Woman shot 3 times by 2 home invaders...able to return fire...and lives....

[HereWeGoAgain]

that issue is going to be debated for a long time.....however......what has turned out to be even more important.....increased levels of gun ownership, as more Americans not only buy guns, but also carry them for self defense, have not led to more crime......in fact, as more Americans have bought and carry guns.....the gun crime rate and the accidental gun death rate have gone down...substantially, and not up, as the anti gunners predicted they would....

Most gun sales are to people who already own. Ownership is down.

What a load of horse hockey.

I've provided a survey, what you have to counter?

How about being very familiar with guns and gun culture for forty years?
In other words I see more of what goes on in the gun industry in a month than you will in your entire life.
And as any regular shooter will tell you...there are more noobs than ever at the range,and you see a crap load more women as well.

Ok... so one guy.... at one gun range.... who states his purely 'scientific' statement of "there are more noobs than ever at the range, and more women", is now divine conclusive proof that gun ownership is UP, whereas multi-year research into nation wide gun ownership.... well that's just opinion.

Now granted, I actually do think that gun ownership is up since 2008. I do. In fact, I purchased my gun because of Obama.

However, I don't assume that just because in my tiny little world, gun ownership has increased, means that it's Universal. And certainly not over the long history. Comparing decade over decade, it's very clear gun ownership is down.

I get it... your opinion is, everyone on the survey lied.

I don't think you'll convince many people that Internet Bob knows all, and surveys over 40 years are all lies.

Is there anything you do a lot of that you can call yourself knowledgeable on?
Nothing?
Dont take my word for it,ask anyone that shoots.

 

[Skull Pilot]

If you want to take the chance of being unarmed in while criminals invade your house that's your choice.

It didn't end too well for the Petit family in CT

Ghastly Details In Conn. Home Invasion - CBS News

So now tell me you would still rather be defenseless.

What are the odds of that happening compared to someone accidently being shot and killed? How often is the defender the only one shot like the woman in this thread?

don't know
don't care

I choose to be able to defend myself and will support anyone who does.

If you choose to be defenseless that's fine with me

Yes you don't care about what really happens. You just argue from emotion and paranoia.

You and you alone are responsible for your choices.

What other people choose to do is none of your business.

I don't understand your need to tell other people how to live.

That statement is not emotional nor is it paranoid.

You're the one so afraid that there may be accidents that you feel the need to tell people they shouldn't own guns.

You live in fear not me.

I'm warning people about what can happen. I wish the woman shot by her 2 year old had been more careful. Clearly carrying a gun was a bad idea for her. I'm not afraid at all. I've gone my whole life not carrying and I've never needed a gun. You run around scared and paranoid. It's sad that in such a safe country you are still so scared.

Her being stupid was a bad idea.

And what makes you think people want you to warn them about their life choices? WHat other people do is none of your business

I very rarely carry a gun but I have the option. My weapons are more for home defense than anything else because where I live it would take the cops at least 30 minutes if not more to respond. I'm not fearful of a break in but I am prepared nonetheless. You aren't and that's your choice.
You live in fear of accidents. FYI accidents are the leading cause of death in people under the age of 45.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Most gun sales are to people who already own. Ownership is down.

What a load of horse hockey.

I've provided a survey, what you have to counter?

How about being very familiar with guns and gun culture for forty years?
In other words I see more of what goes on in the gun industry in a month than you will in your entire life.
And as any regular shooter will tell you...there are more noobs than ever at the range,and you see a crap load more women as well.

Yes....back in the 90s you never saw women at the range...now....they are all over the place....

There are the same number of ranges in my area as there were 20 years ago.

As someone who doesnt shoot how would you know?
I sure as hell cant tell you how many beauty parlors are in my area.

 

[Brain357]

What a load of horse hockey.

I've provided a survey, what you have to counter?

How about being very familiar with guns and gun culture for forty years?
In other words I see more of what goes on in the gun industry in a month than you will in your entire life.
And as any regular shooter will tell you...there are more noobs than ever at the range,and you see a crap load more women as well.

Yes....back in the 90s you never saw women at the range...now....they are all over the place....

There are the same number of ranges in my area as there were 20 years ago.

As someone who doesnt shoot how would you know?
I sure as hell cant tell you how many beauty parlors are in my area.

Who said I don't shoot? I have been to the local ranges.

 

[Brain357]

What are the odds of that happening compared to someone accidently being shot and killed? How often is the defender the only one shot like the woman in this thread?

don't know
don't care

I choose to be able to defend myself and will support anyone who does.

