Ten Gun Myths and Memes-- Shot Down

[GeoLaureate8]

I am suspicious of anyone who does not think a gun free world would be a better place. No one is dancing around.

Sam Harris: "Like most gun owners, I understand the ethical importance of guns and cannot honestly wish for a world without them. I suspect that sentiment will shock many readers. Wouldn't any decent person wish for a world without guns? In my view, only someone who doesn't understand violence could wish for such a world. A world without guns is one in which the most aggressive men can do more or less anything they want.

A world without guns, therefore, is one in which the advantages of youth, size, strength, aggression, and sheer numbers are almost always decisive. Who could be nostalgic for such a world?"

The Riddle of the Gun : Sam Harris



.

 

[The2ndAmendment]

what did james have to say about guns? Americans need never fear their government
because of the advantage of being armed,
which the Americans possess over the people
of almost every other nation."

Although your quote is true and I verified it, I did unknowingly post a Bogus George Washington quote. For the sake of Gun Rights and maintaining our credibility, DO NOT defend a bogus quote.

I did verify the others on the list right afterwards. I also decided to research a list of bogus pro-gun quotes:

http://saf.org/pub/rkba/general/BogusAntiGunQuotes.htm

I suggest we learn these quickly, so we don't give the progressives the upper hand in an argument.

 

[RDD_1210]

For one I do not believe a gun ensures safety. A gun is a tool, certainly a dangerous tool but a tool nonetheless no different than a chain saw or any other dangerous tool. A gun is a way to protect yourself. Most people use guns and will never be shot either accidentally or purposely.



You may say a guns purpose is to kill, I don't buy that. i have owned guns my entire life and have never killed anything with them except for paper targets and clay pigeons. The purpose of a gun is to give people an option to protect themselves from harm.

It's not my fault if another is irresponsible with their guns or their chainsaws or their swimming pools for that matter.

But thats the point. You've been shown data that says guns aren't even a good tool for protection. Yes, they do work for some to protect, but they are causing more harm than good.

And if you refuse to even discuss responsible gun legislation then it absolutely is your fault when innocent people are shot and killed because you insisted on protecting your precious toys.

How are they not a good tool for protection when there are no stats for how many times a person with a gun prevented a crime without firing the weapon?

One does not need to fire a weapon for it to be effective as protection.

This is probably as meaningless as any other stat but since you like them so much

Private Guns Stop Crime 2.5M Times A Year In US

And legislation does not make people responsible. It never has and it never will.

All the legislation in the world cannot prevent accidents.

No stats? We are the most armed society and one of the most violent. If arming people meant safety, shouldn't we be one of the least violent societies?

No stats he says. lol.

 

[The2ndAmendment]

E]

No stats? We are the most armed society and one of the most violent. If arming people meant safety, shouldn't we be one of the least violent societies?

Here let me help you with that:
You are far more likely to survive
a violent assault if you defend yourself with a gun.

Resisting with a gun 6%
Did nothing at all 25%
Resisted with a knife 40%
Non-violent resistance 45%

U.S. Department of Justice, Law Enforcement Assistance Administration, Rape Victimization in 26 American Cities, 1979 60
Department of Justice's National Crime Victimization Survey 61
U.S. Department of Justice 62
U.S. Department of Justice 63
British Home Office – no a pro-gun organization by any mean

From these same studies.

Of the 2,500,000 annual self-defense cases using guns, more than 7.7% are by women
defending themselves against sexual abuse.
Fact:
When a woman was armed with a gun or knife, only 3% of the attempted rapes are
successful, compared to 32% when unarmed.

Fact:
The probability of serious injury from an attack is 2.5 times greater for women offering no
resistance than for women resisting with a gun. Men also benefit from using a gun, but the
benefits are smaller: offering no resistance is 1.4 times more likely to result in serious injury than
resisting with a gun.

Fact:
27% of women keep a gun in the house.

Fact:
37.6 million women either own or have rapid access to guns.

Fact:
In 1966 the city of Orlando responded to a wave of sexual assaults by offering firearms
training classes to women. The number of rapes dropped by nearly 90%.

https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/Digitization/55878NCJRS.pdf

 

[RDD_1210]

Guns are good for protection like ocean water is good for thirst.

