ridiculous. My state adopted CCW laws over a decade ago. Yet crime in Cleveland and other major cities in the state have gone up. It has nothing to do with the guns, it has to do with the demographics. Those cities had an increasing amount of minorities.

 

[kaz]

Lol everything I said is supported by evidence. You have yet to to post a relevant study that contradicts it.

Also don’t pretend gun toting idiots with concealed carry don’t carry their guns wherever they want.

Correct.

"Gun free" zones are likewise a myth.

You mean they don't have laws that bar anyone with a gun from being on school property?

Clayton's right on this one.

If we (honest citizens) didn't have guns, then criminals wouldn't have them, they would be unnecessary. But we have guns , but then we tell criminals they can have guns too, but they can't have guns at schools. So they can have guns? They can't? See how it's our fault? Criminals are reasonably confused whether they are be allowed to shoot people or not

Citizens have the right to carry firearms pursuant to lawful self-defense – not act in the capacity of law enforcement, not to ‘deter’ crime, and not to fend off ‘tyranny.’

The notion that private citizens carrying guns will somehow ‘save the day’ and defend unarmed private citizens from criminal attack is as baseless as it is ridiculous.

Citizens are not required to ‘justify’ the exercising of a fundamental right as a ‘prerequisite’ to indeed do so.

That’s where conservatives get it wrong: they’re so desperate to ‘justify’ the carrying of firearms that they contrive these inane and wrongheaded rationalizations – such as ‘good guy with a gun’ – where no such rationalization is warranted.

Study: Concealed Handgun Permits Don't Affect Crime Rate

Supporters insist that allowing people to legally carry concealed handguns reduces crime, but that has not been the result in at least four states that have tried it, including Texas, according to a newly published academic study.

www.texastribune.org

In my experience people with CC permits tend actively avoid situations that might require them to draw a weapon.

They are less likely to get into arguments in public and tend to be some of the most law abiding people in society.

Yep. Contrary to the bigoted thinking of inner city elitists like Clayton who live in lofts and drink wine spritzers, we take carrying as a serious responsibility. We want not to have to shoot anyone for so many reasons

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Lol everything I said is supported by evidence. You have yet to to post a relevant study that contradicts it.

Also don’t pretend gun toting idiots with concealed carry don’t carry their guns wherever they want.

Correct.

"Gun free" zones are likewise a myth.

You mean they don't have laws that bar anyone with a gun from being on school property?

Clayton's right on this one.

If we (honest citizens) didn't have guns, then criminals wouldn't have them, they would be unnecessary. But we have guns , but then we tell criminals they can have guns too, but they can't have guns at schools. So they can have guns? They can't? See how it's our fault? Criminals are reasonably confused whether they are be allowed to shoot people or not

Citizens have the right to carry firearms pursuant to lawful self-defense – not act in the capacity of law enforcement, not to ‘deter’ crime, and not to fend off ‘tyranny.’

The notion that private citizens carrying guns will somehow ‘save the day’ and defend unarmed private citizens from criminal attack is as baseless as it is ridiculous.

Citizens are not required to ‘justify’ the exercising of a fundamental right as a ‘prerequisite’ to indeed do so.

That’s where conservatives get it wrong: they’re so desperate to ‘justify’ the carrying of firearms that they contrive these inane and wrongheaded rationalizations – such as ‘good guy with a gun’ – where no such rationalization is warranted.

Study: Concealed Handgun Permits Don't Affect Crime Rate

Supporters insist that allowing people to legally carry concealed handguns reduces crime, but that has not been the result in at least four states that have tried it, including Texas, according to a newly published academic study.

www.texastribune.org

In my experience people with CC permits tend actively avoid situations that might require them to draw a weapon.

They are less likely to get into arguments in public and tend to be some of the most law abiding people in society.

Yep. Contrary to the bigoted thinking of inner city elitists like Clayton who live in lofts and drink wine spritzers, we take carrying as a serious responsibility. We want not to have to shoot anyone for so many reasons

Absolutely. When I strap on my gun, the only thing I'm thinking is "God, I hope I don't have to use this thing tonight!!"

If you have to use deadly force, you don't just shoot somebody, hop on your horse, and ride off into the sunset. You will still have to answer questions by the police; maybe be asked to the police station for a more in depth interview. They have the right to temporarily take your firearm away. Right or wrong, the family of the criminal can still sue you. That means hiring lawyers, taking time off of work for court appearances, and although unlikely, may have to pay out your ass if you get a bad judge or jury in the civil suit. In such a case, have to file for an appeal and start all over again.