If you choose to be defenseless that's fine with me

Yes you don't care about what really happens. You just argue from emotion and paranoia.

You and you alone are responsible for your choices.

What other people choose to do is none of your business.

I don't understand your need to tell other people how to live.

That statement is not emotional nor is it paranoid.

You're the one so afraid that there may be accidents that you feel the need to tell people they shouldn't own guns.

You live in fear not me.

I'm warning people about what can happen. I wish the woman shot by her 2 year old had been more careful. Clearly carrying a gun was a bad idea for her. I'm not afraid at all. I've gone my whole life not carrying and I've never needed a gun. You run around scared and paranoid. It's sad that in such a safe country you are still so scared.

Her being stupid was a bad idea.

And what makes you think people want you to warn them about their life choices? WHat other people do is none of your business

I very rarely carry a gun but I have the option. My weapons are more for home defense than anything else because where I live it would take the cops at least 30 minutes if not more to respond. I'm not fearful of a break in but I am prepared nonetheless. You aren't and that's your choice.
You live in fear of accidents. FYI accidents are the leading cause of death in people under the age of 45.

Some people on here act like you need to carry to be safe. I just give the other side of the story. I don't see why gun people are so offended by statistics, surveys, and studies. Do you prefer to be blind to the facts?

 

[2aguy]

Being armed yourself makes you more likely to be shot.

Do I want to spend my life being a victim and a coward, but with less risk of being killed?

When you look around the world at other modern countries, and see that we have tons of crime relative to them... I think this wussy pathetic "don't be armed, because you are less likely to be shot!" idea is the reason.

I'd rather go down fighting.

That is your choice. It really depends on the situation. I wouldn't want to get shot over my wallet. I just think people should know the facts.

Just be prepared to be a victim for the rest of your life.

Family Says Friendly 20-year-old Shot for No Reason - FOX16.com

See, if you could make the case that not being armed would guarantee not being shot.... I'd be on your side of the argument.

But completely an utterly defenseless people are shot, stabbed, raped, and killed all the time.

The difference between Daniel in this story, and the lady in the OP story, is that the lady was armed and could fight back, Daniel was unarmed, and couldn't. Daniel is dead. The lady is not.

I just think people should know the facts, too.

I've never been a victim.

There are very few guarantees. You can't guarantee that carrying a gun will keep you from being shot. In fact it makes you more likely to be shot:
Carrying a gun increases risk of getting shot and killed - science-in-society - 06 October 2009 - New Scientist

I can guarantee if you don't own a gun that you won't accidently shoot yourself or another innocent person. More people are accidently shot each year than are criminals in defense.

I don't think being armed would have really helped Daniel. I don't think he was expecting them to kill him. In this case the criminal would have a big advantage.

How about this example:
Las Vegas Cop Killers Were Husband-Wife Team - ABC News

The armed guy in the Walmart was the only one shot and killed.

There are several countries with few guns and much lower crime rates than us. You don't need guns for people to not be raped and killed, that's just silly.

Saying we should not do something, on the risk that you might harm yourself, is ridiculous.

We should ban pools and bathtubs. Thousands of people die every year in pools and bathtubs. I guarantee you will never accidentally drown in a pool or bath tub, if we eliminate all of them.

We should obviously ban cars and bikes.

You have a higher chance of dying, falling down the stairs in an average home, than from a firearm. A higher chance of dying falling from a ladder only 6 feet high, than from a firearm.

So clearly we should ban ladders and stairs, and cars and bikes, and pretty much everything.

I never said there was a guarantee that having a gun will keep you from getting shot.

But there is in fact one guarantee. There is one absolute statement, that I would place a bet of 100% of my entire life time of wages on. If a criminal intends to shoot you, and you are completely unarmed, I guarantee 100%, you will not be able to defend yourself.

Unless there is some divine intervention, or the criminal is so stupid, he drops the gun, and you pick it up. Chances are, you are going to die.

The question is, do you want to be able to defend yourself, or not? And maybe you'd rather be a sheeple. Should the rest of us, who don't want to be helpless, be able to defend ourselves, even if you don't? I say, yes we should.

keep in mind as well....in homes where there is a gun related death the factors of domestic violence, and drug and alcohol abuse were more relevant than the gun were.....it is behavior, not the gun that causes gun accidents and gun murder....

 

[2aguy]

don't know
don't care

I choose to be able to defend myself and will support anyone who does.