You may think it's a good idea but it's only going to make the problem worse.

Your opinion.

I have seen a crime thwarted with a gun. My uncle stopped a couple burglars by racking his shotgun and saying, "You have 3 seconds to get the fuck out of my house"

Seems to me he made the situation better.

Oh and btw no one in my uncle's family has ever been shot even though they own guns.

LOL, so the hell what. I didn't argue that guns NEVER protect people. I just said it was not good at it, especially compared with the number of people killed by guns.

Are you really making your argument based upon the experiences of your Uncle?

 

[RDD_1210]

E]

No stats? We are the most armed society and one of the most violent. If arming people meant safety, shouldn't we be one of the least violent societies?

Here let me help you with that:
You are far more likely to survive
a violent assault if you defend yourself with a gun.

Resisting with a gun 6%
Did nothing at all 25%
Resisted with a knife 40%
Non-violent resistance 45%

U.S. Department of Justice, Law Enforcement Assistance Administration, Rape Victimization in 26 American Cities, 1979 60
Department of Justice's National Crime Victimization Survey 61
U.S. Department of Justice 62
U.S. Department of Justice 63
British Home Office – no a pro-gun organization by any mean

From these same studies.

Of the 2,500,000 annual self-defense cases using guns, more than 7.7% are by women
defending themselves against sexual abuse.
Fact:
When a woman was armed with a gun or knife, only 3% of the attempted rapes are
successful, compared to 32% when unarmed.

Fact:
The probability of serious injury from an attack is 2.5 times greater for women offering no
resistance than for women resisting with a gun. Men also benefit from using a gun, but the
benefits are smaller: offering no resistance is 1.4 times more likely to result in serious injury than
resisting with a gun.

Fact:
27% of women keep a gun in the house.

Fact:
37.6 million women either own or have rapid access to guns.

Fact:
In 1966 the city of Orlando responded to a wave of sexual assaults by offering firearms
training classes to women. The number of rapes dropped by nearly 90%.

It's almost as if you guys are allergic to citing your sources with a link. Why is that?

 

[Spoonman]

Guns are good for protection like ocean water is good for thirst.

You may think it's a good idea but it's only going to make the problem worse.

Your opinion.

I have seen a crime thwarted with a gun. My uncle stopped a couple burglars by racking his shotgun and saying, "You have 3 seconds to get the fuck out of my house"

Seems to me he made the situation better.

Oh and btw no one in my uncle's family has ever been shot even though they own guns.

LOL, so the hell what? I didn't argue that guns NEVER protect people. I just said it was not good at it, especially compared with the number of people killed by guns.

Are you really making your argument based upon the experiences of your Uncle?

if guns aren't good at protecting people, why do cops carry them?

 

[Pogo]

For OKTexas from last night -- hate to leave something undone:

All you have to do is what I did. Go to the link provided in the link to your article and it take you here:

Injuries and deaths due to firearms in - PubMed Mobile

And it says: METHODS: We reviewed the police, medical examiner, emergency medical service, emergency department, and hospital records of all fatal and nonfatal shootings in three U.S. cities: Memphis, Tennessee; Seattle, Washington; and Galveston, Texas.

RESULTS: During the study interval (12 months in Memphis, 18 months in Seattle, and Galveston) 626 shootings occurred in or around a residence. This total included 54 unintentional shootings, 118 attempted or completed suicides, and 438 assaults/homicides. Thirteen shootings were legally justifiable or an act of self-defense, including three that involved law enforcement officers acting in the line of duty. For every time a gun in the home was used in a self-defense or legally justifiable shooting, there were four unintentional shootings, seven criminal assaults or homicides, and 11 attempted or completed suicides.

Any questions?

Yes. What point of the OP are you talking about here? Can we do one at a time?

From the OP.

• Myth #5: Keeping a gun at home makes you safer.
Fact-check: Owning a gun has been linked to higher risks of homicide, suicide, and accidental death by gun.