These anti-gunners actually believe we are out there just looking for a reason to shoot or kill somebody. It's quite the opposite.

 

[kaz]

Lol everything I said is supported by evidence. You have yet to to post a relevant study that contradicts it.

Also don’t pretend gun toting idiots with concealed carry don’t carry their guns wherever they want.

Correct.

"Gun free" zones are likewise a myth.

You mean they don't have laws that bar anyone with a gun from being on school property?

Clayton's right on this one.

If we (honest citizens) didn't have guns, then criminals wouldn't have them, they would be unnecessary. But we have guns , but then we tell criminals they can have guns too, but they can't have guns at schools. So they can have guns? They can't? See how it's our fault? Criminals are reasonably confused whether they are be allowed to shoot people or not

Citizens have the right to carry firearms pursuant to lawful self-defense – not act in the capacity of law enforcement, not to ‘deter’ crime, and not to fend off ‘tyranny.’

The notion that private citizens carrying guns will somehow ‘save the day’ and defend unarmed private citizens from criminal attack is as baseless as it is ridiculous.

Citizens are not required to ‘justify’ the exercising of a fundamental right as a ‘prerequisite’ to indeed do so.

That’s where conservatives get it wrong: they’re so desperate to ‘justify’ the carrying of firearms that they contrive these inane and wrongheaded rationalizations – such as ‘good guy with a gun’ – where no such rationalization is warranted.

Study: Concealed Handgun Permits Don't Affect Crime Rate

Supporters insist that allowing people to legally carry concealed handguns reduces crime, but that has not been the result in at least four states that have tried it, including Texas, according to a newly published academic study.

www.texastribune.org

In my experience people with CC permits tend actively avoid situations that might require them to draw a weapon.

They are less likely to get into arguments in public and tend to be some of the most law abiding people in society.

Yep. Contrary to the bigoted thinking of inner city elitists like Clayton who live in lofts and drink wine spritzers, we take carrying as a serious responsibility. We want not to have to shoot anyone for so many reasons

Absolutely. When I strap on my gun, the only thing I'm thinking is "God, I hope I don't have to use this thing tonight!!"

If you have to use deadly force, you don't just shoot somebody, hop on your horse, and ride off into the sunset. You will still have to answer questions by the police; maybe be asked to the police station for a more in depth interview. They have the right to temporarily take your firearm away. Right or wrong, the family of the criminal can still sue you. That means hiring lawyers, taking time off of work for court appearances, and although unlikely, may have to pay out your ass if you get a bad judge or jury in the civil suit. In such a case, have to file for an appeal and start all over again.

These anti-gunners actually believe we are out there just looking for a reason to shoot or kill somebody. It's quite the opposite.

All true. There's also that I would like to not have to live the rest of my life having killed someone. I'd do it in a heartbeat if they threatened me or my family, but I'd very much like it to not happen at all

 

[Dagosa]

New research puts the 'good guy with a gun' idea to rest: Loose concealed-carry laws are linked to more firearm homicides

States with looser concealed-carry laws have higher rates of gun homicide. And higher gun-ownership rates are associated with more mass shootings.

www.yahoo.com

A new study found that states with looser concealed-carry gun laws have higher rates of gun homicide.

The results also showed that higher levels of gun ownership are associated with more mass shootings.

The study suggests the US could reduce gun violence by lowering levels of gun ownership and passing stricter concealed-carry laws.

Visit Business Insider's homepage for more stories.

The "good guy with a gun" theory goes like this: If more well-intentioned people carry guns, there's a higher chance of stopping a violent shooter.

Unfortunately, that's not how it works in real life, according to new research published in the journal Justice Quarterly. The study found that laws allowing more people to carry guns in public are associated with a rise in gun violence. The results also showed that the higher a state's gun-ownership rate, the more likely a mass shooting is.

Bullshit. The crime rate went down in every state that adopted concealed carry. It's almost certain the study is based on flawed assumptions.

Every state has concealed carry, with or without a license. We should be the safest nation in the world....we aren’t.

