Brain357
Platinum Member
- Mar 30, 2013
- 37,068
- 4,189
- 1,130
Kleck flip flops. He has also said as has Lott that most defenses happen at home where everyone but felons can legally have a gun.
"Reasonable" gun control vs "gun nut gun control"
- Thread starter M14 Shooter
- Start date
Kleck flip flops. He has also said as has Lott that most defenses happen at home where everyone but felons can legally have a gun.
- Moderator
- #142
Absolutely.
2aguy
Diamond Member
- Jul 19, 2014
- 112,236
- 52,460
- 2,290
I just averaged the studies......which were conducted by different researchers, from both private and public researchers, over a period of 40 years looking specifically at guns and self defense....the name of the researcher is first, then the year then the number of times they determined guns were used for self defense......notice how many of them there are and how many of them were done by gun grabbers like the clinton Justice Dept. and the obama CDC
And these aren't all of the studies either...there are more...and they support the ones below.....
A quick guide to the studies and the numbers.....the full lay out of what was studied by each study is in the links....
GunCite-Gun Control-How Often Are Guns Used in Self-Defense
GunCite Frequency of Defensive Gun Use in Previous Surveys
Field...1976....3,052,717 ( no cops, military)
DMIa 1978...2,141,512 ( no cops, military)
L.A. TIMES...1994...3,609,68 ( no cops, military)
Kleck...2.5 million ( no cops, military)
Obama's CDC....2013....500,000--3million
--------------------
Bordua...1977...1,414,544
DMIb...1978...1,098,409 ( no cops, military)
Hart...1981...1.797,461 ( no cops, military)
Mauser...1990...1,487,342 ( no cops, military)
Gallup...1993...1,621,377 ( no cops, military)
DEPT. OF JUSTICE...1994...1.5 million
Journal of Quantitative Criminology--- 989,883 times per year."
-------------------------------------------
Ohio...1982...771,043
Gallup...1991...777,152
Tarrance... 1994... 764,036 (no cops, military)
Lawerence Southwich Jr. 400,000 fewer violent crimes and at least 800,000 violent crimes deterred..
*****************************************
If you take the studies from that Kleck cites in his paper, 16 of them....and you only average the ones that exclude military and police shootings..the average becomes 2 million...I use those studies because I have the details on them...and they are still 10 studies (including Kleck's)....
And here we have studies that show that guns are the most effective way to stop a rape.....
Guns Effective Defense Against Rape
A woman using a gun is less likely to be raped and more likely to not be injured during the attack....
Guns Effective Defense Against Rape
However, most recent studies with improved methodology are consistently showing that the more forceful the resistance, the lower the risk of a completed rape, with no increase in physical injury. Sarah Ullman's original research (Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 1998) and critical review of past studies (Criminal Justice and Behavior, 1997) are especially valuable in solidifying this conclusion.
I wish to single out one particular subtype of physical resistance: Use of a weapon, and especially a firearm, is statistically a woman's best means of resistance, greatly enhancing her odds of escaping both rape and injury, compared to any other strategy of physical or verbal resistance. This conclusion is drawn from four types of information.
First, a 1989 study (Furby, Journal of Interpersonal Violence) found that both male and female survey respondents judged a gun to be the most effective means that a potential rape victim could use to fend off the assault. Rape "experts" considered it a close second, after eye-gouging.
Second, raw data from the 1979-1985 installments of the Justice Department's annual National Crime Victim Survey show that when a woman resists a stranger rape with a gun, the probability of completion was 0.1 percent and of victim injury 0.0 percent, compared to 31 percent and 40 percent, respectively, for all stranger rapes (Kleck, Social Problems, 1990).
Third, a recent paper (Southwick, Journal of Criminal Justice, 2000) analyzed victim resistance to violent crimes generally, with robbery, aggravated assault and rape considered together. Women who resisted with a gun were 2.5 times more likely to escape without injury than those who did not resist and 4 times more likely to escape uninjured than those who resisted with any means other than a gun. Similarly, their property losses in a robbery were reduced more than six-fold and almost three-fold, respectively, compared to the other categories of resistance strategy.
Fourth, we have two studies in the last 20 years that directly address the outcomes of women who resist attempted rape with a weapon. (Lizotte, Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 1986; Kleck, Social Problems, 1990.) The former concludes,"Further, women who resist rape with a gun or knife dramatically decrease their probability of completion." (Lizotte did not analyze victim injuries apart from the rape itself.) The latter concludes that "resistance with a gun or knife is the most effective form of resistance for preventing completion of a rape"; this is accomplished "without creating any significant additional risk of other injury."
The best conclusion from available scientific data, then, is when avoidance of rape has failed and one must choose between being raped and resisting, a woman's best option is to resist with a gun in her hands.
********************
So, again a woman's best chance for stopping the rape and ultimately surviving the situation is to use a gun.....
***********************
http://www.hoboes.com/pub/Firearms/Data/Crime/Florida/Gun Ownership Stops Rape/
In Orlando, Florida, in 1966 a series of brutal rapes swept the
community. Citizens reacted to the tripling in the rate of rape
over the previous year by buying handguns for self-defense; 200-300
firearms were being purchased each week from dealers, and an unknown
number more from private parties. The newspaper there, the _Orlando
Sentinel Star_, had an anti-gun editorial stance and tried to pressure
the local police chief and city government to stop the flow of arms.
When that tactic failed, the paper decided that in the interest of
public safety, they would sponsor a gun-training seminar in conjunction
with the local police. Plans were made for a one-day training course at
a local city park.
Plans were made for an expected 400-500 women. However,
more than 2500 women arrived, and brought with them every conceivable
kind of firearm. They had to park many blocks away, and the weapons
were carried in in purses, paper bags, boxes, briefcases, holsters,
and womens' hands. One police officer present said he'd never been so
scared in his life. [It must have been quite a sight!]
Swamped, the organizers hastily dismissed the women with promises for
a more thorough course with scheduled appointments. The course offered
was for three classes/week, and within 6 months, the Orlando police had
trained more than 6000 women in basic pistol marksmanship and the law
of self-defense.
The results?
In 1966 there were 36 rapes in Orlando, triple the 1965 rate. In 1967,
there were 4.
Before the training, rape rates had been increasing in
Orlando as nationwide.
5 years after the training, rape was still
below pre-training levels in Orlando, but up 308% in the surrounding
areas, 96% for Florida overall, and 64% nationally.
Also in 1967, violent assault and burglary decreased by 25% in Orlando,
in addition to the rape reductions.
In 1967, NOT A SINGLE WOMAN HAD FIRED HER WEAPON in self-defense. In
1967, NOT A SINGLE WOMAN HAD TURNED HER GUN ON HER HUSBAND OR BOYFRIEND.
(No data are available for later years.)
The reason the program worked so spectacularly well is that it was
widely known that Orlando women had the means and training to defend
themselves from attackers. Rapists, being (somewhat) human, they are
learning engines; they took their business elsewhere--to the detriment
of the defenseless in those other locations.
Department of Justice victim studies show that overall, when rape is
attempted, the completion rate is 36%. But when a woman defends herself
with a gun, the completion rate drops to 3%.
And for 19.95 you can read Southwick's 2000 study on guns that talk about rape.....
Self-defense with guns The consequences
This one gives the actual percentages of how rapes are stopped...guns come out on top...
http://medind.nic.in/jal/t07/i4/jalt07i4p99.pdf
Here is Clinton's actual gun study...the number of 1.5 million is on page 9
https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles/165476.pdf
11 of the 16 say less than 2 million. Where do you account for decreased crime in your estimate? Why do you count studies that aren't national?
Not one study is less than 764,000....I don't account for it......ask Kleck or Lott, Lott is very responsive to contacting people...he even responded personally to my emails......you could get a lot of good info. by talking to him.....
And it is the anti gun extremists like you who say that if more Americans own or carry guns the crime rate will....not maybe, but will....go up. And yet the violent crime rate is going down, and the gun murder rate, specifically is going down, not up....it is up to you to explain why you are wrong and we were right.......since you claimed law abiding people owning and carrying guns would increase the crime rate...and that never happened....
2aguy
Diamond Member
- Jul 19, 2014
- 112,236
- 52,460
- 2,290
M14 Shooter
The Light of Truth
- Thread starter
- #145
Ah.
So, its not a stretch to say that the reason for the lower-than-US crime rates in other countries have more to do with the difference in their demo-socio-economic issues than their gun control?
Brain357
Platinum Member
- Mar 30, 2013
- 37,068
- 4,189
- 1,130
764k is like 500k in today's numbers. That's 25% of your crazy imaginary number.
