Update on Waffle house shooting over no smoking request…yep, a gun free zone, and he had a record.

[2aguy]

"Update on Waffle house shooting over no smoking request…yep, a gun free zone, and he had a record."

This is truly moronic.

If the shooter had a gun clearly it wasn't a "gun free zone," an employee could likewise carry a concealed gun.

The thread premise consequently fails, as people carry guns whether the property owner prohibits it or not.

Against corporate policy twit. The Corporate policy is no guns allowed…..try reading the link.

would you follow that policy?

do you check your concealed weapon at the door?

Any sane person wouldn't think they need a gun to eat a soggy waffle.

Except for the ones who do……..a lot of restaurants get robbed……the customers at the Palatine, Brown's Chicken wish someone had carried a gun to eat fried chicken…..but because we didn't have concealed carry back then…all of the employees were murdered.

And we lose 32,000 or more citizens a year to guns. Like some third world nation.

Wrong……21,000 of those deaths are by suicide…..Japan, South Korea and China have absolute gun control and have 2x that suicide rate…so those don't count…considering that we also have 19,000 people who committed suicide without guns….

In a country with over 357 million guns, and 13 million Americans carrying guns for self defense we had a grand total of 505 accidental gun deaths……..

And actual gun murders…committed by people breaking the law…..8,124 in 2014….the majority of victims are violent criminals murdered by other violent criminals and it is about time people started acknowledging that fact…..

Then…in 2014 we had mass shooters who murdered a grand total of 9 people…..

So it isn't a 3rd world nation…it is a criminal culture that likes to shoot each other……..


Normal gun owners = 356,991,876 million…. vs. 8,124 violent criminals who break the law….

Can you tell which number is bigger….?


And guns are used by American citizens 1.5 million times a year to stop violent crime…and to save American lives from criminal attack…according to bill clinton and confirmed by President obama……..


And keep in mind…mass murder, genocide and ethnic cleansing have happened all over the world and the one thing all those events have in common….unarmed people…who are then murdered by police, and soldiers by order of their own governments….it happened in Europe and with the murder of 12 million people….innocent, unarmed, men, women and children (of all ages)……….and the fact is they had no guns to stop it…..

So try doing some research and then your posts will be more informed.

 

[2aguy]

What gun control has looked like around the world…

 

[BULLDOG]

Against corporate policy twit. The Corporate policy is no guns allowed…..try reading the link.

would you follow that policy?

do you check your concealed weapon at the door?

Any sane person wouldn't think they need a gun to eat a soggy waffle.

Except for the ones who do……..a lot of restaurants get robbed……the customers at the Palatine, Brown's Chicken wish someone had carried a gun to eat fried chicken…..but because we didn't have concealed carry back then…all of the employees were murdered.

And we lose 32,000 or more citizens a year to guns. Like some third world nation.

Wrong……21,000 of those deaths are by suicide…..Japan, South Korea and China have absolute gun control and have 2x that suicide rate…so those don't count…considering that we also have 19,000 people who committed suicide without guns….

In a country with over 357 million guns, and 13 million Americans carrying guns for self defense we had a grand total of 505 accidental gun deaths……..

And actual gun murders…committed by people breaking the law…..8,124 in 2014….the majority of victims are violent criminals murdered by other violent criminals and it is about time people started acknowledging that fact…..

Then…in 2014 we had mass shooters who murdered a grand total of 9 people…..

So it isn't a 3rd world nation…it is a criminal culture that likes to shoot each other……..


Normal gun owners = 356,991,876 million…. vs. 8,124 violent criminals who break the law….

Can you tell which number is bigger….?


And guns are used by American citizens 1.5 million times a year to stop violent crime…and to save American lives from criminal attack…according to bill clinton and confirmed by President obama……..


And keep in mind…mass murder, genocide and ethnic cleansing have happened all over the world and the one thing all those events have in common….unarmed people…who are then murdered by police, and soldiers by order of their own governments….it happened in Europe and with the murder of 12 million people….innocent, unarmed, men, women and children (of all ages)……….and the fact is they had no guns to stop it…..

So try doing some research and then your posts will be more informed.

Here's some research for you. You are more likely to be struck by lightning than you are to use a gun to kill in self defense
VPC - A Deadly Myth: Women, Handguns, and Self-Defense

 

[2aguy]

would you follow that policy?

do you check your concealed weapon at the door?

Any sane person wouldn't think they need a gun to eat a soggy waffle.

Except for the ones who do……..a lot of restaurants get robbed……the customers at the Palatine, Brown's Chicken wish someone had carried a gun to eat fried chicken…..but because we didn't have concealed carry back then…all of the employees were murdered.

And we lose 32,000 or more citizens a year to guns. Like some third world nation.

Wrong……21,000 of those deaths are by suicide…..Japan, South Korea and China have absolute gun control and have 2x that suicide rate…so those don't count…considering that we also have 19,000 people who committed suicide without guns….

In a country with over 357 million guns, and 13 million Americans carrying guns for self defense we had a grand total of 505 accidental gun deaths……..

And actual gun murders…committed by people breaking the law…..8,124 in 2014….the majority of victims are violent criminals murdered by other violent criminals and it is about time people started acknowledging that fact…..

Then…in 2014 we had mass shooters who murdered a grand total of 9 people…..

So it isn't a 3rd world nation…it is a criminal culture that likes to shoot each other……..


Normal gun owners = 356,991,876 million…. vs. 8,124 violent criminals who break the law….

Can you tell which number is bigger….?


And guns are used by American citizens 1.5 million times a year to stop violent crime…and to save American lives from criminal attack…according to bill clinton and confirmed by President obama……..


And keep in mind…mass murder, genocide and ethnic cleansing have happened all over the world and the one thing all those events have in common….unarmed people…who are then murdered by police, and soldiers by order of their own governments….it happened in Europe and with the murder of 12 million people….innocent, unarmed, men, women and children (of all ages)……….and the fact is they had no guns to stop it…..

So try doing some research and then your posts will be more informed.

Here's some research for you. You are more likely to be struck by lightning than you are to use a gun to kill in self defense
VPC - A Deadly Myth: Women, Handguns, and Self-Defense

Oh….the Violence Policy Center………that isn't research, they are a rabid, anti gun extremist group…here is some actual research…

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%20Ownership%20Stops%20Rape/

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

 

[BULLDOG]

Any sane person wouldn't think they need a gun to eat a soggy waffle.