 

[9thIDdoc]

New research puts the 'good guy with a gun' idea to rest: Loose concealed-carry laws are linked to more firearm homicides

States with looser concealed-carry laws have higher rates of gun homicide. And higher gun-ownership rates are associated with more mass shootings.

www.yahoo.com

A new study found that states with looser concealed-carry gun laws have higher rates of gun homicide.

The results also showed that higher levels of gun ownership are associated with more mass shootings.

The study suggests the US could reduce gun violence by lowering levels of gun ownership and passing stricter concealed-carry laws.

Visit Business Insider's homepage for more stories.

The "good guy with a gun" theory goes like this: If more well-intentioned people carry guns, there's a higher chance of stopping a violent shooter.

Unfortunately, that's not how it works in real life, according to new research published in the journal Justice Quarterly. The study found that laws allowing more people to carry guns in public are associated with a rise in gun violence. The results also showed that the higher a state's gun-ownership rate, the more likely a mass shooting is.

Bullshit. The crime rate went down in every state that adopted concealed carry. It's almost certain the study is based on flawed assumptions.

Should I even bother asking for a source?

Defensive Gun Use Is Not a Myth

Yeah dude. No one ever said people haven’t defended themselves with guns. That is completely besides the point of what this article is saying is that “a good guy with a gun” does nothing to prevent mass shootings. More gun ownership is correlated with more gun violence. These are the facts that matter.

And that right there exemplifies the stupidity of your post and study. You take one out of many possible factors and try to use that single issue alone to make this phony claim. We are right back to the liberal fallacy that people don't kill people, guns kill people.

Well we can all do that. Since the early 90's up until the Ferguson effect, gun and violent crime in the US was on a decline. What's proportional with that decline is more and more states adopting CCW programs, and changing laws that protect the victim instead of the criminal. How is that possible????

The amount of guns is irrelevant. More importantly are the demographics of these areas. In the United States, you are eight times more likely to be killed by a black than a white. Furthermore it's lower income areas where most murders happen. You are wrong. People kill people, not guns.

You and your study are not comparing apples to apples. Take two states with the same demographics and use one with lenient gun laws and one with strict gun laws, and then see what your conclusions are. No anti-gun organization has ever done that to my knowledge.

New research puts the 'good guy with a gun' idea to rest: Loose concealed-carry laws are linked to more firearm homicides

States with looser concealed-carry laws have higher rates of gun homicide. And higher gun-ownership rates are associated with more mass shootings.

www.yahoo.com

A new study found that states with looser concealed-carry gun laws have higher rates of gun homicide.

The results also showed that higher levels of gun ownership are associated with more mass shootings.

The study suggests the US could reduce gun violence by lowering levels of gun ownership and passing stricter concealed-carry laws.

Visit Business Insider's homepage for more stories.

The "good guy with a gun" theory goes like this: If more well-intentioned people carry guns, there's a higher chance of stopping a violent shooter.

Unfortunately, that's not how it works in real life, according to new research published in the journal Justice Quarterly. The study found that laws allowing more people to carry guns in public are associated with a rise in gun violence. The results also showed that the higher a state's gun-ownership rate, the more likely a mass shooting is.

Unless you can find a study that directly contradicts the SPECIFIC claims made in this study, anything you say doesn’t matter.

Did the study make any SPECIFIC claims? If so why don't you quote them?

I did in the OP, dummy.

Untrue. Your OP vs the information you linked:


A new study found that states with looser concealed-carry gun laws have higher rates of gun homicide.

The results also showed that higher levels of gun ownership are associated with more mass shootings.

The study suggests the US could reduce gun violence by lowering levels of gun ownership and passing stricter concealed-carry laws.

Visit Business Insider's homepage for more stories.

The "good guy with a gun" theory goes like this: If more well-intentioned people carry guns, there's a higher chance of stopping a violent shooter.

Unfortunately, that's not how it works in real life, according to new research published in the journal Justice Quarterly. The study found that laws allowing more people to carry guns in public are associated with a rise in gun violence. The results also showed that the higher a state's gun-ownership rate, the more likely a mass shooting is.