I just averaged the studies......which were conducted by different researchers, from both private and public researchers, over a period of 40 years looking specifically at guns and self defense....the name of the researcher is first, then the year then the number of times they determined guns were used for self defense......notice how many of them there are and how many of them were done by gun grabbers like the clinton Justice Dept. and the obama CDC
And these aren't all of the studies either...there are more...and they support the ones below.....
A quick guide to the studies and the numbers.....the full lay out of what was studied by each study is in the links....
GunCite-Gun Control-How Often Are Guns Used in Self-Defense
GunCite Frequency of Defensive Gun Use in Previous Surveys
Field...1976....3,052,717 ( no cops, military)
DMIa 1978...2,141,512 ( no cops, military)
L.A. TIMES...1994...3,609,68 ( no cops, military)
Kleck...2.5 million ( no cops, military)
Obama's CDC....2013....500,000--3million
--------------------
Bordua...1977...1,414,544
DMIb...1978...1,098,409 ( no cops, military)
Hart...1981...1.797,461 ( no cops, military)
Mauser...1990...1,487,342 ( no cops, military)
Gallup...1993...1,621,377 ( no cops, military)
DEPT. OF JUSTICE...1994...1.5 million
Journal of Quantitative Criminology--- 989,883 times per year."
-------------------------------------------
Ohio...1982...771,043
Gallup...1991...777,152
Tarrance... 1994... 764,036 (no cops, military)
Lawerence Southwich Jr. 400,000 fewer violent crimes and at least 800,000 violent crimes deterred..
*****************************************
If you take the studies from that Kleck cites in his paper, 16 of them....and you only average the ones that exclude military and police shootings..the average becomes 2 million...I use those studies because I have the details on them...and they are still 10 studies (including Kleck's)....
And here we have studies that show that guns are the most effective way to stop a rape.....
Guns Effective Defense Against Rape
A woman using a gun is less likely to be raped and more likely to not be injured during the attack....
Guns Effective Defense Against Rape
However, most recent studies with improved methodology are consistently showing that the more forceful the resistance, the lower the risk of a completed rape, with no increase in physical injury. Sarah Ullman's original research (Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 1998) and critical review of past studies (Criminal Justice and Behavior, 1997) are especially valuable in solidifying this conclusion.
I wish to single out one particular subtype of physical resistance: Use of a weapon, and especially a firearm, is statistically a woman's best means of resistance, greatly enhancing her odds of escaping both rape and injury, compared to any other strategy of physical or verbal resistance. This conclusion is drawn from four types of information.
First, a 1989 study (Furby, Journal of Interpersonal Violence) found that both male and female survey respondents judged a gun to be the most effective means that a potential rape victim could use to fend off the assault. Rape "experts" considered it a close second, after eye-gouging.
Second, raw data from the 1979-1985 installments of the Justice Department's annual National Crime Victim Survey show that when a woman resists a stranger rape with a gun, the probability of completion was 0.1 percent and of victim injury 0.0 percent, compared to 31 percent and 40 percent, respectively, for all stranger rapes (Kleck, Social Problems, 1990).
Third, a recent paper (Southwick, Journal of Criminal Justice, 2000) analyzed victim resistance to violent crimes generally, with robbery, aggravated assault and rape considered together. Women who resisted with a gun were 2.5 times more likely to escape without injury than those who did not resist and 4 times more likely to escape uninjured than those who resisted with any means other than a gun. Similarly, their property losses in a robbery were reduced more than six-fold and almost three-fold, respectively, compared to the other categories of resistance strategy.
Fourth, we have two studies in the last 20 years that directly address the outcomes of women who resist attempted rape with a weapon. (Lizotte, Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 1986; Kleck, Social Problems, 1990.) The former concludes,"Further, women who resist rape with a gun or knife dramatically decrease their probability of completion." (Lizotte did not analyze victim injuries apart from the rape itself.) The latter concludes that "resistance with a gun or knife is the most effective form of resistance for preventing completion of a rape"; this is accomplished "without creating any significant additional risk of other injury."
The best conclusion from available scientific data, then, is when avoidance of rape has failed and one must choose between being raped and resisting, a woman's best option is to resist with a gun in her hands.
********************
So, again a woman's best chance for stopping the rape and ultimately surviving the situation is to use a gun.....
***********************
http://www.hoboes.com/pub/Firearms/Data/Crime/Florida/Gun Ownership Stops Rape/
In Orlando, Florida, in 1966 a series of brutal rapes swept the
community. Citizens reacted to the tripling in the rate of rape
over the previous year by buying handguns for self-defense; 200-300
firearms were being purchased each week from dealers, and an unknown
number more from private parties. The newspaper there, the _Orlando
Sentinel Star_, had an anti-gun editorial stance and tried to pressure
the local police chief and city government to stop the flow of arms.
When that tactic failed, the paper decided that in the interest of
public safety, they would sponsor a gun-training seminar in conjunction
with the local police. Plans were made for a one-day training course at
a local city park.
Plans were made for an expected 400-500 women. However,
more than 2500 women arrived, and brought with them every conceivable
kind of firearm. They had to park many blocks away, and the weapons
were carried in in purses, paper bags, boxes, briefcases, holsters,
and womens' hands. One police officer present said he'd never been so
scared in his life. [It must have been quite a sight!
Swamped, the organizers hastily dismissed the women with promises for
a more thorough course with scheduled appointments. The course offered
was for three classes/week, and within 6 months, the Orlando police had
trained more than 6000 women in basic pistol marksmanship and the law
of self-defense.
The results?
In 1966 there were 36 rapes in Orlando, triple the 1965 rate. In 1967,
there were 4.
Before the training, rape rates had been increasing in
Orlando as nationwide.
5 years after the training, rape was still
below pre-training levels in Orlando, but up 308% in the surrounding
areas, 96% for Florida overall, and 64% nationally.
Also in 1967, violent assault and burglary decreased by 25% in Orlando,
in addition to the rape reductions.
In 1967, NOT A SINGLE WOMAN HAD FIRED HER WEAPON in self-defense. In
1967, NOT A SINGLE WOMAN HAD TURNED HER GUN ON HER HUSBAND OR BOYFRIEND.
(No data are available for later years.)
The reason the program worked so spectacularly well is that it was
widely known that Orlando women had the means and training to defend
themselves from attackers. Rapists, being (somewhat) human, they are
learning engines; they took their business elsewhere--to the detriment
of the defenseless in those other locations.
Department of Justice victim studies show that overall, when rape is
attempted, the completion rate is 36%. But when a woman defends herself
with a gun, the completion rate drops to 3%.
And for 19.95 you can read Southwick's 2000 study on guns that talk about rape.....
Self-defense with guns The consequences
This one gives the actual percentages of how rapes are stopped...guns come out on top...
http://medind.nic.in/jal/t07/i4/jalt07i4p99.pdf
Here is Clinton's actual gun study...the number of 1.5 million is on page 9
https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles/165476.pdf
11 of the 16 say less than 2 million. Where do you account for decreased crime in your estimate? Why do you count studies that aren't national?
Not one study is less than 764,000....I don't account for it......ask Kleck or Lott, Lott is very responsive to contacting people...he even responded personally to my emails......you could get a lot of good info. by talking to him.....
And it is the anti gun extremists like you who say that if more Americans own or carry guns the crime rate will....not maybe, but will....go up. And yet the violent crime rate is going down, and the gun murder rate, specifically is going down, not up....it is up to you to explain why you are wrong and we were right.......since you claimed law abiding people owning and carrying guns would increase the crime rate...and that never happened....
Brain357
Platinum Member
- Mar 30, 2013
- 37,068
- 4,189
- 1,130
Your 2 million now that is embarassing.
Brain357
Platinum Member
- Mar 30, 2013
- 37,068
- 4,189
- 1,130
I just averaged the studies......which were conducted by different researchers, from both private and public researchers, over a period of 40 years looking specifically at guns and self defense....the name of the researcher is first, then the year then the number of times they determined guns were used for self defense......notice how many of them there are and how many of them were done by gun grabbers like the clinton Justice Dept. and the obama CDC
And these aren't all of the studies either...there are more...and they support the ones below.....
A quick guide to the studies and the numbers.....the full lay out of what was studied by each study is in the links....
GunCite-Gun Control-How Often Are Guns Used in Self-Defense
GunCite Frequency of Defensive Gun Use in Previous Surveys
Field...1976....3,052,717 ( no cops, military)
DMIa 1978...2,141,512 ( no cops, military)
L.A. TIMES...1994...3,609,68 ( no cops, military)
Kleck...2.5 million ( no cops, military)
Obama's CDC....2013....500,000--3million
--------------------
Bordua...1977...1,414,544
DMIb...1978...1,098,409 ( no cops, military)
Hart...1981...1.797,461 ( no cops, military)
Mauser...1990...1,487,342 ( no cops, military)
Gallup...1993...1,621,377 ( no cops, military)
DEPT. OF JUSTICE...1994...1.5 million
Journal of Quantitative Criminology--- 989,883 times per year."
