Will more guns create a safer society?

[Derideo_Te]

Except that studies on guns in the home prove that they increase the risks significantly, especially for children. The "benefit" is outweighed by the harm.

Except......gun accidents...like gun violence....are going down, not up.....and as to the studies you talk about....

Lies Damned Lies and Washington CeaseFire s Statistics - The Truth About Guns

basically they use Dr. Kellerman’s own numbers and methodology to show that in homes without a firearm you are ninety-nine times more likely to suffer a non-firearm related killing than you are to kill an intruder without a firearm . . .

But, back to the problems with the new and improved 22 times number.

#1) Dr. Kellerman initially failed to state how he determined that the gun used belonged in the home or had been brought into it by someone else. Four years later he wrote a letter to the NEJM with a correction stating that in follow-up interviews it was determined that in 63% of the cases the gun was organic to the household. So, 0.63 times 22 means you’re only 13.6 times more likely to be ki . . . etc. (I think I’ll start using the acronym TMLTBKBAGIYHTTKAI . . . or, better yet we’ll just use TML (times more likely). So, that has reduced the 22 TML figure down to 13.6.

#2) Dr. Kellerman failed to account for other risk factors like drug use, criminals or criminal activity in the home. According to his study’s Table 3, 53% of the case study households contained at least one adult who had been arrested. So 0.47 times 13.64 leaves 6.4 TML.

#3) Most of the killings didn’t actually occur “in the home,” Oops! According to Kellerman’s own figures, only 23.9% of the homicides happened in the home of the victim. So, 0.239 times 6.4 gives us 1.5321812 so let’s call it 1.5 TML, shall we?

#4) Kellerman’s study includes suicides committed with guns. The problem with that is he did no research to determine if the “victim” acquired the weapon solely in order to commit suicide or if they used it as a “method of opportunity.” And despite the antis claims to the contrary, numerous studies have shown that suicide rates are independent of method. In other words, taking away guns may reduce the gun suicide rate, but non-gun suicides will increase enough to offset this.

#5) And the biggest problem of all: Dr. Kellerman seems to believe that killing someone is the only way to use a gun defensively (one wonders, then, what he thinks of police departments who routinely arrestpeople instead of killing them). But according to Dr. Kleck’s study Targeting Guns (as cited on page 19of Gun Facts ver. 6.0) in less than 0.1% of DGUs is the attacker killed. Indeed, in 92% of DGUs the victim merely brandishes the weapon or fires a warning shot.

So, putting all this together, what do we have (besides the fact that 22 TML is a completely bogus number)? After my swipe at number crunching we have reduced TML to 1.5, but what does that mean in real life?

Well, according to the CDC‘s numbers, over the 11 years from 1999 to 2009 we averaged 11,800 firearm-related murders annually. If we carry that number through 2010 and look at the census numbers, that means the your chance of being murdered with a gun is 11,800/309,000,000 or 0.0038%. So even if we accept Dr. Kellerman’s premise that guns are only useful when they kill someone, having a gun in your home raises your odds of being killed from 0.0038% to 0.0059%.

Your blogger cites Kellerman who has been exposed as a hack for not following accepted scientific practices for studies.

 

[Derideo_Te]

research by the left is heavily biased

Ironic!

 

[2aguy]

Congress passed the Militia Act of 1792 wherein it explicitly required inspection and accounting of all firearms to be reported to the President on an annual basis. Oh, and before you go off pop and say that only applied to the militia you should understand that it applied to every male aged 18 to 45 that they must be enrolled in the militia.

Not sure why militia regulations from 1792 are important to you. Are you advocating that all male Americans from 18 to 45 maintain a fully functional, select fire, military rifle in their homes?....if you are...I would have to disagree, the 2nd amendment only says the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed, it doesn't mandate ownership.....possibly the states could mandate keeping a select fire, military rifle in the home....but I would still be against making it mandatory...

Are you a right wing gun nut or something...or one of those militia types....?

 

[2aguy]

Your blogger cites Kellerman who has been exposed as a hack for not following accepted scientific practices for studies.

Yes....sadly he is still quoted in these debates by anti gunners....

 

[BlackSand]

Having the item gives us some benifit which off-sets that harm.

Except that studies on guns in the home prove that they increase the risks significantly, especially for children. The "benefit" is outweighed by the harm.

More children die drowning in five gallon buckets than from firearms. In fact firearms come last in child fatality rates ... And six times lower than drowning.

Maybe we should start legislation to outlaw swimming pools and eliminate a household threat six times more deadly to children than firearms ... Then we can go after cars and ATV's that are 26 times more deadly to children than firearms.

.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Congress passed the Militia Act of 1792 wherein it explicitly required inspection and accounting of all firearms to be reported to the President on an annual basis. Oh, and before you go off pop and say that only applied to the militia you should understand that it applied to every male aged 18 to 45 that they must be enrolled in the militia.