OP: "A new study found that states with looser concealed-carry gun laws have higher rates of gun homicide."
Link: Although household gun ownership has been declining since the early 1990s (Smith & Son, 2015), gun purchases and permit applications spike dramatically in the wake of infamous mass shootings (Liu & Wiebe, 2019; Wallace, 2015), especially among individuals with no history of firearms ownership (Studdert, Zhang, Rodden, Hyndman, & Wintemute, 2017). In 2019 alone, 13% of Americans surveyed purchased a weapon to protect themselves against mass shootings, with an additional 16% seriously considering the option (Brenan, 2019).
Aside from influencing individual gun-purchasing behavior, mass shootings are often used to garner support for more restrictive or permissive firearms laws. For example, one study found each incident increased the number of firearm bills introduced in any given state’s legislature by 15% (Luca, Malhotra, & Poliquin, 2019). One of the most widely discussed—
and most widely implemented—policies to prevent mass shootings is permissive concealed carry legislation. Suzanna Gratia Hupp famously called for fewer restrictions on concealed carry, arguing that she could have stopped the 1991 massacre at Luby’s cafeteria in Killeen, Texas if she were not legally obligated to leave her firearm locked in her car (Hupp, 2009)
The results also showed that higher levels of gun ownership are associated with more mass shootings. Indeed, 56% of Americans believe that increased gun-carrying in public makes the nation safer (Newport, 2015). State laws have changed along with public opinion: while only 15 states maintained permissive concealed carry policies in the early 1990s, that number increased to 41 states as of 2018 (Siegel, Pahn et al. 2017).

Seems obvious to me that mass shootings tend to increase firearms ownership; rather than the other way around.

OP: The study suggests the US could reduce gun violence by lowering levels of gun ownership and passing stricter concealed-carry laws.

No.

Link: Even further, research has yet to determine whether the effects of gun ownership and concealed carry legislation vary for mass shootings and firearms homicide.

OP: The "good guy with a gun" theory goes like this: If more well-intentioned people carry guns, there's a higher chance of stopping a violent shooter.

Not a theory; simple fact.

Lol okay you posted a few studies (i guess?). None of them were actually relevant to specific facts in my post. You can’t just post supposedly pro-gun research and expect it to matter if the actual content doesn't apply the original claims I made. You’re just linking random shit in a wall post that isn’t relevant to the conversation at hand and expect me to be overwhelmed or something.

Let me summarize this another way. What study from your post is directly relevant to the specific claims I made in my post? I didn’t see anything relevant.

Dumpass, those excerpts are from the link you posted with your OP. They are what you claim to be specific proof.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

New research puts the 'good guy with a gun' idea to rest: Loose concealed-carry laws are linked to more firearm homicides

States with looser concealed-carry laws have higher rates of gun homicide. And higher gun-ownership rates are associated with more mass shootings.

www.yahoo.com

A new study found that states with looser concealed-carry gun laws have higher rates of gun homicide.

The results also showed that higher levels of gun ownership are associated with more mass shootings.

The study suggests the US could reduce gun violence by lowering levels of gun ownership and passing stricter concealed-carry laws.

Visit Business Insider's homepage for more stories.

The "good guy with a gun" theory goes like this: If more well-intentioned people carry guns, there's a higher chance of stopping a violent shooter.

Unfortunately, that's not how it works in real life, according to new research published in the journal Justice Quarterly. The study found that laws allowing more people to carry guns in public are associated with a rise in gun violence. The results also showed that the higher a state's gun-ownership rate, the more likely a mass shooting is.

Bullshit. The crime rate went down in every state that adopted concealed carry. It's almost certain the study is based on flawed assumptions.

Every state has concealed carry, with or without a license. We should be the safest nation in the world....we aren’t.

CCW's are only as good as the laws that protect the shooter. For instance if my license was good in NYC, I wouldn't carry there anyway. You're liable to kill an attacker and still end up in jail charged with murder or manslaughter.

In my state, I wouldn't think twice about it. Our laws are designed to give the shooter ultimate legal protection if deadly force is warranted.

 

[Dagosa]

In my state, I wouldn't think twice about it. Our laws are designed to give the shooter ultimate legal protection if deadly force is warranted.

The catch all phrase......if deadly force is warranted.
That will get you in a shit load of trouble in any state. Also, you might think it’s an easy decision. It isn’t. In nyc it’s tight for one reason only. Population density. Even a handgun is deadly out to hundreds of yards...if you miss the target or if it over penetrates. Police have an element of legal protection if a stray round hits an innocent. You have no such thing. I have a permit and never carry a weapon into a heavily populated area....NEVER.

A lawyer is riding every bullet that leaves your weapon. Keep that in mind.