-------------------------------------------
Ohio...1982...771,043
Gallup...1991...777,152
Tarrance... 1994... 764,036 (no cops, military)
Lawerence Southwich Jr. 400,000 fewer violent crimes and at least 800,000 violent crimes deterred..
*****************************************
If you take the studies from that Kleck cites in his paper, 16 of them....and you only average the ones that exclude military and police shootings..the average becomes 2 million...I use those studies because I have the details on them...and they are still 10 studies (including Kleck's)....
And here we have studies that show that guns are the most effective way to stop a rape.....
Guns Effective Defense Against Rape
A woman using a gun is less likely to be raped and more likely to not be injured during the attack....
Guns Effective Defense Against Rape
However, most recent studies with improved methodology are consistently showing that the more forceful the resistance, the lower the risk of a completed rape, with no increase in physical injury. Sarah Ullman's original research (Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 1998) and critical review of past studies (Criminal Justice and Behavior, 1997) are especially valuable in solidifying this conclusion.
I wish to single out one particular subtype of physical resistance: Use of a weapon, and especially a firearm, is statistically a woman's best means of resistance, greatly enhancing her odds of escaping both rape and injury, compared to any other strategy of physical or verbal resistance. This conclusion is drawn from four types of information.
First, a 1989 study (Furby, Journal of Interpersonal Violence) found that both male and female survey respondents judged a gun to be the most effective means that a potential rape victim could use to fend off the assault. Rape "experts" considered it a close second, after eye-gouging.
Second, raw data from the 1979-1985 installments of the Justice Department's annual National Crime Victim Survey show that when a woman resists a stranger rape with a gun, the probability of completion was 0.1 percent and of victim injury 0.0 percent, compared to 31 percent and 40 percent, respectively, for all stranger rapes (Kleck, Social Problems, 1990).
Third, a recent paper (Southwick, Journal of Criminal Justice, 2000) analyzed victim resistance to violent crimes generally, with robbery, aggravated assault and rape considered together. Women who resisted with a gun were 2.5 times more likely to escape without injury than those who did not resist and 4 times more likely to escape uninjured than those who resisted with any means other than a gun. Similarly, their property losses in a robbery were reduced more than six-fold and almost three-fold, respectively, compared to the other categories of resistance strategy.
Fourth, we have two studies in the last 20 years that directly address the outcomes of women who resist attempted rape with a weapon. (Lizotte, Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 1986; Kleck, Social Problems, 1990.) The former concludes,"Further, women who resist rape with a gun or knife dramatically decrease their probability of completion." (Lizotte did not analyze victim injuries apart from the rape itself.) The latter concludes that "resistance with a gun or knife is the most effective form of resistance for preventing completion of a rape"; this is accomplished "without creating any significant additional risk of other injury."
The best conclusion from available scientific data, then, is when avoidance of rape has failed and one must choose between being raped and resisting, a woman's best option is to resist with a gun in her hands.
********************
So, again a woman's best chance for stopping the rape and ultimately surviving the situation is to use a gun.....
***********************
http://www.hoboes.com/pub/Firearms/Data/Crime/Florida/Gun Ownership Stops Rape/
In Orlando, Florida, in 1966 a series of brutal rapes swept the
community. Citizens reacted to the tripling in the rate of rape
over the previous year by buying handguns for self-defense; 200-300
firearms were being purchased each week from dealers, and an unknown
number more from private parties. The newspaper there, the _Orlando
Sentinel Star_, had an anti-gun editorial stance and tried to pressure
the local police chief and city government to stop the flow of arms.
When that tactic failed, the paper decided that in the interest of
public safety, they would sponsor a gun-training seminar in conjunction
with the local police. Plans were made for a one-day training course at
a local city park.
Plans were made for an expected 400-500 women. However,
more than 2500 women arrived, and brought with them every conceivable
kind of firearm. They had to park many blocks away, and the weapons
were carried in in purses, paper bags, boxes, briefcases, holsters,
and womens' hands. One police officer present said he'd never been so
scared in his life. [It must have been quite a sight!
Swamped, the organizers hastily dismissed the women with promises for
a more thorough course with scheduled appointments. The course offered
was for three classes/week, and within 6 months, the Orlando police had
trained more than 6000 women in basic pistol marksmanship and the law
of self-defense.
The results?
In 1966 there were 36 rapes in Orlando, triple the 1965 rate. In 1967,
there were 4.
Before the training, rape rates had been increasing in
Orlando as nationwide.
5 years after the training, rape was still
below pre-training levels in Orlando, but up 308% in the surrounding
areas, 96% for Florida overall, and 64% nationally.
Also in 1967, violent assault and burglary decreased by 25% in Orlando,
in addition to the rape reductions.
In 1967, NOT A SINGLE WOMAN HAD FIRED HER WEAPON in self-defense. In
1967, NOT A SINGLE WOMAN HAD TURNED HER GUN ON HER HUSBAND OR BOYFRIEND.
(No data are available for later years.)
The reason the program worked so spectacularly well is that it was
widely known that Orlando women had the means and training to defend
themselves from attackers. Rapists, being (somewhat) human, they are
learning engines; they took their business elsewhere--to the detriment
of the defenseless in those other locations.
Department of Justice victim studies show that overall, when rape is
attempted, the completion rate is 36%. But when a woman defends herself
with a gun, the completion rate drops to 3%.
And for 19.95 you can read Southwick's 2000 study on guns that talk about rape.....
Self-defense with guns The consequences
This one gives the actual percentages of how rapes are stopped...guns come out on top...
http://medind.nic.in/jal/t07/i4/jalt07i4p99.pdf
Here is Clinton's actual gun study...the number of 1.5 million is on page 9
https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles/165476.pdf
11 of the 16 say less than 2 million. Where do you account for decreased crime in your estimate? Why do you count studies that aren't national?
Not one study is less than 764,000....I don't account for it......ask Kleck or Lott, Lott is very responsive to contacting people...he even responded personally to my emails......you could get a lot of good info. by talking to him.....
And it is the anti gun extremists like you who say that if more Americans own or carry guns the crime rate will....not maybe, but will....go up. And yet the violent crime rate is going down, and the gun murder rate, specifically is going down, not up....it is up to you to explain why you are wrong and we were right.......since you claimed law abiding people owning and carrying guns would increase the crime rate...and that never happened....
Let me state again, ownership does not effect crime rates.
- Feb 12, 2007
- 59,439
- 24,106
- 2,290
The Progs are focused on their FAKE reasonable gun control because it is far more lucrative for extorting money from the Stupid Americans Who Need To Be Protected From Themselves.
Mentally ill gun owners are such a tiny minority; they are too small of a pool to feed the Gun Hating Industry.
Mentally ill gun owners are such a tiny minority; they are too small of a pool to feed the Gun Hating Industry.
M14 Shooter
The Light of Truth
- Thread starter
- #151
Pretty sure that Brain will disagree with this,.
He'll have to lie his ass off to do it, but that's not new.
Brain357
Platinum Member
- Mar 30, 2013
- 37,068
- 4,189
- 1,130
No I think those factors effect crime rates. Inequality probably most effects them.
2aguy
Diamond Member
- Jul 19, 2014
- 112,236
- 52,460
- 2,290
I just averaged the studies......which were conducted by different researchers, from both private and public researchers, over a period of 40 years looking specifically at guns and self defense....the name of the researcher is first, then the year then the number of times they determined guns were used for self defense......notice how many of them there are and how many of them were done by gun grabbers like the clinton Justice Dept. and the obama CDC
And these aren't all of the studies either...there are more...and they support the ones below.....
A quick guide to the studies and the numbers.....the full lay out of what was studied by each study is in the links....
GunCite-Gun Control-How Often Are Guns Used in Self-Defense
GunCite Frequency of Defensive Gun Use in Previous Surveys
Field...1976....3,052,717 ( no cops, military)
DMIa 1978...2,141,512 ( no cops, military)
L.A. TIMES...1994...3,609,68 ( no cops, military)
Kleck...2.5 million ( no cops, military)
Obama's CDC....2013....500,000--3million
--------------------
Bordua...1977...1,414,544
DMIb...1978...1,098,409 ( no cops, military)
Hart...1981...1.797,461 ( no cops, military)
Mauser...1990...1,487,342 ( no cops, military)
Gallup...1993...1,621,377 ( no cops, military)
DEPT. OF JUSTICE...1994...1.5 million
Journal of Quantitative Criminology--- 989,883 times per year."