Except for the ones who do……..a lot of restaurants get robbed……the customers at the Palatine, Brown's Chicken wish someone had carried a gun to eat fried chicken…..but because we didn't have concealed carry back then…all of the employees were murdered.

And we lose 32,000 or more citizens a year to guns. Like some third world nation.

Wrong……21,000 of those deaths are by suicide…..Japan, South Korea and China have absolute gun control and have 2x that suicide rate…so those don't count…considering that we also have 19,000 people who committed suicide without guns….

In a country with over 357 million guns, and 13 million Americans carrying guns for self defense we had a grand total of 505 accidental gun deaths……..

And actual gun murders…committed by people breaking the law…..8,124 in 2014….the majority of victims are violent criminals murdered by other violent criminals and it is about time people started acknowledging that fact…..

Then…in 2014 we had mass shooters who murdered a grand total of 9 people…..

So it isn't a 3rd world nation…it is a criminal culture that likes to shoot each other……..


Normal gun owners = 356,991,876 million…. vs. 8,124 violent criminals who break the law….

Can you tell which number is bigger….?


And guns are used by American citizens 1.5 million times a year to stop violent crime…and to save American lives from criminal attack…according to bill clinton and confirmed by President obama……..


And keep in mind…mass murder, genocide and ethnic cleansing have happened all over the world and the one thing all those events have in common….unarmed people…who are then murdered by police, and soldiers by order of their own governments….it happened in Europe and with the murder of 12 million people….innocent, unarmed, men, women and children (of all ages)……….and the fact is they had no guns to stop it…..

So try doing some research and then your posts will be more informed.

Here's some research for you. You are more likely to be struck by lightning than you are to use a gun to kill in self defense
VPC - A Deadly Myth: Women, Handguns, and Self-Defense

Oh….the Violence Policy Center………that isn't research, they are a rabid, anti gun extremist group…here is some actual research…

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/
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

You really should read your links before you post them. That number was reported, but then there was an entire section on
why those numbers didn't make realistic sense. Below is an excerpt of that section. The report didn't actually say it, but the only rational answer to the discrepancy is that gun owners greatly exaggerated the amount of times they used a gun for defensive purposes. Why does that not surprise me?



For example, in only a small fraction of rape and robbery attempts do victims use guns in self-defense. It does not make sense, then, that the NSPOF estimate of the number of rapes in which a woman defended herself with a gun was more than the total number of rapes estimated from NCVS (exhibit 8). For other crimes listed in exhibit 8, the results are almost as absurd: the NSPOF estimate of DGU robberies is 36 percent of all NCVS-estimated robberies, while the NSPOF estimate of DGU assaults is 19 percent of all aggravated assaults. If those percentages were close to accurate, crime would be a risky business indeed! NSPOF estimates also suggest that 130,000 criminals are wounded or killed by civilian gun defenders. That number also appears completely out of line with other, more reliable statistics on the number of gunshot cases.14 The evidence of bias in the DGU estimates is even stronger when one recalls that the DGU estimates are calculated using only the most recently reported DGU incidents of NSPOF respondents; as noted, about half of the respondents who reported a DGU indicated two or more in the preceding year. Although there are no details on the circumstances of those additional DGUs, presumably they are similar to the most recent case and provide evidence for additional millions of violent crimes foiled and perpetrators shot.

 

[OnePercenter]

Where did he get the gun?

Was his head injury sustained while performing duties as a Fire Fighter?

 

[2aguy]

Except for the ones who do……..a lot of restaurants get robbed……the customers at the Palatine, Brown's Chicken wish someone had carried a gun to eat fried chicken…..but because we didn't have concealed carry back then…all of the employees were murdered.

And we lose 32,000 or more citizens a year to guns. Like some third world nation.

Wrong……21,000 of those deaths are by suicide…..Japan, South Korea and China have absolute gun control and have 2x that suicide rate…so those don't count…considering that we also have 19,000 people who committed suicide without guns….

In a country with over 357 million guns, and 13 million Americans carrying guns for self defense we had a grand total of 505 accidental gun deaths……..

And actual gun murders…committed by people breaking the law…..8,124 in 2014….the majority of victims are violent criminals murdered by other violent criminals and it is about time people started acknowledging that fact…..

Then…in 2014 we had mass shooters who murdered a grand total of 9 people…..

So it isn't a 3rd world nation…it is a criminal culture that likes to shoot each other……..


Normal gun owners = 356,991,876 million…. vs. 8,124 violent criminals who break the law….

Can you tell which number is bigger….?


And guns are used by American citizens 1.5 million times a year to stop violent crime…and to save American lives from criminal attack…according to bill clinton and confirmed by President obama……..


And keep in mind…mass murder, genocide and ethnic cleansing have happened all over the world and the one thing all those events have in common….unarmed people…who are then murdered by police, and soldiers by order of their own governments….it happened in Europe and with the murder of 12 million people….innocent, unarmed, men, women and children (of all ages)……….and the fact is they had no guns to stop it…..

So try doing some research and then your posts will be more informed.

Here's some research for you. You are more likely to be struck by lightning than you are to use a gun to kill in self defense
VPC - A Deadly Myth: Women, Handguns, and Self-Defense

Oh….the Violence Policy Center………that isn't research, they are a rabid, anti gun extremist group…here is some actual research…

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

You really should read your links before you post them. That number was reported, but then there was an entire section on
why those numbers didn't make realistic sense. Below is an excerpt of that section. The report didn't actually say it, but the only rational answer to the discrepancy is that gun owners greatly exaggerated the amount of times they used a gun for defensive purposes. Why does that not surprise me?



For example, in only a small fraction of rape and robbery attempts do victims use guns in self-defense. It does not make sense, then, that the NSPOF estimate of the number of rapes in which a woman defended herself with a gun was more than the total number of rapes estimated from NCVS (exhibit 8). For other crimes listed in exhibit 8, the results are almost as absurd: the NSPOF estimate of DGU robberies is 36 percent of all NCVS-estimated robberies, while the NSPOF estimate of DGU assaults is 19 percent of all aggravated assaults. If those percentages were close to accurate, crime would be a risky business indeed! NSPOF estimates also suggest that 130,000 criminals are wounded or killed by civilian gun defenders. That number also appears completely out of line with other, more reliable statistics on the number of gunshot cases.14 The evidence of bias in the DGU estimates is even stronger when one recalls that the DGU estimates are calculated using only the most recently reported DGU incidents of NSPOF respondents; as noted, about half of the respondents who reported a DGU indicated two or more in the preceding year. Although there are no details on the circumstances of those additional DGUs, presumably they are similar to the most recent case and provide evidence for additional millions of violent crimes foiled and perpetrators shot.