 

[9thIDdoc]

Lol everything I said is supported by evidence. You have yet to to post a relevant study that contradicts it.

Also don’t pretend gun toting idiots with concealed carry don’t carry their guns wherever they want.

Correct.

"Gun free" zones are likewise a myth.

You mean they don't have laws that bar anyone with a gun from being on school property?

Clayton's right on this one.

If we (honest citizens) didn't have guns, then criminals wouldn't have them, they would be unnecessary. But we have guns , but then we tell criminals they can have guns too, but they can't have guns at schools. So they can have guns? They can't? See how it's our fault? Criminals are reasonably confused whether they are be allowed to shoot people or not

Citizens have the right to carry firearms pursuant to lawful self-defense – not act in the capacity of law enforcement, not to ‘deter’ crime, and not to fend off ‘tyranny.’

The notion that private citizens carrying guns will somehow ‘save the day’ and defend unarmed private citizens from criminal attack is as baseless as it is ridiculous.

Citizens are not required to ‘justify’ the exercising of a fundamental right as a ‘prerequisite’ to indeed do so.

That’s where conservatives get it wrong: they’re so desperate to ‘justify’ the carrying of firearms that they contrive these inane and wrongheaded rationalizations – such as ‘good guy with a gun’ – where no such rationalization is warranted.

Study: Concealed Handgun Permits Don't Affect Crime Rate

Supporters insist that allowing people to legally carry concealed handguns reduces crime, but that has not been the result in at least four states that have tried it, including Texas, according to a newly published academic study.

www.texastribune.org

What? The OP posts a link that does not support his silly argument so you think you need to do the same? Not impressed.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

In my state, I wouldn't think twice about it. Our laws are designed to give the shooter ultimate legal protection if deadly force is warranted.

The catch all phrase......if deadly force is warranted.
That will get you in a shit load of trouble in any state. Also, you might think it’s an easy decision. It isn’t. In nyc it’s tight for one reason only. Population density. Even a handgun is deadly out to hundreds of yards...if you miss the target or if it over penetrates. Police have an element of legal protection if a stray round hits an innocent. You have no such thing. I have a permit and never carry a weapon into a heavily populated area....NEVER.

A lawyer is riding every bullet that leaves your weapon. Keep that in mind.

I don't know what your classes taught you, but the first and most repeated concept of ours was downrange. You never use a firearm if an innocent is behind or near your subject, for the simple fact most shots, you will miss your target. Also, statistics show that in most cases where a person needed to use a firearm for self-defense, it was between 6 and 8 feet.

As for myself, I use hollow points so that it will stop inside of him. If it would exit the body, it will do so at an extremely reduced speed.

Deadly force if warranted is not a catch phrase, it's the law. Like most states, our laws read A CCW holder is legally allowed to use deadly force if they believe that they (or others) are in jeopardy of serious bodily harm or death. Yes, there is always the ambulance chasers to deal with, but it's better than being dead or severely injured.

 

[2aguy]

New research puts the 'good guy with a gun' idea to rest: Loose concealed-carry laws are linked to more firearm homicides

States with looser concealed-carry laws have higher rates of gun homicide. And higher gun-ownership rates are associated with more mass shootings.

www.yahoo.com

A new study found that states with looser concealed-carry gun laws have higher rates of gun homicide.

The results also showed that higher levels of gun ownership are associated with more mass shootings.

The study suggests the US could reduce gun violence by lowering levels of gun ownership and passing stricter concealed-carry laws.

Visit Business Insider's homepage for more stories.

The "good guy with a gun" theory goes like this: If more well-intentioned people carry guns, there's a higher chance of stopping a violent shooter.

Unfortunately, that's not how it works in real life, according to new research published in the journal Justice Quarterly. The study found that laws allowing more people to carry guns in public are associated with a rise in gun violence. The results also showed that the higher a state's gun-ownership rate, the more likely a mass shooting is.

More crap research by anti-gun extremists........

Suicides do not count.......and if you dig into this you will find suicide used to get her results...

 

[2aguy]

New research puts the 'good guy with a gun' idea to rest: Loose concealed-carry laws are linked to more firearm homicides

States with looser concealed-carry laws have higher rates of gun homicide. And higher gun-ownership rates are associated with more mass shootings.

www.yahoo.com

A new study found that states with looser concealed-carry gun laws have higher rates of gun homicide.