-------------------------------------------
Ohio...1982...771,043
Gallup...1991...777,152
Tarrance... 1994... 764,036 (no cops, military)
Lawerence Southwich Jr. 400,000 fewer violent crimes and at least 800,000 violent crimes deterred..
*****************************************
If you take the studies from that Kleck cites in his paper, 16 of them....and you only average the ones that exclude military and police shootings..the average becomes 2 million...I use those studies because I have the details on them...and they are still 10 studies (including Kleck's)....
And here we have studies that show that guns are the most effective way to stop a rape.....
Guns Effective Defense Against Rape
A woman using a gun is less likely to be raped and more likely to not be injured during the attack....
Guns Effective Defense Against Rape
However, most recent studies with improved methodology are consistently showing that the more forceful the resistance, the lower the risk of a completed rape, with no increase in physical injury. Sarah Ullman's original research (Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 1998) and critical review of past studies (Criminal Justice and Behavior, 1997) are especially valuable in solidifying this conclusion.
I wish to single out one particular subtype of physical resistance: Use of a weapon, and especially a firearm, is statistically a woman's best means of resistance, greatly enhancing her odds of escaping both rape and injury, compared to any other strategy of physical or verbal resistance. This conclusion is drawn from four types of information.
First, a 1989 study (Furby, Journal of Interpersonal Violence) found that both male and female survey respondents judged a gun to be the most effective means that a potential rape victim could use to fend off the assault. Rape "experts" considered it a close second, after eye-gouging.
Second, raw data from the 1979-1985 installments of the Justice Department's annual National Crime Victim Survey show that when a woman resists a stranger rape with a gun, the probability of completion was 0.1 percent and of victim injury 0.0 percent, compared to 31 percent and 40 percent, respectively, for all stranger rapes (Kleck, Social Problems, 1990).
Third, a recent paper (Southwick, Journal of Criminal Justice, 2000) analyzed victim resistance to violent crimes generally, with robbery, aggravated assault and rape considered together. Women who resisted with a gun were 2.5 times more likely to escape without injury than those who did not resist and 4 times more likely to escape uninjured than those who resisted with any means other than a gun. Similarly, their property losses in a robbery were reduced more than six-fold and almost three-fold, respectively, compared to the other categories of resistance strategy.
Fourth, we have two studies in the last 20 years that directly address the outcomes of women who resist attempted rape with a weapon. (Lizotte, Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 1986; Kleck, Social Problems, 1990.) The former concludes,"Further, women who resist rape with a gun or knife dramatically decrease their probability of completion." (Lizotte did not analyze victim injuries apart from the rape itself.) The latter concludes that "resistance with a gun or knife is the most effective form of resistance for preventing completion of a rape"; this is accomplished "without creating any significant additional risk of other injury."
The best conclusion from available scientific data, then, is when avoidance of rape has failed and one must choose between being raped and resisting, a woman's best option is to resist with a gun in her hands.
********************
So, again a woman's best chance for stopping the rape and ultimately surviving the situation is to use a gun.....
***********************
http://www.hoboes.com/pub/Firearms/Data/Crime/Florida/Gun Ownership Stops Rape/
In Orlando, Florida, in 1966 a series of brutal rapes swept the
community. Citizens reacted to the tripling in the rate of rape
over the previous year by buying handguns for self-defense; 200-300
firearms were being purchased each week from dealers, and an unknown
number more from private parties. The newspaper there, the _Orlando
Sentinel Star_, had an anti-gun editorial stance and tried to pressure
the local police chief and city government to stop the flow of arms.
When that tactic failed, the paper decided that in the interest of
public safety, they would sponsor a gun-training seminar in conjunction
with the local police. Plans were made for a one-day training course at
a local city park.
Plans were made for an expected 400-500 women. However,
more than 2500 women arrived, and brought with them every conceivable
kind of firearm. They had to park many blocks away, and the weapons
were carried in in purses, paper bags, boxes, briefcases, holsters,
and womens' hands. One police officer present said he'd never been so
scared in his life. [It must have been quite a sight!
Swamped, the organizers hastily dismissed the women with promises for
a more thorough course with scheduled appointments. The course offered
was for three classes/week, and within 6 months, the Orlando police had
trained more than 6000 women in basic pistol marksmanship and the law
of self-defense.
The results?
In 1966 there were 36 rapes in Orlando, triple the 1965 rate. In 1967,
there were 4.
Before the training, rape rates had been increasing in
Orlando as nationwide.
5 years after the training, rape was still
below pre-training levels in Orlando, but up 308% in the surrounding
areas, 96% for Florida overall, and 64% nationally.
Also in 1967, violent assault and burglary decreased by 25% in Orlando,
in addition to the rape reductions.
In 1967, NOT A SINGLE WOMAN HAD FIRED HER WEAPON in self-defense. In
1967, NOT A SINGLE WOMAN HAD TURNED HER GUN ON HER HUSBAND OR BOYFRIEND.
(No data are available for later years.)
The reason the program worked so spectacularly well is that it was
widely known that Orlando women had the means and training to defend
themselves from attackers. Rapists, being (somewhat) human, they are
learning engines; they took their business elsewhere--to the detriment
of the defenseless in those other locations.
Department of Justice victim studies show that overall, when rape is
attempted, the completion rate is 36%. But when a woman defends herself
with a gun, the completion rate drops to 3%.
And for 19.95 you can read Southwick's 2000 study on guns that talk about rape.....
Self-defense with guns The consequences
This one gives the actual percentages of how rapes are stopped...guns come out on top...
http://medind.nic.in/jal/t07/i4/jalt07i4p99.pdf
Here is Clinton's actual gun study...the number of 1.5 million is on page 9
https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles/165476.pdf
11 of the 16 say less than 2 million. Where do you account for decreased crime in your estimate? Why do you count studies that aren't national?
Not one study is less than 764,000....I don't account for it......ask Kleck or Lott, Lott is very responsive to contacting people...he even responded personally to my emails......you could get a lot of good info. by talking to him.....
And it is the anti gun extremists like you who say that if more Americans own or carry guns the crime rate will....not maybe, but will....go up. And yet the violent crime rate is going down, and the gun murder rate, specifically is going down, not up....it is up to you to explain why you are wrong and we were right.......since you claimed law abiding people owning and carrying guns would increase the crime rate...and that never happened....
Let me state again, ownership does not effect crime rates.
This study says you are wrong...
2aguy
Diamond Member
- Jul 19, 2014
- 112,236
- 52,460
- 2,290
I just averaged the studies......which were conducted by different researchers, from both private and public researchers, over a period of 40 years looking specifically at guns and self defense....the name of the researcher is first, then the year then the number of times they determined guns were used for self defense......notice how many of them there are and how many of them were done by gun grabbers like the clinton Justice Dept. and the obama CDC
And these aren't all of the studies either...there are more...and they support the ones below.....
A quick guide to the studies and the numbers.....the full lay out of what was studied by each study is in the links....
GunCite-Gun Control-How Often Are Guns Used in Self-Defense
GunCite Frequency of Defensive Gun Use in Previous Surveys
Field...1976....3,052,717 ( no cops, military)
DMIa 1978...2,141,512 ( no cops, military)
L.A. TIMES...1994...3,609,68 ( no cops, military)
Kleck...2.5 million ( no cops, military)
Obama's CDC....2013....500,000--3million
--------------------
Bordua...1977...1,414,544
DMIb...1978...1,098,409 ( no cops, military)
Hart...1981...1.797,461 ( no cops, military)
Mauser...1990...1,487,342 ( no cops, military)
Gallup...1993...1,621,377 ( no cops, military)
DEPT. OF JUSTICE...1994...1.5 million
Journal of Quantitative Criminology--- 989,883 times per year."
-------------------------------------------
Ohio...1982...771,043
Gallup...1991...777,152
Tarrance... 1994... 764,036 (no cops, military)
Lawerence Southwich Jr. 400,000 fewer violent crimes and at least 800,000 violent crimes deterred..
*****************************************
If you take the studies from that Kleck cites in his paper, 16 of them....and you only average the ones that exclude military and police shootings..the average becomes 2 million...I use those studies because I have the details on them...and they are still 10 studies (including Kleck's)....
And here we have studies that show that guns are the most effective way to stop a rape.....
Guns Effective Defense Against Rape
A woman using a gun is less likely to be raped and more likely to not be injured during the attack....
Guns Effective Defense Against Rape
However, most recent studies with improved methodology are consistently showing that the more forceful the resistance, the lower the risk of a completed rape, with no increase in physical injury. Sarah Ullman's original research (Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 1998) and critical review of past studies (Criminal Justice and Behavior, 1997) are especially valuable in solidifying this conclusion.