You realize that the guys who did the study, created it, executed it and when the numbers came back...they were shocked that Dr. Kleck and all the others were right...guns are used for self defense millions of times a year and their study showed the 1.5 million number...then they spent the rest of their study saying their research was all wrong.........only an anti gunner does that...

 

[2aguy]

Except for the ones who do……..a lot of restaurants get robbed……the customers at the Palatine, Brown's Chicken wish someone had carried a gun to eat fried chicken…..but because we didn't have concealed carry back then…all of the employees were murdered.

And we lose 32,000 or more citizens a year to guns. Like some third world nation.

Wrong……21,000 of those deaths are by suicide…..Japan, South Korea and China have absolute gun control and have 2x that suicide rate…so those don't count…considering that we also have 19,000 people who committed suicide without guns….

In a country with over 357 million guns, and 13 million Americans carrying guns for self defense we had a grand total of 505 accidental gun deaths……..

And actual gun murders…committed by people breaking the law…..8,124 in 2014….the majority of victims are violent criminals murdered by other violent criminals and it is about time people started acknowledging that fact…..

Then…in 2014 we had mass shooters who murdered a grand total of 9 people…..

So it isn't a 3rd world nation…it is a criminal culture that likes to shoot each other……..


Normal gun owners = 356,991,876 million…. vs. 8,124 violent criminals who break the law….

Can you tell which number is bigger….?


And guns are used by American citizens 1.5 million times a year to stop violent crime…and to save American lives from criminal attack…according to bill clinton and confirmed by President obama……..


And keep in mind…mass murder, genocide and ethnic cleansing have happened all over the world and the one thing all those events have in common….unarmed people…who are then murdered by police, and soldiers by order of their own governments….it happened in Europe and with the murder of 12 million people….innocent, unarmed, men, women and children (of all ages)……….and the fact is they had no guns to stop it…..

So try doing some research and then your posts will be more informed.

Here's some research for you. You are more likely to be struck by lightning than you are to use a gun to kill in self defense
VPC - A Deadly Myth: Women, Handguns, and Self-Defense

Oh….the Violence Policy Center………that isn't research, they are a rabid, anti gun extremist group…here is some actual research…

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

You really should read your links before you post them. That number was reported, but then there was an entire section on
why those numbers didn't make realistic sense. Below is an excerpt of that section. The report didn't actually say it, but the only rational answer to the discrepancy is that gun owners greatly exaggerated the amount of times they used a gun for defensive purposes. Why does that not surprise me?



For example, in only a small fraction of rape and robbery attempts do victims use guns in self-defense. It does not make sense, then, that the NSPOF estimate of the number of rapes in which a woman defended herself with a gun was more than the total number of rapes estimated from NCVS (exhibit 8). For other crimes listed in exhibit 8, the results are almost as absurd: the NSPOF estimate of DGU robberies is 36 percent of all NCVS-estimated robberies, while the NSPOF estimate of DGU assaults is 19 percent of all aggravated assaults. If those percentages were close to accurate, crime would be a risky business indeed! NSPOF estimates also suggest that 130,000 criminals are wounded or killed by civilian gun defenders. That number also appears completely out of line with other, more reliable statistics on the number of gunshot cases.14 The evidence of bias in the DGU estimates is even stronger when one recalls that the DGU estimates are calculated using only the most recently reported DGU incidents of NSPOF respondents; as noted, about half of the respondents who reported a DGU indicated two or more in the preceding year. Although there are no details on the circumstances of those additional DGUs, presumably they are similar to the most recent case and provide evidence for additional millions of violent crimes foiled and perpetrators shot.

And you should keep up on why the National Crime Vicimization Survey is bad at even what it is supposed to do...

National Crime Victimization Survey A new report finds that the Justice Department has been undercounting instances of rape and sexual assault.

How helpful, then, that the Justice Department asked the National Research Council (part of the National Academies, which also includes the National Academy of Sciences and the Institute of Medicine) to study how successfully the federal government measures rape.

The answer has just arrived, in a report out Tuesday with the headline from the press release: “The National Crime Victimization Survey Is Likely Undercounting Rape and Sexual Assault.”

We’re not talking about small fractions—we’re talking about the kind of potentially massive underestimate that the military and the Justice Department have warned about for years—and that could be throwing a wrench into the effort to do the most effective type of rape prevention.....

But here are the flaws that call the nice-sounding stats into doubt: The NCVS is designed to measure all kinds of crime victimization. The questions it poses about sexual violence are embedded among questions that ask about lots of other types of crime. For example:

So......the NCVS can't get an accurate account of what it is researching....how do we know this...the numbers are off...

There is, in fact, an existing survey that has many of the attributes the NCVS currently lacks. It’s administered by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and it’s called the National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey. (NISVS is the acronym. Apologies for the alphabet soup.)

NISVS “represents the public health perspective,” as Tuesday’s report puts it, and it asks questions about specific behavior, including whether the survey-taker was unable to consent to sex because he or she had been drinking or taking drugs. NISVS was first conducted in 2010, so it doesn’t go back in time the way the NCVS numbers do.

But here’s the startling direct comparison between the two measures: NISVS counted 1.27 million total sexual acts of forced penetration for women over the past year (including completed, attempted, and alcohol or drug facilitated).

NCVS counted only 188,380 for rape and sexual assault. And the FBI, which collects its data from local law enforcement, and so only counts rapes and attempted rapes that have been reported as crimes, totaled only 85,593 for 2010.

So no....the NCVS is not a tool to understand the use of guns for self defense..........

So.....the NCVS undercounts one of the very crimes it is supposed to be studying...of course gun grabbers cling to it because it is the only study that under reports defensive gun uses...primarily because it is not a defensive gun use study....

 

[2aguy]

Except for the ones who do……..a lot of restaurants get robbed……the customers at the Palatine, Brown's Chicken wish someone had carried a gun to eat fried chicken…..but because we didn't have concealed carry back then…all of the employees were murdered.

And we lose 32,000 or more citizens a year to guns. Like some third world nation.