Not sure why militia regulations from 1792 are important to you. Are you advocating that all male Americans from 18 to 45 maintain a fully functional, select fire, military rifle in their homes?....if you are...I would have to disagree, the 2nd amendment only says the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed, it doesn't mandate ownership.....possibly the states could mandate keeping a select fire, military rifle in the home....but I would still be against making it mandatory...

Are you a right wing gun nut or something...or one of those militia types....?

The Militia Act of 1792 required that all firearms be registered with the government.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Having the item gives us some benifit which off-sets that harm.

Except that studies on guns in the home prove that they increase the risks significantly, especially for children. The "benefit" is outweighed by the harm.

More children die drowning in five gallon buckets than from firearms. In fact firearms come last in child fatality rates ... And six times lower than drowning.

Maybe we should start legislation to outlaw swimming pools and eliminate a household threat six times more deadly to children than firearms ... Then we can go after cars and ATV's that are 26 times more deadly to children than firearms.

.

Accidental deaths of children by firearms;

Causes of Death Accidental Firearm

Unintentional injuries from firearms represent less than two percent of all firearm deaths in the U.S. But of this two percent, children and adolescents are involved in 55% of these deaths. The majority of the injuries occur to children playing with or showing the weapons to friends. The easy availability of firearms is believed to be the number one risk factor for unintentional firearm deaths.

Homicides of children by firearms;

Causes of Death Homicide Firearm

In 2000, 1,242 children in the United States died from intentional firearm-related injuries. Homicides of children are most often murders of teens by other teens.

Youth homicides represent the greatest proportion of all firearm deaths. Each day in the U.S., firearms kill an average of 10 children and teens, even though the number of teens killed by firearms in the U.S. has dropped by 35% in the past four years. In 1999, the Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance Survey reported that almost one-fifth of the 10th and 12th graders indicated that they had carried a firearm within the previous 30 days for self-defense or to settle disputes.

Youth homicide is a serious problem in large urban areas, especially among black males. Homicides are the number one cause of death for black and Hispanic teens. Yet when socio-economic status is held constant, differences in homicide rates by race become insignificant. Major contributing factors in addition to poverty include easy access to handguns, involvement in drug and gang activity, family disruption and school failure. These homicides usually occur in connection with an argument or dispute. They almost always are committed by casual acquaintances of the same gender, race and age, using inexpensive, easily acquired handguns.

Violence prevention research has demonstrated that strategies are most effective when they identify high-risk children in their earliest years and intervene at multiple levels through collaborative community partnerships.

Sacrificing children on the NRA alter of the 2nd Amendment is something that can be prevented. We mandated airbags in vehicles in order to reduce deaths. Why can't we mandate safer firearms too? What is so sacred about a gun that it cannot be made safer?

 

[BlackSand]

Congress passed the Militia Act of 1792 wherein it explicitly required inspection and accounting of all firearms to be reported to the President on an annual basis. Oh, and before you go off pop and say that only applied to the militia you should understand that it applied to every male aged 18 to 45 that they must be enrolled in the militia.

Not sure why militia regulations from 1792 are important to you. Are you advocating that all male Americans from 18 to 45 maintain a fully functional, select fire, military rifle in their homes?....if you are...I would have to disagree, the 2nd amendment only says the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed, it doesn't mandate ownership.....possibly the states could mandate keeping a select fire, military rifle in the home....but I would still be against making it mandatory...

Are you a right wing gun nut or something...or one of those militia types....?

The Militia Act of 1792 required that all firearms be registered with the government.

The Militia Act of 1792 required accounting of firearms for state and federal militias ... State Militias (National Guard) and Federal Militias (Armed Forces) do keep tight control and accounting in regards to firearms.

.

 

[Saigon]

[


There is no other country on Earth with a 13% minority committing more than half of the murders and other violent crimes.

The US cannot be compared to any other place.

I don't know....I think it's easy to just blame black people, but I suspect the reality is more complex.

I'd be interested to see homicide rates ranked by income bracket and seeing how poor white people score before I link everything to skin colour.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Congress passed the Militia Act of 1792 wherein it explicitly required inspection and accounting of all firearms to be reported to the President on an annual basis. Oh, and before you go off pop and say that only applied to the militia you should understand that it applied to every male aged 18 to 45 that they must be enrolled in the militia.

Not sure why militia regulations from 1792 are important to you. Are you advocating that all male Americans from 18 to 45 maintain a fully functional, select fire, military rifle in their homes?....if you are...I would have to disagree, the 2nd amendment only says the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed, it doesn't mandate ownership.....possibly the states could mandate keeping a select fire, military rifle in the home....but I would still be against making it mandatory...

Are you a right wing gun nut or something...or one of those militia types....?

The Militia Act of 1792 required that all firearms be registered with the government.

The Militia Act of 1792 required accounting of firearms for state and federal militias ... State Militias (National Guard) and Federal Militias (Armed Forces) do keep tight control and accounting in regards to firearms.

.

Agreed!