I wish to single out one particular subtype of physical resistance: Use of a weapon, and especially a firearm, is statistically a woman's best means of resistance, greatly enhancing her odds of escaping both rape and injury, compared to any other strategy of physical or verbal resistance. This conclusion is drawn from four types of information.
First, a 1989 study (Furby, Journal of Interpersonal Violence) found that both male and female survey respondents judged a gun to be the most effective means that a potential rape victim could use to fend off the assault. Rape "experts" considered it a close second, after eye-gouging.
Second, raw data from the 1979-1985 installments of the Justice Department's annual National Crime Victim Survey show that when a woman resists a stranger rape with a gun, the probability of completion was 0.1 percent and of victim injury 0.0 percent, compared to 31 percent and 40 percent, respectively, for all stranger rapes (Kleck, Social Problems, 1990).
Third, a recent paper (Southwick, Journal of Criminal Justice, 2000) analyzed victim resistance to violent crimes generally, with robbery, aggravated assault and rape considered together. Women who resisted with a gun were 2.5 times more likely to escape without injury than those who did not resist and 4 times more likely to escape uninjured than those who resisted with any means other than a gun. Similarly, their property losses in a robbery were reduced more than six-fold and almost three-fold, respectively, compared to the other categories of resistance strategy.
Fourth, we have two studies in the last 20 years that directly address the outcomes of women who resist attempted rape with a weapon. (Lizotte, Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 1986; Kleck, Social Problems, 1990.) The former concludes,"Further, women who resist rape with a gun or knife dramatically decrease their probability of completion." (Lizotte did not analyze victim injuries apart from the rape itself.) The latter concludes that "resistance with a gun or knife is the most effective form of resistance for preventing completion of a rape"; this is accomplished "without creating any significant additional risk of other injury."
The best conclusion from available scientific data, then, is when avoidance of rape has failed and one must choose between being raped and resisting, a woman's best option is to resist with a gun in her hands.
********************
So, again a woman's best chance for stopping the rape and ultimately surviving the situation is to use a gun.....
***********************
http://www.hoboes.com/pub/Firearms/Data/Crime/Florida/Gun Ownership Stops Rape/
In Orlando, Florida, in 1966 a series of brutal rapes swept the
community. Citizens reacted to the tripling in the rate of rape
over the previous year by buying handguns for self-defense; 200-300
firearms were being purchased each week from dealers, and an unknown
number more from private parties. The newspaper there, the _Orlando
Sentinel Star_, had an anti-gun editorial stance and tried to pressure
the local police chief and city government to stop the flow of arms.
When that tactic failed, the paper decided that in the interest of
public safety, they would sponsor a gun-training seminar in conjunction
with the local police. Plans were made for a one-day training course at
a local city park.
Plans were made for an expected 400-500 women. However,
more than 2500 women arrived, and brought with them every conceivable
kind of firearm. They had to park many blocks away, and the weapons
were carried in in purses, paper bags, boxes, briefcases, holsters,
and womens' hands. One police officer present said he'd never been so
scared in his life. [It must have been quite a sight!
Swamped, the organizers hastily dismissed the women with promises for
a more thorough course with scheduled appointments. The course offered
was for three classes/week, and within 6 months, the Orlando police had
trained more than 6000 women in basic pistol marksmanship and the law
of self-defense.
The results?
In 1966 there were 36 rapes in Orlando, triple the 1965 rate. In 1967,
there were 4.
Before the training, rape rates had been increasing in
Orlando as nationwide.
5 years after the training, rape was still
below pre-training levels in Orlando, but up 308% in the surrounding
areas, 96% for Florida overall, and 64% nationally.
Also in 1967, violent assault and burglary decreased by 25% in Orlando,
in addition to the rape reductions.
In 1967, NOT A SINGLE WOMAN HAD FIRED HER WEAPON in self-defense. In
1967, NOT A SINGLE WOMAN HAD TURNED HER GUN ON HER HUSBAND OR BOYFRIEND.
(No data are available for later years.)
The reason the program worked so spectacularly well is that it was
widely known that Orlando women had the means and training to defend
themselves from attackers. Rapists, being (somewhat) human, they are
learning engines; they took their business elsewhere--to the detriment
of the defenseless in those other locations.
Department of Justice victim studies show that overall, when rape is
attempted, the completion rate is 36%. But when a woman defends herself
with a gun, the completion rate drops to 3%.
And for 19.95 you can read Southwick's 2000 study on guns that talk about rape.....
Self-defense with guns The consequences
This one gives the actual percentages of how rapes are stopped...guns come out on top...
http://medind.nic.in/jal/t07/i4/jalt07i4p99.pdf
Here is Clinton's actual gun study...the number of 1.5 million is on page 9
https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles/165476.pdf
11 of the 16 say less than 2 million. Where do you account for decreased crime in your estimate? Why do you count studies that aren't national?
Not one study is less than 764,000....I don't account for it......ask Kleck or Lott, Lott is very responsive to contacting people...he even responded personally to my emails......you could get a lot of good info. by talking to him.....
And it is the anti gun extremists like you who say that if more Americans own or carry guns the crime rate will....not maybe, but will....go up. And yet the violent crime rate is going down, and the gun murder rate, specifically is going down, not up....it is up to you to explain why you are wrong and we were right.......since you claimed law abiding people owning and carrying guns would increase the crime rate...and that never happened....
Let me state again, ownership does not effect crime rates.
An Error Occurred Setting Your User Cookie
Applied Economics Letters
Volume 21, Issue 4, 2014
▼Translator disclaimer
An examination of the effects of concealed weapons laws and assault weapons bans on state-level murder rates
The present study differs from this prior research in several ways. First, data for the period 1980 to 2009 is examined; this is one of the longest time periods examined in any research on assault weapons bans or CCW laws. Second, the gun-related murder rate is used as the dependent variable. The use of this crime rate is important because most other studies looked at violent crime rates or homicide rates. Violent crime rate data is not disaggregated into gun-related violent crime and non gun violent crime, and homicides include justifiable killings and state-sanctioned killings; hence, an analysis using these types of crime rates may result in spurious conclusions.
**************
**************
Results are presented on Table 1. The CCW dummy variable is significant and positive, but the assault weapons ban is insignificant. Given that the average gun-related murder rate over the period in question was 3.44, the results of the present study indicate that states with more restrictive CCW laws had gun-related murder rates that were 10% higher. In addition, the Federal assault weapons ban is significant and positive, indicating that murder rates were 19.3% higher when the Federal ban was in effect. These results corroborate the findings of Lott and Mustard (1997). These results suggest that, even after controlling for unobservable state and year fixed effects, limiting the ability to carry concealed weapons may cause murder rates to increase. There may, however, be other explanations for these results. Laws may be ineffective due to loopholes and exemptions. The most violent states may also have the toughest gun control measures. Further research is warranted in this area.
Last edited:
Brain357
Platinum Member
- Mar 30, 2013
- 37,068
- 4,189
- 1,130
I just averaged the studies......which were conducted by different researchers, from both private and public researchers, over a period of 40 years looking specifically at guns and self defense....the name of the researcher is first, then the year then the number of times they determined guns were used for self defense......notice how many of them there are and how many of them were done by gun grabbers like the clinton Justice Dept. and the obama CDC
And these aren't all of the studies either...there are more...and they support the ones below.....
A quick guide to the studies and the numbers.....the full lay out of what was studied by each study is in the links....
GunCite-Gun Control-How Often Are Guns Used in Self-Defense
GunCite Frequency of Defensive Gun Use in Previous Surveys
Field...1976....3,052,717 ( no cops, military)
DMIa 1978...2,141,512 ( no cops, military)
L.A. TIMES...1994...3,609,68 ( no cops, military)
Kleck...2.5 million ( no cops, military)
Obama's CDC....2013....500,000--3million
--------------------
Bordua...1977...1,414,544
DMIb...1978...1,098,409 ( no cops, military)
Hart...1981...1.797,461 ( no cops, military)
Mauser...1990...1,487,342 ( no cops, military)
Gallup...1993...1,621,377 ( no cops, military)
DEPT. OF JUSTICE...1994...1.5 million
Journal of Quantitative Criminology--- 989,883 times per year."
-------------------------------------------
Ohio...1982...771,043
Gallup...1991...777,152
Tarrance... 1994... 764,036 (no cops, military)
Lawerence Southwich Jr. 400,000 fewer violent crimes and at least 800,000 violent crimes deterred..