If you choose to be defenseless that's fine with me

Yes you don't care about what really happens. You just argue from emotion and paranoia.

You and you alone are responsible for your choices.

What other people choose to do is none of your business.

I don't understand your need to tell other people how to live.

That statement is not emotional nor is it paranoid.

You're the one so afraid that there may be accidents that you feel the need to tell people they shouldn't own guns.

You live in fear not me.

I'm warning people about what can happen. I wish the woman shot by her 2 year old had been more careful. Clearly carrying a gun was a bad idea for her. I'm not afraid at all. I've gone my whole life not carrying and I've never needed a gun. You run around scared and paranoid. It's sad that in such a safe country you are still so scared.

Her being stupid was a bad idea.

And what makes you think people want you to warn them about their life choices? WHat other people do is none of your business

I very rarely carry a gun but I have the option. My weapons are more for home defense than anything else because where I live it would take the cops at least 30 minutes if not more to respond. I'm not fearful of a break in but I am prepared nonetheless. You aren't and that's your choice.
You live in fear of accidents. FYI accidents are the leading cause of death in people under the age of 45.

Some people on here act like you need to carry to be safe. I just give the other side of the story. I don't see why gun people are so offended by statistics, surveys, and studies. Do you prefer to be blind to the facts?

Because those surveys and studies from the anti gun side come from people who have an agenda to keep people from owning guns....because they have a fear of guns that isn't based on accurate information....I have seen anti gun study after anti gun study that if not poorly done then they are done specifically to come to the conclusion against gun ownership.....

I have learned from years of studying this issue that the reality is not what anti gunners are concerned with....they just want all guns kept from normal people....and they will say and do anything to achieve that end....I have seen it over and over again...

My first experience with this is when John Lott released his book based on his University of Chicago study " More Guns, Less Crime." He told Don and Roma, local radio hosts here in Chicago who were interviewing him that day, that he offered to let the director of the Brady campaign to read the book before it was released to get her thoughts on it.......remember.....Lott was neutral to a little anti gun when he first did that study and when he first got involved in the gun debate.........she declined stating she didn't want to give him any added credibility.......

the day of the release, the media went to her to get her reaction to the book......without having read the book she stated that his methods were flawed....and he told Don and Roma that story...I heard the interview at work.......

gun grabbers have an irrational fear of guns....and because of that there can be no "common sense" gun control measures...only restrictions so deep they are literal bans on civilian ownership. T

There are only 8-9,000 gun murders a year in the U.S. there are 1.6 million defensive gun uses each year. There are only 6-700 accidental gun deaths a year....

all of that in a country of 320 million people, with over 310 million guns in private hands, and over 11.1 million people carrying guns for self defense......

and yet....anti gunners think those numbers say we need to disarm regular, law abiding people.....while the majority of gun crime and murders are committed by gang members in isolated areas in large cities.....

They are irrational...considering as has been pointed out the death rates with other ordinary actives like driving cars or swimming....guns don't even compare.....yet they want them banned and controlled.....

 

[2aguy]

don't know
don't care

I choose to be able to defend myself and will support anyone who does.

If you choose to be defenseless that's fine with me

Yes you don't care about what really happens. You just argue from emotion and paranoia.

You and you alone are responsible for your choices.

What other people choose to do is none of your business.

I don't understand your need to tell other people how to live.

That statement is not emotional nor is it paranoid.

You're the one so afraid that there may be accidents that you feel the need to tell people they shouldn't own guns.

You live in fear not me.

I'm warning people about what can happen. I wish the woman shot by her 2 year old had been more careful. Clearly carrying a gun was a bad idea for her. I'm not afraid at all. I've gone my whole life not carrying and I've never needed a gun. You run around scared and paranoid. It's sad that in such a safe country you are still so scared.

Her being stupid was a bad idea.

And what makes you think people want you to warn them about their life choices? WHat other people do is none of your business

I very rarely carry a gun but I have the option. My weapons are more for home defense than anything else because where I live it would take the cops at least 30 minutes if not more to respond. I'm not fearful of a break in but I am prepared nonetheless. You aren't and that's your choice.
You live in fear of accidents. FYI accidents are the leading cause of death in people under the age of 45.

Some people on here act like you need to carry to be safe. I just give the other side of the story. I don't see why gun people are so offended by statistics, surveys, and studies. Do you prefer to be blind to the facts?