Wrong……21,000 of those deaths are by suicide…..Japan, South Korea and China have absolute gun control and have 2x that suicide rate…so those don't count…considering that we also have 19,000 people who committed suicide without guns….

In a country with over 357 million guns, and 13 million Americans carrying guns for self defense we had a grand total of 505 accidental gun deaths……..

And actual gun murders…committed by people breaking the law…..8,124 in 2014….the majority of victims are violent criminals murdered by other violent criminals and it is about time people started acknowledging that fact…..

Then…in 2014 we had mass shooters who murdered a grand total of 9 people…..

So it isn't a 3rd world nation…it is a criminal culture that likes to shoot each other……..


Normal gun owners = 356,991,876 million…. vs. 8,124 violent criminals who break the law….

Can you tell which number is bigger….?


And guns are used by American citizens 1.5 million times a year to stop violent crime…and to save American lives from criminal attack…according to bill clinton and confirmed by President obama……..


And keep in mind…mass murder, genocide and ethnic cleansing have happened all over the world and the one thing all those events have in common….unarmed people…who are then murdered by police, and soldiers by order of their own governments….it happened in Europe and with the murder of 12 million people….innocent, unarmed, men, women and children (of all ages)……….and the fact is they had no guns to stop it…..

So try doing some research and then your posts will be more informed.

Here's some research for you. You are more likely to be struck by lightning than you are to use a gun to kill in self defense
VPC - A Deadly Myth: Women, Handguns, and Self-Defense

Oh….the Violence Policy Center………that isn't research, they are a rabid, anti gun extremist group…here is some actual research…

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

You really should read your links before you post them. That number was reported, but then there was an entire section on
why those numbers didn't make realistic sense. Below is an excerpt of that section. The report didn't actually say it, but the only rational answer to the discrepancy is that gun owners greatly exaggerated the amount of times they used a gun for defensive purposes. Why does that not surprise me?



For example, in only a small fraction of rape and robbery attempts do victims use guns in self-defense. It does not make sense, then, that the NSPOF estimate of the number of rapes in which a woman defended herself with a gun was more than the total number of rapes estimated from NCVS (exhibit 8). For other crimes listed in exhibit 8, the results are almost as absurd: the NSPOF estimate of DGU robberies is 36 percent of all NCVS-estimated robberies, while the NSPOF estimate of DGU assaults is 19 percent of all aggravated assaults. If those percentages were close to accurate, crime would be a risky business indeed! NSPOF estimates also suggest that 130,000 criminals are wounded or killed by civilian gun defenders. That number also appears completely out of line with other, more reliable statistics on the number of gunshot cases.14 The evidence of bias in the DGU estimates is even stronger when one recalls that the DGU estimates are calculated using only the most recently reported DGU incidents of NSPOF respondents; as noted, about half of the respondents who reported a DGU indicated two or more in the preceding year. Although there are no details on the circumstances of those additional DGUs, presumably they are similar to the most recent case and provide evidence for additional millions of violent crimes foiled and perpetrators shot.

and please link which link you are citing...makes it easier for all of us....

 

[2aguy]

The one link...

Self-defense with guns: The consequences

Based on these findings, the consequences of having a greater portion of the potential victims being armed were analyzed. It was found that this would reduce both losses and injuries from crime as well as both the criminals' incentives to commit violent crimes and to be armed.

 

[BULLDOG]

And we lose 32,000 or more citizens a year to guns. Like some third world nation.

Wrong……21,000 of those deaths are by suicide…..Japan, South Korea and China have absolute gun control and have 2x that suicide rate…so those don't count…considering that we also have 19,000 people who committed suicide without guns….

In a country with over 357 million guns, and 13 million Americans carrying guns for self defense we had a grand total of 505 accidental gun deaths……..

And actual gun murders…committed by people breaking the law…..8,124 in 2014….the majority of victims are violent criminals murdered by other violent criminals and it is about time people started acknowledging that fact…..

Then…in 2014 we had mass shooters who murdered a grand total of 9 people…..

So it isn't a 3rd world nation…it is a criminal culture that likes to shoot each other……..


Normal gun owners = 356,991,876 million…. vs. 8,124 violent criminals who break the law….

Can you tell which number is bigger….?


And guns are used by American citizens 1.5 million times a year to stop violent crime…and to save American lives from criminal attack…according to bill clinton and confirmed by President obama……..


And keep in mind…mass murder, genocide and ethnic cleansing have happened all over the world and the one thing all those events have in common….unarmed people…who are then murdered by police, and soldiers by order of their own governments….it happened in Europe and with the murder of 12 million people….innocent, unarmed, men, women and children (of all ages)……….and the fact is they had no guns to stop it…..

So try doing some research and then your posts will be more informed.

Here's some research for you. You are more likely to be struck by lightning than you are to use a gun to kill in self defense
VPC - A Deadly Myth: Women, Handguns, and Self-Defense

Oh….the Violence Policy Center………that isn't research, they are a rabid, anti gun extremist group…here is some actual research…

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

You really should read your links before you post them. That number was reported, but then there was an entire section on
why those numbers didn't make realistic sense. Below is an excerpt of that section. The report didn't actually say it, but the only rational answer to the discrepancy is that gun owners greatly exaggerated the amount of times they used a gun for defensive purposes. Why does that not surprise me?



For example, in only a small fraction of rape and robbery attempts do victims use guns in self-defense. It does not make sense, then, that the NSPOF estimate of the number of rapes in which a woman defended herself with a gun was more than the total number of rapes estimated from NCVS (exhibit 8). For other crimes listed in exhibit 8, the results are almost as absurd: the NSPOF estimate of DGU robberies is 36 percent of all NCVS-estimated robberies, while the NSPOF estimate of DGU assaults is 19 percent of all aggravated assaults. If those percentages were close to accurate, crime would be a risky business indeed! NSPOF estimates also suggest that 130,000 criminals are wounded or killed by civilian gun defenders. That number also appears completely out of line with other, more reliable statistics on the number of gunshot cases.14 The evidence of bias in the DGU estimates is even stronger when one recalls that the DGU estimates are calculated using only the most recently reported DGU incidents of NSPOF respondents; as noted, about half of the respondents who reported a DGU indicated two or more in the preceding year. Although there are no details on the circumstances of those additional DGUs, presumably they are similar to the most recent case and provide evidence for additional millions of violent crimes foiled and perpetrators shot.