• For every time a gun is used in self-defense in the home, there are 7 assaults or murders, 11 suicide attempts, and 4 accidents involving guns in or around a home...

The very selective data I posted is where these bogus numbers come from, can you say with any itellectual honesty they are an accurate representation of reality considering their methods.

OK I've got the page now, quoting in part:
METHODS: We reviewed the police, medical examiner, emergency medical service, emergency department, and hospital records of all fatal and nonfatal shootings in three U.S. cities: Memphis, Tennessee; Seattle, Washington; and Galveston, Texas.

RESULTS: During the study interval (12 months in Memphis, 18 months in Seattle, and Galveston) 626 shootings occurred in or around a residence. This total included 54 unintentional shootings, 118 attempted or completed suicides, and 438 assaults/homicides. Thirteen shootings were legally justifiable or an act of self-defense, including three that involved law enforcement officers acting in the line of duty. For every time a gun in the home was used in a self-defense or legally justifiable shooting, there were four unintentional shootings, seven criminal assaults or homicides, and 11 attempted or completed suicides.

CONCLUSIONS: Guns kept in homes are more likely to be involved in a fatal or nonfatal accidental shooting, criminal assault, or suicide attempt than to be used to injure or kill in self-defense. (end quote)

Yeah, that methodology looks reasonable to me (and I've had some training in this) -- what's the issue? Three cities in diverse areas. I infer that your point is that they didn't go on and ask all people in all cities everywhere? What for? To keep doing the same thing and expect a different result? Any sample is going to be limited by practicality.

What such a study does is provide an indication, a pointer to what's likely going on. IF the results were close to a wash here we could say they were inconclusive and didn't give us an indication, and we would either need further studies or we might conclude there's no correlation. But the results are not close.

 

[The2ndAmendment]

Guns are good for protection like ocean water is good for thirst.

You may think it's a good idea but it's only going to make the problem worse.

Your opinion.

I have seen a crime thwarted with a gun. My uncle stopped a couple burglars by racking his shotgun and saying, "You have 3 seconds to get the fuck out of my house"

Seems to me he made the situation better.

Oh and btw no one in my uncle's family has ever been shot even though they own guns.

LOL, so the hell what? I didn't argue that guns NEVER protect people. I just said it was not good at it, especially compared with the number of people killed by guns.

Are you really making your argument based upon the experiences of your Uncle?

Oh boy, did you log onto another account Saigon? Because you have the exact same method of approach. You try to derail attention from yourself when confronted by the facts, and conveniently forget/ignore the posters calling you out.

Let me remind you:

You are far more likely to survive
a violent assault if you defend yourself with a gun.

Resisting with a gun 6%
Did nothing at all 25%
Resisted with a knife 40%
Non-violent resistance 45%

U.S. Department of Justice, Law Enforcement Assistance Administration, Rape Victimization in 26 American Cities, 1979 60
Department of Justice's National Crime Victimization Survey 61
U.S. Department of Justice 62
U.S. Department of Justice 63
British Home Office – no a pro-gun organization by any mean

From these same studies.

Of the 2,500,000 annual self-defense cases using guns, more than 7.7% are by women
defending themselves against sexual abuse.
Fact:
When a woman was armed with a gun or knife, only 3% of the attempted rapes are
successful, compared to 32% when unarmed.

Fact:
The probability of serious injury from an attack is 2.5 times greater for women offering no
resistance than for women resisting with a gun. Men also benefit from using a gun, but the
benefits are smaller: offering no resistance is 1.4 times more likely to result in serious injury than
resisting with a gun.

Fact:
27% of women keep a gun in the house.

Fact:
37.6 million women either own or have rapid access to guns.

Fact:
In 1966 the city of Orlando responded to a wave of sexual assaults by offering firearms
training classes to women. The number of rapes dropped by nearly 90%.

https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/Digitization/55878NCJRS.pdf

 

[Spoonman]

E]

No stats? We are the most armed society and one of the most violent. If arming people meant safety, shouldn't we be one of the least violent societies?

Here let me help you with that:
You are far more likely to survive
a violent assault if you defend yourself with a gun.