The results also showed that higher levels of gun ownership are associated with more mass shootings.

The study suggests the US could reduce gun violence by lowering levels of gun ownership and passing stricter concealed-carry laws.

Visit Business Insider's homepage for more stories.

The "good guy with a gun" theory goes like this: If more well-intentioned people carry guns, there's a higher chance of stopping a violent shooter.

Unfortunately, that's not how it works in real life, according to new research published in the journal Justice Quarterly. The study found that laws allowing more people to carry guns in public are associated with a rise in gun violence. The results also showed that the higher a state's gun-ownership rate, the more likely a mass shooting is.

I'm not surprised. It's only logical.

The far right radical extremists on this board who have a small penis needs their penis extenders to feel like a man.

They will attack you for posting truths they don't like.

You are a dumb shit...

Over the last 27 years, we went from 200 million guns in private hands in the 1990s and 4.7 million people carrying guns for self defense in 1997...to close to 400-600 million guns in private hands and over 18.6 million people carrying guns for self defense in 2018...guess what happened...


-- gun murder down 49%

--gun crime down 75%

--violent crime down 72%

Gun Homicide Rate Down 49% Since 1993 Peak; Public Unaware

Compared with 1993, the peak of U.S. gun homicides, the firearm homicide rate was 49% lower in 2010, and there were fewer deaths, even though the nation’s population grew. The victimization rate for other violent crimes with a firearm—assaults, robberies and sex crimes—was 75% lower in 2011 than in 1993. Violent non-fatal crime victimization overall (with or without a firearm) also is down markedly (72%) over two decades.
=====

Maine tops ‘safest states’ rankings four years after removing major gun restriction

When Maine passed a “Constitutional Carry” law allowing Maine residents to carry a concealed firearm without any special permit in 2015, opponents of the law forecast a dangerous future for the state. They said the new law would hurt public safety and put Maine kids at risk.



One state representative who opposed the bill went so far as to say it would give Mainers a reason to be afraid every time they went out in public or to work.

Another state representative suggested the law would lead to violent criminals with recent arrests and convictions legally carrying handguns.


-----

Now four years later, Maine has been named the safest state in the nation according to US News and World Report’s public safety rankings, which measures the fifty states based on crime data.



Ranking as the top safest state for violent crime and fourth for property crime, Maine edges out another New England state, Vermont, for the top spot. Of note, Vermont also is a “Constitutional Carry” state. New Hampshire ranks third in the national rankings, giving New England all three of the top spots in the nation.

In 2018, Maine was edged out by Vermont in the same “safest states” ranking, but declared the best state overall in the broader “Crime and Corrections” category.

In 2017, using a different methodology, Maine was ranked second among the fifty states in the “Crime and Corrections” category and also second in the categories used to rank the “safest states.”

The U.S. News and World Report “Best States” rankings are built in partnership with McKinsey & Company, a firm that works closely with state leaders around the nation.

Maine has also ranked at the top of other state rankings. WalletHub.com recently ranked Maine second in “Personal and Residential Safety” among the fifty states, and third overall.
=============

Bolsonaro's Brazil, More Legal Guns, Homicide Rates Down Precipitously

In December, 2018, in an article published by the Wall Street Journal, this pronouncement was made. From the wsj.com:

Now, Brazil is set to embark on an experiment that will determine what happens when you loosen gun restrictions in a country battling an overpowering wave of gun crime.

Homicides in Brazil were at historic highs in 2017. They dropped a bit in 2018, as candidate Bolsonaro ran on reform of the gun laws to allow self defense, and reform of the law to get tough on crime. The homicide numbers dropped from 59,000 in 2017, to 51,000 in 2018. President Bolsonaro was elected in October of 2018.

After taking office on 1 January, 2019, President Bolsonaro issued his first decree reforming some of Brazil's extreme gun laws on 15 January, 2019. The drop in Brazil's homicide rate accelerated.
-------

Early in the Bolsonaro presidency, a Brazilian lawyer prediceted the homicide rate would drop. From ammoland.com:

César Mello, asked that I include information that early reports are showing a 25% drop in Brazil's homicide rate, in the first quarter of 2019. If this trend continues, 16,000 lives will have been saved in the first year of President Bolsonaro's time in office.