You realize that the guys who did the study, created it, executed it and when the numbers came back...they were shocked that Dr. Kleck and all the others were right...guns are used for self defense millions of times a year and their study showed the 1.5 million number...then they spent the rest of their study saying their research was all wrong.........only an anti gunner does that...

No.They found that the self reporting gun owners greatly exaggerated the number of times they used guns for defense.

 

[2aguy]

Except for the ones who do……..a lot of restaurants get robbed……the customers at the Palatine, Brown's Chicken wish someone had carried a gun to eat fried chicken…..but because we didn't have concealed carry back then…all of the employees were murdered.

And we lose 32,000 or more citizens a year to guns. Like some third world nation.

Wrong……21,000 of those deaths are by suicide…..Japan, South Korea and China have absolute gun control and have 2x that suicide rate…so those don't count…considering that we also have 19,000 people who committed suicide without guns….

In a country with over 357 million guns, and 13 million Americans carrying guns for self defense we had a grand total of 505 accidental gun deaths……..

And actual gun murders…committed by people breaking the law…..8,124 in 2014….the majority of victims are violent criminals murdered by other violent criminals and it is about time people started acknowledging that fact…..

Then…in 2014 we had mass shooters who murdered a grand total of 9 people…..

So it isn't a 3rd world nation…it is a criminal culture that likes to shoot each other……..


Normal gun owners = 356,991,876 million…. vs. 8,124 violent criminals who break the law….

Can you tell which number is bigger….?


And guns are used by American citizens 1.5 million times a year to stop violent crime…and to save American lives from criminal attack…according to bill clinton and confirmed by President obama……..


And keep in mind…mass murder, genocide and ethnic cleansing have happened all over the world and the one thing all those events have in common….unarmed people…who are then murdered by police, and soldiers by order of their own governments….it happened in Europe and with the murder of 12 million people….innocent, unarmed, men, women and children (of all ages)……….and the fact is they had no guns to stop it…..

So try doing some research and then your posts will be more informed.

Here's some research for you. You are more likely to be struck by lightning than you are to use a gun to kill in self defense
VPC - A Deadly Myth: Women, Handguns, and Self-Defense

Oh….the Violence Policy Center………that isn't research, they are a rabid, anti gun extremist group…here is some actual research…

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

You really should read your links before you post them. That number was reported, but then there was an entire section on
why those numbers didn't make realistic sense. Below is an excerpt of that section. The report didn't actually say it, but the only rational answer to the discrepancy is that gun owners greatly exaggerated the amount of times they used a gun for defensive purposes. Why does that not surprise me?



For example, in only a small fraction of rape and robbery attempts do victims use guns in self-defense. It does not make sense, then, that the NSPOF estimate of the number of rapes in which a woman defended herself with a gun was more than the total number of rapes estimated from NCVS (exhibit 8). For other crimes listed in exhibit 8, the results are almost as absurd: the NSPOF estimate of DGU robberies is 36 percent of all NCVS-estimated robberies, while the NSPOF estimate of DGU assaults is 19 percent of all aggravated assaults. If those percentages were close to accurate, crime would be a risky business indeed! NSPOF estimates also suggest that 130,000 criminals are wounded or killed by civilian gun defenders. That number also appears completely out of line with other, more reliable statistics on the number of gunshot cases.14 The evidence of bias in the DGU estimates is even stronger when one recalls that the DGU estimates are calculated using only the most recently reported DGU incidents of NSPOF respondents; as noted, about half of the respondents who reported a DGU indicated two or more in the preceding year. Although there are no details on the circumstances of those additional DGUs, presumably they are similar to the most recent case and provide evidence for additional millions of violent crimes foiled and perpetrators shot.

And more on defensive gun use research....

Armed Resistance to Crime The Prevalence and Nature of Self-Defense with a Gun

Even under the best of circumstances, reporting the use of a gun for self-protection would be an extremely sensitive and legally controversial matter for either of two reasons. As with other forms of forceful resistance, the defensive act itself, regardless of the characteristics of any weapon used, might constitute an unlawful assault or at least the R might believe that others, including either legal authorities or the researchers, could regard it that way. Resistance with a gun also involves additional elements of sensitivity.

Because guns are legally regulated, a victim's possession of the weapon, either in general or at the time of the DGU, might itself be unlawful, either in fact or in the mind of a crime victim who used one. More likely, lay persons with a limited knowledge of the extremely complicated law of either self-defense or firearms regulation are unlikely to know for sure whether their defensive actions or their gun possession was lawful.

It is not hard for gun-using victims interviewed in the NCVS to withhold information about their use of a gun, especially since they are never directly asked whether they used a gun for self-protection. They are asked only general questions about whether they did anything to protect themselves.[26] In short, Rs are merely given the opportunity to volunteer the information that they have used a gun defensively. All it takes for an R to conceal a DGU is to simply refrain from mentioning it, i.e., to leave it out of what may be an otherwise accurate and complete account of the crime incident.

Further, Rs in the NCVS are not even asked the general self-protection question unless they already independently indicated that they had been a victim of a crime. This means that any DGUs associated with crimes the Rs did not want to talk about would remain hidden. It has been estimated that the NCVS may catch less than one-twelfth of spousal assaults and one-thirty-third of rapes,[27] thereby missing nearly all DGUs associated with such crimes.

In the context of a non anonymous survey conducted by the federal government, an R who reports a DGU may believe that he is placing himself in serious legal jeopardy. For example, consider the issue of the location of crimes. For all but a handful of gun owners with a permit to carry a weapon in public places (under 4% of the adult population even in states like Florida, where carry permits are relatively easy to get)[28], the mere possession of a gun in a place other than their home, place of business, or in some states, their vehicle, is a crime, often a felony. In at least ten states, it is punishable by a punitively mandatory minimum prison sentence.[29] Yet, 88% of the violent crimes which Rs reported to NCVS interviewers in 1992 were committed away from the victim's home,[30] i.e., in a location where it would ordinarily be a crime for the victim to even possess a gun, never mind use it defensively. Because the question about location is asked before the self-protection questions,[31] the typical violent crime victim R has already committed himself to having been victimized in a public place before being asked what he or she did for self-protection. In short, Rs usually could not mention their defensive use of a gun without, in effect, confessing to a crime to a federal government employee.