*****************************************
If you take the studies from that Kleck cites in his paper, 16 of them....and you only average the ones that exclude military and police shootings..the average becomes 2 million...I use those studies because I have the details on them...and they are still 10 studies (including Kleck's)....
And here we have studies that show that guns are the most effective way to stop a rape.....
Guns Effective Defense Against Rape
A woman using a gun is less likely to be raped and more likely to not be injured during the attack....
Guns Effective Defense Against Rape
However, most recent studies with improved methodology are consistently showing that the more forceful the resistance, the lower the risk of a completed rape, with no increase in physical injury. Sarah Ullman's original research (Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 1998) and critical review of past studies (Criminal Justice and Behavior, 1997) are especially valuable in solidifying this conclusion.
I wish to single out one particular subtype of physical resistance: Use of a weapon, and especially a firearm, is statistically a woman's best means of resistance, greatly enhancing her odds of escaping both rape and injury, compared to any other strategy of physical or verbal resistance. This conclusion is drawn from four types of information.
First, a 1989 study (Furby, Journal of Interpersonal Violence) found that both male and female survey respondents judged a gun to be the most effective means that a potential rape victim could use to fend off the assault. Rape "experts" considered it a close second, after eye-gouging.
Second, raw data from the 1979-1985 installments of the Justice Department's annual National Crime Victim Survey show that when a woman resists a stranger rape with a gun, the probability of completion was 0.1 percent and of victim injury 0.0 percent, compared to 31 percent and 40 percent, respectively, for all stranger rapes (Kleck, Social Problems, 1990).
Third, a recent paper (Southwick, Journal of Criminal Justice, 2000) analyzed victim resistance to violent crimes generally, with robbery, aggravated assault and rape considered together. Women who resisted with a gun were 2.5 times more likely to escape without injury than those who did not resist and 4 times more likely to escape uninjured than those who resisted with any means other than a gun. Similarly, their property losses in a robbery were reduced more than six-fold and almost three-fold, respectively, compared to the other categories of resistance strategy.
Fourth, we have two studies in the last 20 years that directly address the outcomes of women who resist attempted rape with a weapon. (Lizotte, Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 1986; Kleck, Social Problems, 1990.) The former concludes,"Further, women who resist rape with a gun or knife dramatically decrease their probability of completion." (Lizotte did not analyze victim injuries apart from the rape itself.) The latter concludes that "resistance with a gun or knife is the most effective form of resistance for preventing completion of a rape"; this is accomplished "without creating any significant additional risk of other injury."
The best conclusion from available scientific data, then, is when avoidance of rape has failed and one must choose between being raped and resisting, a woman's best option is to resist with a gun in her hands.
********************
So, again a woman's best chance for stopping the rape and ultimately surviving the situation is to use a gun.....
***********************
http://www.hoboes.com/pub/Firearms/Data/Crime/Florida/Gun Ownership Stops Rape/
In Orlando, Florida, in 1966 a series of brutal rapes swept the
community. Citizens reacted to the tripling in the rate of rape
over the previous year by buying handguns for self-defense; 200-300
firearms were being purchased each week from dealers, and an unknown
number more from private parties. The newspaper there, the _Orlando
Sentinel Star_, had an anti-gun editorial stance and tried to pressure
the local police chief and city government to stop the flow of arms.
When that tactic failed, the paper decided that in the interest of
public safety, they would sponsor a gun-training seminar in conjunction
with the local police. Plans were made for a one-day training course at
a local city park.
Plans were made for an expected 400-500 women. However,
more than 2500 women arrived, and brought with them every conceivable
kind of firearm. They had to park many blocks away, and the weapons
were carried in in purses, paper bags, boxes, briefcases, holsters,
and womens' hands. One police officer present said he'd never been so
scared in his life. [It must have been quite a sight!
Swamped, the organizers hastily dismissed the women with promises for
a more thorough course with scheduled appointments. The course offered
was for three classes/week, and within 6 months, the Orlando police had
trained more than 6000 women in basic pistol marksmanship and the law
of self-defense.
The results?
In 1966 there were 36 rapes in Orlando, triple the 1965 rate. In 1967,
there were 4.
Before the training, rape rates had been increasing in
Orlando as nationwide.
5 years after the training, rape was still
below pre-training levels in Orlando, but up 308% in the surrounding
areas, 96% for Florida overall, and 64% nationally.
Also in 1967, violent assault and burglary decreased by 25% in Orlando,
in addition to the rape reductions.
In 1967, NOT A SINGLE WOMAN HAD FIRED HER WEAPON in self-defense. In
1967, NOT A SINGLE WOMAN HAD TURNED HER GUN ON HER HUSBAND OR BOYFRIEND.
(No data are available for later years.)
The reason the program worked so spectacularly well is that it was
widely known that Orlando women had the means and training to defend
themselves from attackers. Rapists, being (somewhat) human, they are
learning engines; they took their business elsewhere--to the detriment
of the defenseless in those other locations.
Department of Justice victim studies show that overall, when rape is
attempted, the completion rate is 36%. But when a woman defends herself
with a gun, the completion rate drops to 3%.
And for 19.95 you can read Southwick's 2000 study on guns that talk about rape.....
Self-defense with guns The consequences
This one gives the actual percentages of how rapes are stopped...guns come out on top...
http://medind.nic.in/jal/t07/i4/jalt07i4p99.pdf
Here is Clinton's actual gun study...the number of 1.5 million is on page 9
https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles/165476.pdf
11 of the 16 say less than 2 million. Where do you account for decreased crime in your estimate? Why do you count studies that aren't national?
Not one study is less than 764,000....I don't account for it......ask Kleck or Lott, Lott is very responsive to contacting people...he even responded personally to my emails......you could get a lot of good info. by talking to him.....
And it is the anti gun extremists like you who say that if more Americans own or carry guns the crime rate will....not maybe, but will....go up. And yet the violent crime rate is going down, and the gun murder rate, specifically is going down, not up....it is up to you to explain why you are wrong and we were right.......since you claimed law abiding people owning and carrying guns would increase the crime rate...and that never happened....
Let me state again, ownership does not effect crime rates.
An Error Occurred Setting Your User Cookie
Applied Economics Letters
Volume 21, Issue 4, 2014
Select Language
Translator disclaimer
An examination of the effects of concealed weapons laws and assault weapons bans on state-level murder rates
The present study differs from this prior research in several ways. First, data for the period 1980 to 2009 is examined; this is one of the longest time periods examined in any research on assault weapons bans or CCW laws. Second, the gun-related murder rate is used as the dependent variable. The use of this crime rate is important because most other studies looked at violent crime rates or homicide rates. Violent crime rate data is not disaggregated into gun-related violent crime and non gun violent crime, and homicides include justifiable killings and state-sanctioned killings; hence, an analysis using these types of crime rates may result in spurious conclusions.
**************
**************
Results are presented on Table 1. The CCW dummy variable is significant and positive, but the assault weapons ban is insignificant. Given that the average gun-related murder rate over the period in question was 3.44, the results of the present study indicate that states with more restrictive CCW laws had gun-related murder rates that were 10% higher. In addition, the Federal assault weapons ban is significant and positive, indicating that murder rates were 19.3% higher when the Federal ban was in effect. These results corroborate the findings of Lott and Mustard (1997). These results suggest that, even after controlling for unobservable state and year fixed effects, limiting the ability to carry concealed weapons may cause murder rates to increase. There may, however, be other explanations for these results. Laws may be ineffective due to loopholes and exemptions. The most violent states may also have the toughest gun control measures. Further research is warranted in this area.
We have the most guns by far, but not the lowest crime rates.
2aguy
Diamond Member
- Jul 19, 2014
- 112,236
- 52,460
- 2,290
I just averaged the studies......which were conducted by different researchers, from both private and public researchers, over a period of 40 years looking specifically at guns and self defense....the name of the researcher is first, then the year then the number of times they determined guns were used for self defense......notice how many of them there are and how many of them were done by gun grabbers like the clinton Justice Dept. and the obama CDC
And these aren't all of the studies either...there are more...and they support the ones below.....
A quick guide to the studies and the numbers.....the full lay out of what was studied by each study is in the links....
GunCite-Gun Control-How Often Are Guns Used in Self-Defense
GunCite Frequency of Defensive Gun Use in Previous Surveys
Field...1976....3,052,717 ( no cops, military)
DMIa 1978...2,141,512 ( no cops, military)
L.A. TIMES...1994...3,609,68 ( no cops, military)
Kleck...2.5 million ( no cops, military)
Obama's CDC....2013....500,000--3million
--------------------
Bordua...1977...1,414,544
DMIb...1978...1,098,409 ( no cops, military)
Hart...1981...1.797,461 ( no cops, military)
Mauser...1990...1,487,342 ( no cops, military)
Gallup...1993...1,621,377 ( no cops, military)
DEPT. OF JUSTICE...1994...1.5 million
Journal of Quantitative Criminology--- 989,883 times per year."