But back then those were privately owned firearms.

In effect the government was requiring that (a) all guns in private hands be registered, and (b) that all males between the ages of 18 to 45 must belong to a militia.

 

[Ellipsis]

Seriously? That is your "rebuttal?

Slate just reported on the study because that is what Slate does, just like Huffpo, Drudge, Breitbart, DailyKos, etc, etc.

Your credibility has just nosedived into negative territory since you attacked the messenger and not the actual originators of the study.

Attacking the messenger is a personal attack. I haven't don that. I said your source advocates policy, and they do. Pointing out that a source advocates policy and therefore is biased is a viable debate maneuver.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Seriously? That is your "rebuttal?

Slate just reported on the study because that is what Slate does, just like Huffpo, Drudge, Breitbart, DailyKos, etc, etc.

Your credibility has just nosedived into negative territory since you attacked the messenger and not the actual originators of the study.

Attacking the messenger is a personal attack. I haven't don that. I said your source advocates policy, and they do. Discrediting a source is a viable debate maneuver.

But you didn't discredit the study itself ergo it still stands unchallenged.

 

[BlackSand]

[Sacrificing children on the NRA alter of the 2nd Amendment is something that can be prevented. We mandated airbags in vehicles in order to reduce deaths. Why can't we mandate safer firearms too? What is so sacred about a gun that it cannot be made safer?

I added the statistics to your comment as a tongue in cheek response and not as a suggestion to pursue legislation in regards to swimming pools and ATV's.

To answer the question about responsible legislation ... I also have the ability to accept that some people are not responsible people. I don't want to suggest that child death from irresponsible firearm ownership is not tragic ... I just suggest that as long as firearms are available and present ... There will be accidents.

As far as safer firearms ... We have laws that pertain to storage, carry and use of firearms ... And the responsibility rests with the gun owner. Firearms are not safe in any manner ... They are intended to kill things and to handicap them is irrelevant if they are to remain as useful as they are to people now.

I would support more strict accountability for gun owners whose firearms have been used in accidental child deaths (no free pass for careless storage or like concerns). Other than that ... I am a firm believer in the fact the Constitution protects the right of Americans to own a firearm and for more than peaceful use if necessary.

.

 

[Ellipsis]

Sacrificing children on the NRA alter of the 2nd Amendment is something that can be prevented. We mandated airbags in vehicles in order to reduce deaths. Why can't we mandate safer firearms too? What is so sacred about a gun that it cannot be made safer?

2% is not statistically significant. Try again.

 

[Ellipsis]

But you didn't discredit the study itself ergo it still stands unchallenged.

You hadn't linked to the study itself. You linked to slate.com.

 

[BlackSand]

Agreed!

But back then those were privately owned firearms.

In effect the government was requiring that (a) all guns in private hands be registered, and (b) that all males between the ages of 18 to 45 must belong to a militia.

If you want to return to the gun registration ... Then you would have to return to militia requirement. I wouldn't mind ... But others may disagree.

It is possible to suggest that there may be a reduction in accidental child deaths ... If every male between the ages of 18-45 was properly trained in firearm use and storage.

.

 

[Derideo_Te]

2% is not statistically significant.

Tell that to the grieving Sandy Hook parents.

 

[Derideo_Te]

But you didn't discredit the study itself ergo it still stands unchallenged.

You hadn't linked to the study itself. You linked to slate.com.

Study still stands unchallenged because you failed to discredit it.

Next.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Agreed!

But back then those were privately owned firearms.

In effect the government was requiring that (a) all guns in private hands be registered, and (b) that all males between the ages of 18 to 45 must belong to a militia.

If you want to return to the gun registration ... Then you would have to return to militia requirement. I wouldn't mind ... But others may disagree.

It is possible to suggest that there may be a reduction in accidental child deaths ... If every male between the ages of 18-45 was properly trained in firearm use and storage.

.

Personally I agree with the requirement that everyone be properly trained in the use and storage of firearms. Switzerland does so and that is a model that this nation should follow when it comes to firearms in my opinion.

Yes, others may disagree but the current situation is degenerating. Boot camp for 18 year olds might be the answer.

 

[BlackSand]

Personally I agree with the requirement that everyone be properly trained in the use and storage of firearms. Switzerland does so and that is a model that this nation should follow when it comes to firearms in my opinion.

Yes, others may disagree but the current situation is degenerating. Boot camp for 18 year olds might be the answer.

Well ... You provided statistics that include factors that can be further separated. The study you provided also indicated that 1 in 5 "children" between 14 and 18 had carried a firearm within the last 30 days with the intent of personal protection.

I am a firm believer that older teenagers understand what a firearm will do ... And understand what they want to do with one. Pogo and others have often commented on the gun culture and teen involvement. I am not as scared of the gun culture as I am concerned about the irresponsible gun culture.

There are some 14 year olds I would hand a firearm and go hunting with ... And some 18 year olds I wouldn't let anywhere near a firearm.

.