Even for crimes that occurred in the victim's home, such as a burglary, possession of a gun would still often be unlawful or of unknown legal status; because the R had not complied with or could not be sure he had complied with all legal requirements concerning registration of the gun's acquisition or possession, permits for purchase, licensing of home possession, storage requirements, and so on.

In light of all these considerations, it may be unrealistic to assume that more than a fraction of Rs who have used a gun defensively would be willing to report it to NCVS interviewers.

The NCVS was not designed to estimate how often people resist crime using a gun. It was designed primarily to estimate national victimization levels; it incidentally happens to include a few self-protection questions which include response categories covering resistance with a gun.

Its survey instrument has been carefully refined and evaluated over the years to do as good a job as possible in getting people to report illegal things which other people have done to them.


This is the exact opposite of the task which faces anyone trying to get good DGU estimates--to get people to admit controversial and possibly illegal things which the Rs themselves have done. Therefore, it is neither surprising, nor a reflection on the survey's designers, to note that the NCVS is singularly ill-suited for estimating the prevalence or incidence of DGU. It is not credible to regard this survey as an acceptable basis for establishing, in even the roughest way, how often Americans use guns for self-protection.

 

[2aguy]

Wrong……21,000 of those deaths are by suicide…..Japan, South Korea and China have absolute gun control and have 2x that suicide rate…so those don't count…considering that we also have 19,000 people who committed suicide without guns….

In a country with over 357 million guns, and 13 million Americans carrying guns for self defense we had a grand total of 505 accidental gun deaths……..

And actual gun murders…committed by people breaking the law…..8,124 in 2014….the majority of victims are violent criminals murdered by other violent criminals and it is about time people started acknowledging that fact…..

Then…in 2014 we had mass shooters who murdered a grand total of 9 people…..

So it isn't a 3rd world nation…it is a criminal culture that likes to shoot each other……..


Normal gun owners = 356,991,876 million…. vs. 8,124 violent criminals who break the law….

Can you tell which number is bigger….?


And guns are used by American citizens 1.5 million times a year to stop violent crime…and to save American lives from criminal attack…according to bill clinton and confirmed by President obama……..


And keep in mind…mass murder, genocide and ethnic cleansing have happened all over the world and the one thing all those events have in common….unarmed people…who are then murdered by police, and soldiers by order of their own governments….it happened in Europe and with the murder of 12 million people….innocent, unarmed, men, women and children (of all ages)……….and the fact is they had no guns to stop it…..

So try doing some research and then your posts will be more informed.

Here's some research for you. You are more likely to be struck by lightning than you are to use a gun to kill in self defense
VPC - A Deadly Myth: Women, Handguns, and Self-Defense

Oh….the Violence Policy Center………that isn't research, they are a rabid, anti gun extremist group…here is some actual research…

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

You really should read your links before you post them. That number was reported, but then there was an entire section on
why those numbers didn't make realistic sense. Below is an excerpt of that section. The report didn't actually say it, but the only rational answer to the discrepancy is that gun owners greatly exaggerated the amount of times they used a gun for defensive purposes. Why does that not surprise me?



For example, in only a small fraction of rape and robbery attempts do victims use guns in self-defense. It does not make sense, then, that the NSPOF estimate of the number of rapes in which a woman defended herself with a gun was more than the total number of rapes estimated from NCVS (exhibit 8). For other crimes listed in exhibit 8, the results are almost as absurd: the NSPOF estimate of DGU robberies is 36 percent of all NCVS-estimated robberies, while the NSPOF estimate of DGU assaults is 19 percent of all aggravated assaults. If those percentages were close to accurate, crime would be a risky business indeed! NSPOF estimates also suggest that 130,000 criminals are wounded or killed by civilian gun defenders. That number also appears completely out of line with other, more reliable statistics on the number of gunshot cases.14 The evidence of bias in the DGU estimates is even stronger when one recalls that the DGU estimates are calculated using only the most recently reported DGU incidents of NSPOF respondents; as noted, about half of the respondents who reported a DGU indicated two or more in the preceding year. Although there are no details on the circumstances of those additional DGUs, presumably they are similar to the most recent case and provide evidence for additional millions of violent crimes foiled and perpetrators shot.

You realize that the guys who did the study, created it, executed it and when the numbers came back...they were shocked that Dr. Kleck and all the others were right...guns are used for self defense millions of times a year and their study showed the 1.5 million number...then they spent the rest of their study saying their research was all wrong.........only an anti gunner does that...

No.They found that the self reporting gun owners greatly exaggerated the number of times they used guns for defense.

Link...?

 

[2aguy]

Wrong……21,000 of those deaths are by suicide…..Japan, South Korea and China have absolute gun control and have 2x that suicide rate…so those don't count…considering that we also have 19,000 people who committed suicide without guns….

In a country with over 357 million guns, and 13 million Americans carrying guns for self defense we had a grand total of 505 accidental gun deaths……..

And actual gun murders…committed by people breaking the law…..8,124 in 2014….the majority of victims are violent criminals murdered by other violent criminals and it is about time people started acknowledging that fact…..

Then…in 2014 we had mass shooters who murdered a grand total of 9 people…..

So it isn't a 3rd world nation…it is a criminal culture that likes to shoot each other……..


Normal gun owners = 356,991,876 million…. vs. 8,124 violent criminals who break the law….

Can you tell which number is bigger….?


And guns are used by American citizens 1.5 million times a year to stop violent crime…and to save American lives from criminal attack…according to bill clinton and confirmed by President obama……..


And keep in mind…mass murder, genocide and ethnic cleansing have happened all over the world and the one thing all those events have in common….unarmed people…who are then murdered by police, and soldiers by order of their own governments….it happened in Europe and with the murder of 12 million people….innocent, unarmed, men, women and children (of all ages)……….and the fact is they had no guns to stop it…..

So try doing some research and then your posts will be more informed.

Here's some research for you. You are more likely to be struck by lightning than you are to use a gun to kill in self defense
VPC - A Deadly Myth: Women, Handguns, and Self-Defense

Oh….the Violence Policy Center………that isn't research, they are a rabid, anti gun extremist group…here is some actual research…

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

You really should read your links before you post them. That number was reported, but then there was an entire section on
why those numbers didn't make realistic sense. Below is an excerpt of that section. The report didn't actually say it, but the only rational answer to the discrepancy is that gun owners greatly exaggerated the amount of times they used a gun for defensive purposes. Why does that not surprise me?