-------------------------------------------
Ohio...1982...771,043
Gallup...1991...777,152
Tarrance... 1994... 764,036 (no cops, military)
Lawerence Southwich Jr. 400,000 fewer violent crimes and at least 800,000 violent crimes deterred..
*****************************************
If you take the studies from that Kleck cites in his paper, 16 of them....and you only average the ones that exclude military and police shootings..the average becomes 2 million...I use those studies because I have the details on them...and they are still 10 studies (including Kleck's)....
And here we have studies that show that guns are the most effective way to stop a rape.....
Guns Effective Defense Against Rape
A woman using a gun is less likely to be raped and more likely to not be injured during the attack....
Guns Effective Defense Against Rape
However, most recent studies with improved methodology are consistently showing that the more forceful the resistance, the lower the risk of a completed rape, with no increase in physical injury. Sarah Ullman's original research (Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 1998) and critical review of past studies (Criminal Justice and Behavior, 1997) are especially valuable in solidifying this conclusion.
I wish to single out one particular subtype of physical resistance: Use of a weapon, and especially a firearm, is statistically a woman's best means of resistance, greatly enhancing her odds of escaping both rape and injury, compared to any other strategy of physical or verbal resistance. This conclusion is drawn from four types of information.
First, a 1989 study (Furby, Journal of Interpersonal Violence) found that both male and female survey respondents judged a gun to be the most effective means that a potential rape victim could use to fend off the assault. Rape "experts" considered it a close second, after eye-gouging.
Second, raw data from the 1979-1985 installments of the Justice Department's annual National Crime Victim Survey show that when a woman resists a stranger rape with a gun, the probability of completion was 0.1 percent and of victim injury 0.0 percent, compared to 31 percent and 40 percent, respectively, for all stranger rapes (Kleck, Social Problems, 1990).
Third, a recent paper (Southwick, Journal of Criminal Justice, 2000) analyzed victim resistance to violent crimes generally, with robbery, aggravated assault and rape considered together. Women who resisted with a gun were 2.5 times more likely to escape without injury than those who did not resist and 4 times more likely to escape uninjured than those who resisted with any means other than a gun. Similarly, their property losses in a robbery were reduced more than six-fold and almost three-fold, respectively, compared to the other categories of resistance strategy.
Fourth, we have two studies in the last 20 years that directly address the outcomes of women who resist attempted rape with a weapon. (Lizotte, Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 1986; Kleck, Social Problems, 1990.) The former concludes,"Further, women who resist rape with a gun or knife dramatically decrease their probability of completion." (Lizotte did not analyze victim injuries apart from the rape itself.) The latter concludes that "resistance with a gun or knife is the most effective form of resistance for preventing completion of a rape"; this is accomplished "without creating any significant additional risk of other injury."
The best conclusion from available scientific data, then, is when avoidance of rape has failed and one must choose between being raped and resisting, a woman's best option is to resist with a gun in her hands.
********************
So, again a woman's best chance for stopping the rape and ultimately surviving the situation is to use a gun.....
***********************
http://www.hoboes.com/pub/Firearms/Data/Crime/Florida/Gun Ownership Stops Rape/
In Orlando, Florida, in 1966 a series of brutal rapes swept the
community. Citizens reacted to the tripling in the rate of rape
over the previous year by buying handguns for self-defense; 200-300
firearms were being purchased each week from dealers, and an unknown
number more from private parties. The newspaper there, the _Orlando
Sentinel Star_, had an anti-gun editorial stance and tried to pressure
the local police chief and city government to stop the flow of arms.
When that tactic failed, the paper decided that in the interest of
public safety, they would sponsor a gun-training seminar in conjunction
with the local police. Plans were made for a one-day training course at
a local city park.
Plans were made for an expected 400-500 women. However,
more than 2500 women arrived, and brought with them every conceivable
kind of firearm. They had to park many blocks away, and the weapons
were carried in in purses, paper bags, boxes, briefcases, holsters,
and womens' hands. One police officer present said he'd never been so
scared in his life. [It must have been quite a sight!
Swamped, the organizers hastily dismissed the women with promises for
a more thorough course with scheduled appointments. The course offered
was for three classes/week, and within 6 months, the Orlando police had
trained more than 6000 women in basic pistol marksmanship and the law
of self-defense.
The results?
In 1966 there were 36 rapes in Orlando, triple the 1965 rate. In 1967,
there were 4.
Before the training, rape rates had been increasing in
Orlando as nationwide.
5 years after the training, rape was still
below pre-training levels in Orlando, but up 308% in the surrounding
areas, 96% for Florida overall, and 64% nationally.
Also in 1967, violent assault and burglary decreased by 25% in Orlando,
in addition to the rape reductions.
In 1967, NOT A SINGLE WOMAN HAD FIRED HER WEAPON in self-defense. In
1967, NOT A SINGLE WOMAN HAD TURNED HER GUN ON HER HUSBAND OR BOYFRIEND.
(No data are available for later years.)
The reason the program worked so spectacularly well is that it was
widely known that Orlando women had the means and training to defend
themselves from attackers. Rapists, being (somewhat) human, they are
learning engines; they took their business elsewhere--to the detriment
of the defenseless in those other locations.
Department of Justice victim studies show that overall, when rape is
attempted, the completion rate is 36%. But when a woman defends herself
with a gun, the completion rate drops to 3%.
And for 19.95 you can read Southwick's 2000 study on guns that talk about rape.....
Self-defense with guns The consequences
This one gives the actual percentages of how rapes are stopped...guns come out on top...
http://medind.nic.in/jal/t07/i4/jalt07i4p99.pdf
Here is Clinton's actual gun study...the number of 1.5 million is on page 9
https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles/165476.pdf
11 of the 16 say less than 2 million. Where do you account for decreased crime in your estimate? Why do you count studies that aren't national?
Not one study is less than 764,000....I don't account for it......ask Kleck or Lott, Lott is very responsive to contacting people...he even responded personally to my emails......you could get a lot of good info. by talking to him.....
And it is the anti gun extremists like you who say that if more Americans own or carry guns the crime rate will....not maybe, but will....go up. And yet the violent crime rate is going down, and the gun murder rate, specifically is going down, not up....it is up to you to explain why you are wrong and we were right.......since you claimed law abiding people owning and carrying guns would increase the crime rate...and that never happened....
Let me state again, ownership does not effect crime rates.
An Error Occurred Setting Your User Cookie
Applied Economics Letters
Volume 21, Issue 4, 2014
Select Language
Translator disclaimer
An examination of the effects of concealed weapons laws and assault weapons bans on state-level murder rates
The present study differs from this prior research in several ways. First, data for the period 1980 to 2009 is examined; this is one of the longest time periods examined in any research on assault weapons bans or CCW laws. Second, the gun-related murder rate is used as the dependent variable. The use of this crime rate is important because most other studies looked at violent crime rates or homicide rates. Violent crime rate data is not disaggregated into gun-related violent crime and non gun violent crime, and homicides include justifiable killings and state-sanctioned killings; hence, an analysis using these types of crime rates may result in spurious conclusions.
**************
**************
Results are presented on Table 1. The CCW dummy variable is significant and positive, but the assault weapons ban is insignificant. Given that the average gun-related murder rate over the period in question was 3.44, the results of the present study indicate that states with more restrictive CCW laws had gun-related murder rates that were 10% higher. In addition, the Federal assault weapons ban is significant and positive, indicating that murder rates were 19.3% higher when the Federal ban was in effect. These results corroborate the findings of Lott and Mustard (1997). These results suggest that, even after controlling for unobservable state and year fixed effects, limiting the ability to carry concealed weapons may cause murder rates to increase. There may, however, be other explanations for these results. Laws may be ineffective due to loopholes and exemptions. The most violent states may also have the toughest gun control measures. Further research is warranted in this area.
We have the most guns by far, but not the lowest crime rates.
and other countries have extreme gun control and higher gun murder rates.....culture, not guns.
Brain357
Platinum Member
- Mar 30, 2013
- 37,068
- 4,189
- 1,130
An Error Occurred Setting Your User Cookie
Applied Economics Letters
Volume 21, Issue 4, 2014
Select Language
Translator disclaimer
An examination of the effects of concealed weapons laws and assault weapons bans on state-level murder rates
The present study differs from this prior research in several ways. First, data for the period 1980 to 2009 is examined; this is one of the longest time periods examined in any research on assault weapons bans or CCW laws. Second, the gun-related murder rate is used as the dependent variable. The use of this crime rate is important because most other studies looked at violent crime rates or homicide rates. Violent crime rate data is not disaggregated into gun-related violent crime and non gun violent crime, and homicides include justifiable killings and state-sanctioned killings; hence, an analysis using these types of crime rates may result in spurious conclusions.