Resisting with a gun 6%
Did nothing at all 25%
Resisted with a knife 40%
Non-violent resistance 45%

U.S. Department of Justice, Law Enforcement Assistance Administration, Rape Victimization in 26 American Cities, 1979 60
Department of Justice's National Crime Victimization Survey 61
U.S. Department of Justice 62
U.S. Department of Justice 63
British Home Office – no a pro-gun organization by any mean

From these same studies.

Of the 2,500,000 annual self-defense cases using guns, more than 7.7% are by women
defending themselves against sexual abuse.
Fact:
When a woman was armed with a gun or knife, only 3% of the attempted rapes are
successful, compared to 32% when unarmed.

Fact:
The probability of serious injury from an attack is 2.5 times greater for women offering no
resistance than for women resisting with a gun. Men also benefit from using a gun, but the
benefits are smaller: offering no resistance is 1.4 times more likely to result in serious injury than
resisting with a gun.

Fact:
27% of women keep a gun in the house.

Fact:
37.6 million women either own or have rapid access to guns.

Fact:
In 1966 the city of Orlando responded to a wave of sexual assaults by offering firearms
training classes to women. The number of rapes dropped by nearly 90%.

It's almost as if you guys are allergic to citing your sources with a link. Why is that?

should we link opinion pieces like you?

 

[Skull Pilot]

But thats the point. You've been shown data that says guns aren't even a good tool for protection. Yes, they do work for some to protect, but they are causing more harm than good.

And if you refuse to even discuss responsible gun legislation then it absolutely is your fault when innocent people are shot and killed because you insisted on protecting your precious toys.

How are they not a good tool for protection when there are no stats for how many times a person with a gun prevented a crime without firing the weapon?

One does not need to fire a weapon for it to be effective as protection.

This is probably as meaningless as any other stat but since you like them so much

Private Guns Stop Crime 2.5M Times A Year In US

And legislation does not make people responsible. It never has and it never will.

All the legislation in the world cannot prevent accidents.

No stats? We are the most armed society and one of the most violent. If arming people menat safety, shouldn't we be one of the least violent societies?

No stats he says. lol.

Sorry but people are violent with or without guns. One does not cause the other.

It's just as valid to say that we could very well have more violent crime if we had less people armed than we do.

Again guns are used 2.5 million times a year in self defense. How many of those people would been have killed, raped, beaten etc if they didn't have a weapon?

it's impossible to say isn't it?

So if you don't want a gun don't get one. I have no problem with that. I have owned a weapon capable of killing a person since I was 8 years old and in the nearly 40 years since then I have never shot myself or anyone else.

I have proven that I am a responsible gun owning citizen and do not believe I should be limited in my owning a weapon.

So if you can find a way to legislate responsibility for those who are irresponsible while leaving people like me (and most gun owners btw) alone then I'm all for it.

I'm still in favor of mandatory life in prison for all crimes committed with a gun.

 

[The2ndAmendment]

It's almost as if you guys are allergic to citing your sources with a link. Why is that?

That is your link, GOOGLE IT OR GO TO THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE WEBSITE

However, I will indulge your request ONE FINAL TIME.

https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/Digitization/55878NCJRS.pdf

 

[RDD_1210]

Your opinion.

I have seen a crime thwarted with a gun. My uncle stopped a couple burglars by racking his shotgun and saying, "You have 3 seconds to get the fuck out of my house"

Seems to me he made the situation better.

Oh and btw no one in my uncle's family has ever been shot even though they own guns.

LOL, so the hell what? I didn't argue that guns NEVER protect people. I just said it was not good at it, especially compared with the number of people killed by guns.

Are you really making your argument based upon the experiences of your Uncle?

if guns aren't good at protecting people, why do cops carry them?

LOL, really? This needs to be explained to you? It's like you keep setting up these ridiculous points, it gets knocked down and you look for something else ridiculous to move on to.

You'll just ignore my response and pretend you didn't say the dumb shit that you said.

 

[GeoLaureate8]

Guns are evil devices, strip them from the good men and women of the police and military immediately!

These Americans who are trying to protect our nation and cities don't realize that they possess evil, diabolical mass murder devices!