For example, in only a small fraction of rape and robbery attempts do victims use guns in self-defense. It does not make sense, then, that the NSPOF estimate of the number of rapes in which a woman defended herself with a gun was more than the total number of rapes estimated from NCVS (exhibit 8). For other crimes listed in exhibit 8, the results are almost as absurd: the NSPOF estimate of DGU robberies is 36 percent of all NCVS-estimated robberies, while the NSPOF estimate of DGU assaults is 19 percent of all aggravated assaults. If those percentages were close to accurate, crime would be a risky business indeed! NSPOF estimates also suggest that 130,000 criminals are wounded or killed by civilian gun defenders. That number also appears completely out of line with other, more reliable statistics on the number of gunshot cases.14 The evidence of bias in the DGU estimates is even stronger when one recalls that the DGU estimates are calculated using only the most recently reported DGU incidents of NSPOF respondents; as noted, about half of the respondents who reported a DGU indicated two or more in the preceding year. Although there are no details on the circumstances of those additional DGUs, presumably they are similar to the most recent case and provide evidence for additional millions of violent crimes foiled and perpetrators shot.

You realize that the guys who did the study, created it, executed it and when the numbers came back...they were shocked that Dr. Kleck and all the others were right...guns are used for self defense millions of times a year and their study showed the 1.5 million number...then they spent the rest of their study saying their research was all wrong.........only an anti gunner does that...

No.They found that the self reporting gun owners greatly exaggerated the number of times they used guns for defense.

If this is the Clinton gun self defense study they found 1.5 million defensive gun uses with their own research....that is not what bill clinton paid for......so they spent the rest of their paper trashing their own research....not exactly how a paper is supposed to be done....

 

[2aguy]

Except for the ones who do……..a lot of restaurants get robbed……the customers at the Palatine, Brown's Chicken wish someone had carried a gun to eat fried chicken…..but because we didn't have concealed carry back then…all of the employees were murdered.

And we lose 32,000 or more citizens a year to guns. Like some third world nation.

Wrong……21,000 of those deaths are by suicide…..Japan, South Korea and China have absolute gun control and have 2x that suicide rate…so those don't count…considering that we also have 19,000 people who committed suicide without guns….

In a country with over 357 million guns, and 13 million Americans carrying guns for self defense we had a grand total of 505 accidental gun deaths……..

And actual gun murders…committed by people breaking the law…..8,124 in 2014….the majority of victims are violent criminals murdered by other violent criminals and it is about time people started acknowledging that fact…..

Then…in 2014 we had mass shooters who murdered a grand total of 9 people…..

So it isn't a 3rd world nation…it is a criminal culture that likes to shoot each other……..


Normal gun owners = 356,991,876 million…. vs. 8,124 violent criminals who break the law….

Can you tell which number is bigger….?


And guns are used by American citizens 1.5 million times a year to stop violent crime…and to save American lives from criminal attack…according to bill clinton and confirmed by President obama……..


And keep in mind…mass murder, genocide and ethnic cleansing have happened all over the world and the one thing all those events have in common….unarmed people…who are then murdered by police, and soldiers by order of their own governments….it happened in Europe and with the murder of 12 million people….innocent, unarmed, men, women and children (of all ages)……….and the fact is they had no guns to stop it…..

So try doing some research and then your posts will be more informed.

Here's some research for you. You are more likely to be struck by lightning than you are to use a gun to kill in self defense
VPC - A Deadly Myth: Women, Handguns, and Self-Defense

Oh….the Violence Policy Center………that isn't research, they are a rabid, anti gun extremist group…here is some actual research…

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

You really should read your links before you post them. That number was reported, but then there was an entire section on
why those numbers didn't make realistic sense. Below is an excerpt of that section. The report didn't actually say it, but the only rational answer to the discrepancy is that gun owners greatly exaggerated the amount of times they used a gun for defensive purposes. Why does that not surprise me?



For example, in only a small fraction of rape and robbery attempts do victims use guns in self-defense. It does not make sense, then, that the NSPOF estimate of the number of rapes in which a woman defended herself with a gun was more than the total number of rapes estimated from NCVS (exhibit 8). For other crimes listed in exhibit 8, the results are almost as absurd: the NSPOF estimate of DGU robberies is 36 percent of all NCVS-estimated robberies, while the NSPOF estimate of DGU assaults is 19 percent of all aggravated assaults. If those percentages were close to accurate, crime would be a risky business indeed! NSPOF estimates also suggest that 130,000 criminals are wounded or killed by civilian gun defenders. That number also appears completely out of line with other, more reliable statistics on the number of gunshot cases.14 The evidence of bias in the DGU estimates is even stronger when one recalls that the DGU estimates are calculated using only the most recently reported DGU incidents of NSPOF respondents; as noted, about half of the respondents who reported a DGU indicated two or more in the preceding year. Although there are no details on the circumstances of those additional DGUs, presumably they are similar to the most recent case and provide evidence for additional millions of violent crimes foiled and perpetrators shot.

And this is the important part of the clinton study...what they actually found before their anti gun agenda took over....

Applying those restrictions leaves 19 NSPOF respondents (0.8 percent of the sample), representing 1.5 million defensive users. This estimate is directly comparable to the well-known estimate of Kleck and Gertz, shown in the last column of exhibit 7.

And that was obviously unacceptable to the these researchers, since they were known anti gun researchers....then they had to disprove their own study.......and the other research that also supported that number.......

 

[2aguy]

Except for the ones who do……..a lot of restaurants get robbed……the customers at the Palatine, Brown's Chicken wish someone had carried a gun to eat fried chicken…..but because we didn't have concealed carry back then…all of the employees were murdered.

And we lose 32,000 or more citizens a year to guns. Like some third world nation.

Wrong……21,000 of those deaths are by suicide…..Japan, South Korea and China have absolute gun control and have 2x that suicide rate…so those don't count…considering that we also have 19,000 people who committed suicide without guns….

In a country with over 357 million guns, and 13 million Americans carrying guns for self defense we had a grand total of 505 accidental gun deaths……..

And actual gun murders…committed by people breaking the law…..8,124 in 2014….the majority of victims are violent criminals murdered by other violent criminals and it is about time people started acknowledging that fact…..

Then…in 2014 we had mass shooters who murdered a grand total of 9 people…..

So it isn't a 3rd world nation…it is a criminal culture that likes to shoot each other……..