**************
**************
Results are presented on Table 1. The CCW dummy variable is significant and positive, but the assault weapons ban is insignificant. Given that the average gun-related murder rate over the period in question was 3.44, the results of the present study indicate that states with more restrictive CCW laws had gun-related murder rates that were 10% higher. In addition, the Federal assault weapons ban is significant and positive, indicating that murder rates were 19.3% higher when the Federal ban was in effect. These results corroborate the findings of Lott and Mustard (1997). These results suggest that, even after controlling for unobservable state and year fixed effects, limiting the ability to carry concealed weapons may cause murder rates to increase. There may, however, be other explanations for these results. Laws may be ineffective due to loopholes and exemptions. The most violent states may also have the toughest gun control measures. Further research is warranted in this area.
We have the most guns by far, but not the lowest crime rates.
and other countries have extreme gun control and higher gun murder rates.....culture, not guns.
Then why do you keep insisting gun ownership effects crime rates?
2aguy
Diamond Member
- Jul 19, 2014
- 112,236
- 52,460
- 2,290
An Error Occurred Setting Your User Cookie
Applied Economics Letters
Volume 21, Issue 4, 2014
Select Language
Translator disclaimer
An examination of the effects of concealed weapons laws and assault weapons bans on state-level murder rates
The present study differs from this prior research in several ways. First, data for the period 1980 to 2009 is examined; this is one of the longest time periods examined in any research on assault weapons bans or CCW laws. Second, the gun-related murder rate is used as the dependent variable. The use of this crime rate is important because most other studies looked at violent crime rates or homicide rates. Violent crime rate data is not disaggregated into gun-related violent crime and non gun violent crime, and homicides include justifiable killings and state-sanctioned killings; hence, an analysis using these types of crime rates may result in spurious conclusions.
**************
**************
Results are presented on Table 1. The CCW dummy variable is significant and positive, but the assault weapons ban is insignificant. Given that the average gun-related murder rate over the period in question was 3.44, the results of the present study indicate that states with more restrictive CCW laws had gun-related murder rates that were 10% higher. In addition, the Federal assault weapons ban is significant and positive, indicating that murder rates were 19.3% higher when the Federal ban was in effect. These results corroborate the findings of Lott and Mustard (1997). These results suggest that, even after controlling for unobservable state and year fixed effects, limiting the ability to carry concealed weapons may cause murder rates to increase. There may, however, be other explanations for these results. Laws may be ineffective due to loopholes and exemptions. The most violent states may also have the toughest gun control measures. Further research is warranted in this area.
We have the most guns by far, but not the lowest crime rates.
and other countries have extreme gun control and higher gun murder rates.....culture, not guns.
Then why do you keep insisting gun ownership effects crime rates?
because armed people do lower the crime rate...but it doesn't make it zero...and other factors can overcome an armed citizenship...like chicago...where the gangs control their aldermen....and keep the police levels low, prevent arrest and help keep gang members out of jail...
And only so many people are carrying guns, that leaves a lot of people not carrying guns...and criminals run away from someone who pulls a gun.....walk down a block and attack someone who doesn't have a gun.......
but...the person with the pistol stopped their criminal attack......
The leading way to reduce gun crime....arrest criminals who use guns and keep them locked up.....and yet you see over and over that prosecutors and judges do not do this......
Brain357
Platinum Member
- Mar 30, 2013
- 37,068
- 4,189
- 1,130
An Error Occurred Setting Your User Cookie
Applied Economics Letters
Volume 21, Issue 4, 2014
Select Language
Translator disclaimer
An examination of the effects of concealed weapons laws and assault weapons bans on state-level murder rates
The present study differs from this prior research in several ways. First, data for the period 1980 to 2009 is examined; this is one of the longest time periods examined in any research on assault weapons bans or CCW laws. Second, the gun-related murder rate is used as the dependent variable. The use of this crime rate is important because most other studies looked at violent crime rates or homicide rates. Violent crime rate data is not disaggregated into gun-related violent crime and non gun violent crime, and homicides include justifiable killings and state-sanctioned killings; hence, an analysis using these types of crime rates may result in spurious conclusions.
**************
**************
Results are presented on Table 1. The CCW dummy variable is significant and positive, but the assault weapons ban is insignificant. Given that the average gun-related murder rate over the period in question was 3.44, the results of the present study indicate that states with more restrictive CCW laws had gun-related murder rates that were 10% higher. In addition, the Federal assault weapons ban is significant and positive, indicating that murder rates were 19.3% higher when the Federal ban was in effect. These results corroborate the findings of Lott and Mustard (1997). These results suggest that, even after controlling for unobservable state and year fixed effects, limiting the ability to carry concealed weapons may cause murder rates to increase. There may, however, be other explanations for these results. Laws may be ineffective due to loopholes and exemptions. The most violent states may also have the toughest gun control measures. Further research is warranted in this area.
We have the most guns by far, but not the lowest crime rates.
and other countries have extreme gun control and higher gun murder rates.....culture, not guns.
Then why do you keep insisting gun ownership effects crime rates?
because armed people do lower the crime rate...but it doesn't make it zero...and other factors can overcome an armed citizenship...like chicago...where the gangs control their aldermen....and keep the police levels low, prevent arrest and help keep gang members out of jail...
And only so many people are carrying guns, that leaves a lot of people not carrying guns...and criminals run away from someone who pulls a gun.....walk down a block and attack someone who doesn't have a gun.......
but...the person with the pistol stopped their criminal attack......
The leading way to reduce gun crime....arrest criminals who use guns and keep them locked up.....and yet you see over and over that prosecutors and judges do not do this......
Well I agree with your last statement. Would be nice if we actually reformed criminals.
2aguy
Diamond Member
- Jul 19, 2014
- 112,236
- 52,460
- 2,290
An Error Occurred Setting Your User Cookie
Applied Economics Letters
Volume 21, Issue 4, 2014
Select Language
Translator disclaimer
An examination of the effects of concealed weapons laws and assault weapons bans on state-level murder rates
The present study differs from this prior research in several ways. First, data for the period 1980 to 2009 is examined; this is one of the longest time periods examined in any research on assault weapons bans or CCW laws. Second, the gun-related murder rate is used as the dependent variable. The use of this crime rate is important because most other studies looked at violent crime rates or homicide rates. Violent crime rate data is not disaggregated into gun-related violent crime and non gun violent crime, and homicides include justifiable killings and state-sanctioned killings; hence, an analysis using these types of crime rates may result in spurious conclusions.
**************
**************
Results are presented on Table 1. The CCW dummy variable is significant and positive, but the assault weapons ban is insignificant. Given that the average gun-related murder rate over the period in question was 3.44, the results of the present study indicate that states with more restrictive CCW laws had gun-related murder rates that were 10% higher. In addition, the Federal assault weapons ban is significant and positive, indicating that murder rates were 19.3% higher when the Federal ban was in effect. These results corroborate the findings of Lott and Mustard (1997). These results suggest that, even after controlling for unobservable state and year fixed effects, limiting the ability to carry concealed weapons may cause murder rates to increase. There may, however, be other explanations for these results. Laws may be ineffective due to loopholes and exemptions. The most violent states may also have the toughest gun control measures. Further research is warranted in this area.
We have the most guns by far, but not the lowest crime rates.
and other countries have extreme gun control and higher gun murder rates.....culture, not guns.
Then why do you keep insisting gun ownership effects crime rates?
because armed people do lower the crime rate...but it doesn't make it zero...and other factors can overcome an armed citizenship...like chicago...where the gangs control their aldermen....and keep the police levels low, prevent arrest and help keep gang members out of jail...
And only so many people are carrying guns, that leaves a lot of people not carrying guns...and criminals run away from someone who pulls a gun.....walk down a block and attack someone who doesn't have a gun.......
but...the person with the pistol stopped their criminal attack......
The leading way to reduce gun crime....arrest criminals who use guns and keep them locked up.....and yet you see over and over that prosecutors and judges do not do this......
Well I agree with your last statement. Would be nice if we actually reformed criminals.
Well....I'll settle for keeping them locked up....
here we go a list, side by side of the papers and what they show...
Of course, the single paper that Shermer cites was mentioned and discussed at length in the review of the literature that Lott provided in More Guns, Less Crime (click on screen shots to make them larger). Unfortunately, Scientific American wasn’t willing to allow a link to this list of papers.
Similar threads