.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Guns are good for protection like ocean water is good for thirst.

You may think it's a good idea but it's only going to make the problem worse.

Your opinion.

I have seen a crime thwarted with a gun. My uncle stopped a couple burglars by racking his shotgun and saying, "You have 3 seconds to get the fuck out of my house"

Seems to me he made the situation better.

Oh and btw no one in my uncle's family has ever been shot even though they own guns.

LOL, so the hell what. I didn't argue that guns NEVER protect people. I just said it was not good at it, especially compared with the number of people killed by guns.

Are you really making your argument based upon the experiences of your Uncle?

and the 2.5 million people a year who protect themselves with a gun

 

[NoNukes]

Here's one:

Switzerland One of the Safest Places Despite Armed Populace | Travel Splendid

.

This is part of their national service. Comparing Switzerland and the United States is ridiculous, totally different societies.

LOL but you guys want to compare the US to every other country that you think supports your red herring arguments. [/QUOuTE]

We are not comparing countries, just pointing out some facts of life. Showing what works in some other places. Unfortunately, many Americans do not care and would rather remain ignorant.

 

[RDD_1210]

Here let me help you with that:
You are far more likely to survive
a violent assault if you defend yourself with a gun.

Resisting with a gun 6%
Did nothing at all 25%
Resisted with a knife 40%
Non-violent resistance 45%



From these same studies.

Of the 2,500,000 annual self-defense cases using guns, more than 7.7% are by women
defending themselves against sexual abuse.
Fact:
When a woman was armed with a gun or knife, only 3% of the attempted rapes are
successful, compared to 32% when unarmed.

Fact:
The probability of serious injury from an attack is 2.5 times greater for women offering no
resistance than for women resisting with a gun. Men also benefit from using a gun, but the
benefits are smaller: offering no resistance is 1.4 times more likely to result in serious injury than
resisting with a gun.

Fact:
27% of women keep a gun in the house.

Fact:
37.6 million women either own or have rapid access to guns.

Fact:
In 1966 the city of Orlando responded to a wave of sexual assaults by offering firearms
training classes to women. The number of rapes dropped by nearly 90%.

It's almost as if you guys are allergic to citing your sources with a link. Why is that?

should we link opinion pieces like you?

Link to anything at this point. I'd love to know where you get your information.

 

[Spoonman]

LOL, so the hell what? I didn't argue that guns NEVER protect people. I just said it was not good at it, especially compared with the number of people killed by guns.

Are you really making your argument based upon the experiences of your Uncle?

if guns aren't good at protecting people, why do cops carry them?

LOL, really? This needs to be explained to you? It's like you keep setting up these ridiculous points, it gets knocked down and you look for something else ridiculous to move on to.

You'll just ignore my response and pretend you didn't say the dumb shit that you said.

ok, i win, cool

 

[Pogo]

But thats the point. You've been shown data that says guns aren't even a good tool for protection. Yes, they do work for some to protect, but they are causing more harm than good.

And if you refuse to even discuss responsible gun legislation then it absolutely is your fault when innocent people are shot and killed because you insisted on protecting your precious toys.

How are they not a good tool for protection when there are no stats for how many times a person with a gun prevented a crime without firing the weapon?

One does not need to fire a weapon for it to be effective as protection.

This is probably as meaningless as any other stat but since you like them so much

Private Guns Stop Crime 2.5M Times A Year In US

And legislation does not make people responsible. It never has and it never will.

All the legislation in the world cannot prevent accidents.

No stats? We are the most armed society and one of the most violent. If arming people meant safety, shouldn't we be one of the least violent societies?

No stats he says. lol.

For No-staters, once again, see this chart. It says a lot about where we sit. I wish I could find a way to paste it into a post so it couldn't be conveniently ignored... but it's there for those with eyes to see.

 

[RDD_1210]

It's almost as if you guys are allergic to citing your sources with a link. Why is that?

That is your link, GOOGLE IT OR GO TO THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE WEBSITE

However, I will indulge your request ONE FINAL TIME.

https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/Digitization/55878NCJRS.pdf

My link? You obviously have me confused with someone else. I think someone needs a nap.