Normal gun owners = 356,991,876 million…. vs. 8,124 violent criminals who break the law….

Can you tell which number is bigger….?


And guns are used by American citizens 1.5 million times a year to stop violent crime…and to save American lives from criminal attack…according to bill clinton and confirmed by President obama……..


And keep in mind…mass murder, genocide and ethnic cleansing have happened all over the world and the one thing all those events have in common….unarmed people…who are then murdered by police, and soldiers by order of their own governments….it happened in Europe and with the murder of 12 million people….innocent, unarmed, men, women and children (of all ages)……….and the fact is they had no guns to stop it…..

So try doing some research and then your posts will be more informed.

Here's some research for you. You are more likely to be struck by lightning than you are to use a gun to kill in self defense
VPC - A Deadly Myth: Women, Handguns, and Self-Defense

Oh….the Violence Policy Center………that isn't research, they are a rabid, anti gun extremist group…here is some actual research…

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

You really should read your links before you post them. That number was reported, but then there was an entire section on
why those numbers didn't make realistic sense. Below is an excerpt of that section. The report didn't actually say it, but the only rational answer to the discrepancy is that gun owners greatly exaggerated the amount of times they used a gun for defensive purposes. Why does that not surprise me?



For example, in only a small fraction of rape and robbery attempts do victims use guns in self-defense. It does not make sense, then, that the NSPOF estimate of the number of rapes in which a woman defended herself with a gun was more than the total number of rapes estimated from NCVS (exhibit 8). For other crimes listed in exhibit 8, the results are almost as absurd: the NSPOF estimate of DGU robberies is 36 percent of all NCVS-estimated robberies, while the NSPOF estimate of DGU assaults is 19 percent of all aggravated assaults. If those percentages were close to accurate, crime would be a risky business indeed! NSPOF estimates also suggest that 130,000 criminals are wounded or killed by civilian gun defenders. That number also appears completely out of line with other, more reliable statistics on the number of gunshot cases.14 The evidence of bias in the DGU estimates is even stronger when one recalls that the DGU estimates are calculated using only the most recently reported DGU incidents of NSPOF respondents; as noted, about half of the respondents who reported a DGU indicated two or more in the preceding year. Although there are no details on the circumstances of those additional DGUs, presumably they are similar to the most recent case and provide evidence for additional millions of violent crimes foiled and perpetrators shot.

See.....the problem you have is that these two anti gun researchers found 1.5 million defensive gun uses.....so you can deny their study since they spend all of their time denying their own work.......and then you have Gary Kleck's work.....citing about 2.5 million defensive gun uses...another anti gun researcher, and member of all sorts of left wing causes......but then you also have to deny President obama and his research....he told the CDC to study all of the research into gun use, gave them 10 million dollars in 2013....and what did they find...obama's CDC....between 500,000 and 3 million defensive gun uses......and of course there is actually 40 years of research you also have to deny....by both government agencies doing the research and private researchrs doing the research....sociologists, economists, and criminologists....many of them anti gun researchers like Kleck and the researchers working for obama and clinton.....


Here is the list of actual gun self defense in the real world by civilians...

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......1994...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 ( the bill clinton study)

Journal of Quantitative Criminology--- 989,883 times per year."
(Based on survey data from a 2000 study published in the Journal of Quantitative Criminology,[17] U.S. civilians use guns to defend themselves and others from crime at least 989,883 times per year.[18])

Paper: "Measuring Civilian Defensive Firearm Use: A Methodological Experiment." By David McDowall and others. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, March 2000. Measuring Civilian Defensive Firearm Use: A Methodological Experiment - Springer


-------------------------------------------

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)....

 

[2aguy]

Thank you for allowing me another opportunity to show all of the defensive gun research.......including bill clinton's and President obama's.......

 

[candycorn]

now a moment of silence for the responsible gun owner that gave us the victims of Sandy Hook 3 years ago.

Thanks.

During that moment of silence did you hear gunfire outside, get a text or call from someone who prevented a gun crime?

No? Neither did anyone else--ask around at work today.

Yet some gun nuts here want you to believe that it happens 5000 times a day, every day of every month of every year and has done so since 1992.

I guess if you're going to tell a lie make it a big one

 

[2aguy]

now a moment of silence for the responsible gun owner that gave us the victims of Sandy Hook 3 years ago.

Thanks.

During that moment of silence did you hear gunfire outside, get a text or call from someone who prevented a gun crime?

No? Neither did anyone else--ask around at work today.

Yet some gun nuts here want you to believe that it happens 5000 times a day, every day of every month of every year and has done so since 1992.

I guess if you're going to tell a lie make it a big one

He was not a responsible gun owner. Sandy Hook was a gun free zone created by people like you. So therefore no responsible gun owners were allowed to be there, and the killer was able to murder all those children with no one to stop him…thanks to you guys.

The killer attended Sandy Hook elementary school, the middle school and the high school……both the middle school and high school had armed police resource officers on campus at the time of the shooting….Sandy Hook did not have one, and so was the chosen target.

Thanks guys…your gun free zone worked exactly as designed…no law abiding gun owner was there to stop him….congrats…...

 

[2aguy]

now a moment of silence for the responsible gun owner that gave us the victims of Sandy Hook 3 years ago.

Thanks.

During that moment of silence did you hear gunfire outside, get a text or call from someone who prevented a gun crime?

No? Neither did anyone else--ask around at work today.

Yet some gun nuts here want you to believe that it happens 5000 times a day, every day of every month of every year and has done so since 1992.

I guess if you're going to tell a lie make it a big one

Yet some gun nuts here want you to believe that it happens 5000 times a day, every day of every month of every year and has done so since 1992.

Hmmm…I didn't think that Gallup was a gun nut research organization…..or that bill clinton and barak obama were gun nuts…..or the L.A. Times…not another gun nut organization…you have a funny definition of gun nuts…..


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......1994...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 ( the bill clinton study)

Journal of Quantitative Criminology--- 989,883 times per year."
(Based on survey data from a 2000 study published in the Journal of Quantitative Criminology,[17] U.S. civilians use guns to defend themselves and others from crime at least 989,883 times per year.[18])

Paper: "Measuring Civilian Defensive Firearm Use: A Methodological Experiment." By David McDowall and others. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, March 2000. Measuring Civilian Defensive Firearm Use: A Methodological Experiment - Springer


-------------------------------------------

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)....