The rate reduction was not quite that high. Only 10,000 lives were saved. From wtop.com:

Brazil had 41,635 killings in 2019, down 19% from the prior year and the least number of homicides since 2007, when the so-called Violence Monitor index was launched. It is a partnership between the non-profit Brazilian Forum of Public Security, the University of Sao Paulo’s Center for the Study of Violence, and news website G1, which published the data Friday.

When translated to homicide rates, the rate dropped 17% in 2018, then 23% more in 2019. The population of Brazil in 2019 was 210 million. The rate of homicides per 100,000 was 19.83. That is less than 2/3 of the homicide rate in 2017, which was 30.8.

 

[2aguy]

New research puts the 'good guy with a gun' idea to rest: Loose concealed-carry laws are linked to more firearm homicides

States with looser concealed-carry laws have higher rates of gun homicide. And higher gun-ownership rates are associated with more mass shootings.

www.yahoo.com

A new study found that states with looser concealed-carry gun laws have higher rates of gun homicide.

The results also showed that higher levels of gun ownership are associated with more mass shootings.

The study suggests the US could reduce gun violence by lowering levels of gun ownership and passing stricter concealed-carry laws.

Visit Business Insider's homepage for more stories.

The "good guy with a gun" theory goes like this: If more well-intentioned people carry guns, there's a higher chance of stopping a violent shooter.

Unfortunately, that's not how it works in real life, according to new research published in the journal Justice Quarterly. The study found that laws allowing more people to carry guns in public are associated with a rise in gun violence. The results also showed that the higher a state's gun-ownership rate, the more likely a mass shooting is.

Bullshit. The crime rate went down in every state that adopted concealed carry. It's almost certain the study is based on flawed assumptions.

Should I even bother asking for a source?

Defensive Gun Use Is Not a Myth

Yeah dude. No one ever said people haven’t defended themselves with guns. That is completely besides the point of what this article is saying is that “a good guy with a gun” does nothing to prevent mass shootings. More gun ownership is correlated with more gun violence. These are the facts that matter.

Mass shootings always happen where people aren't allowed to carry guns. More gun ownership correlates with gun violence because people living in high crime areas buy guns for protection.

What a fucking moron.

Uh no. As the study states, in the areas where gun ownership is higher, mass shootings are more common.

You can’t even bother with statistics that counter mine.

Moron....there were a grand total of 10 mass public shootings in 2019......10.

She is full of crap.

Here you go...the number of mass public shootings according to Mother Jones...rabid, anti gun, left wing news source.....not the NRA...

The list below comes from the old definition of 4 killed to make a shooting a mass shooting...if you now go to the link there are more than listed below...but that is because Mother Jones changed the list from the time I first posted it...and changed to obama's new standard of only 3 dead to make a mass shooting...

I have put obama's updated number in parenthesis..........

we will see....


US Mass Shootings, 1982-2015: Data From Mother Jones' Investigation

2019....10

2018... 12

2017: 11 ( 5 according to the old standard)

2016....6

2015....4 ( obama's new standard....7)

2014....2 (4)

2013....5

2012....7

2011....3

2010....1

2009....4

2008....3

2007....4

2006....3

2005...2

2004....1

2003...1

2002 not listed so more than likely 0

2001....1

2000....1

1999....5

1998...3

1997....2

1996....1

1995...1

1994...1

1993...4

1992...2

1991...3

1990...1

1989...2

1988....1

1987...1

1986...1

1985... not listed so probably 0

1984...2

1983...not listed so probably 0

1982...1
US Mass Shootings, 1982-2015: Data From Mother Jones' Investigation

US Mass Shootings, 1982-2015: Data From Mother Jones' Investigation


Rental Truck in Nice, France, 86 murdered in 5 minutes...

Total number murdered in mass public shootings by year...

Lawn mower deaths every year.... more than 75

(https://munews.missouri.edu/news-releases/2007/0419-lawn-mowers.php)
2019....73
2018.....93
2017........117
2016......71
2015......37
2014..... 9
2013..... 36
2012..... 72
2011..... 19
2010....9
2009...39
2008...18
2007...54
2006...21
2005...17
2004...5
2003...7
2002...not listed by mother jones
2001...5
2000...7
1999...42
1998...14
1997...9
1996...6
1995...6
1994....5
1993...23
1992...9
1991...35
1990...10
1989...15
1988...7
1987...6
1986...15
1985...(none listed)
1984...28
1983 (none listed)
1982...8