Some people actually do need to carry to be safe....about 1.6 million people a year....and we don't know who they are until criminals select them for attack....

 

[2aguy]

Sorry Brain....

such as unlawful gun possession, by the gun-using victim

And he was also talking about outside the home...hence the "illegal possession" in most states.....hence, the reluctance to admit to police a gun was used to stop a violent criminal attack....

No he is talking about DGUs. He does not say only DGUs outside of the home. Sorry but you have no basis for that claim. And again unlawful gun possession includes FELONS.

Which, I disagree with.

If a felon is to be released into society, then they should be at the point where they are safe in society, even with a gun.

If you can't trust a convicted felon with a gun in society, then they shouldn't be released to begin with.

But if you are going to release them, then they should have full rights, including the right to defend themselves. This idea that you are going to say to a convicted felon "you have served your time, and paid your debt to society.... but you are actually going to be punished the rest of your life by not having the rights and freedoms of everyone else to defend yourself".... that does not make sense to me.

Beyond that point, I agree with the other poster. Because of the way the laws are written, people who defend themselves with guns, will never say anything to anyone in many cases, because it's too risky.

You flash a gun at someone who is out of control, and behaving in an aggressive and dangerous manor... you are more likely to get into trouble for defending yourself, than the person who is going nuts.

There was a case not too long ago out of California, where a veteran was approached on his own property, by a man wielding a knife I believe, and the vet got a rifle, and fired a shot into the ground, in his own backyard.

The vet made the mistake of reporting it to the police, who having no proof there was a dude in this guys back yard, promptly arrested him for, by his own admission, firing a weapon inside the city limits.... which was illegal.

So the bad guy gets away, and the good guy goes to jail (thanks to anti-gun people), and then you want to argue that there is no mass of people who defend themselves with guns and never report it? I know I wouldn't report it.

Well I see no reason to legally arm felons. That is its own discussion. Regardless if a felon has a gun they aren't law abiding.

it is against the law,for felons to have guns in their possession.....already.....and yet they still do it....

 

[Brain357]

Yes you don't care about what really happens. You just argue from emotion and paranoia.

You and you alone are responsible for your choices.

What other people choose to do is none of your business.

I don't understand your need to tell other people how to live.

That statement is not emotional nor is it paranoid.

You're the one so afraid that there may be accidents that you feel the need to tell people they shouldn't own guns.

You live in fear not me.

I'm warning people about what can happen. I wish the woman shot by her 2 year old had been more careful. Clearly carrying a gun was a bad idea for her. I'm not afraid at all. I've gone my whole life not carrying and I've never needed a gun. You run around scared and paranoid. It's sad that in such a safe country you are still so scared.

Her being stupid was a bad idea.

And what makes you think people want you to warn them about their life choices? WHat other people do is none of your business

I very rarely carry a gun but I have the option. My weapons are more for home defense than anything else because where I live it would take the cops at least 30 minutes if not more to respond. I'm not fearful of a break in but I am prepared nonetheless. You aren't and that's your choice.
You live in fear of accidents. FYI accidents are the leading cause of death in people under the age of 45.

Some people on here act like you need to carry to be safe. I just give the other side of the story. I don't see why gun people are so offended by statistics, surveys, and studies. Do you prefer to be blind to the facts?

Because those surveys and studies from the anti gun side come from people who have an agenda to keep people from owning guns....because they have a fear of guns that isn't based on accurate information....I have seen anti gun study after anti gun study that if not poorly done then they are done specifically to come to the conclusion against gun ownership.....

I have learned from years of studying this issue that the reality is not what anti gunners are concerned with....they just want all guns kept from normal people....and they will say and do anything to achieve that end....I have seen it over and over again...

My first experience with this is when John Lott released his book based on his University of Chicago study " More Guns, Less Crime." He told Don and Roma, local radio hosts here in Chicago who were interviewing him that day, that he offered to let the director of the Brady campaign to read the book before it was released to get her thoughts on it.......remember.....Lott was neutral to a little anti gun when he first did that study and when he first got involved in the gun debate.........she declined stating she didn't want to give him any added credibility.......

the day of the release, the media went to her to get her reaction to the book......without having read the book she stated that his methods were flawed....and he told Don and Roma that story...I heard the interview at work.......

gun grabbers have an irrational fear of guns....and because of that there can be no "common sense" gun control measures...only restrictions so deep they are literal bans on civilian ownership. T

There are only 8-9,000 gun murders a year in the U.S. there are 1.6 million defensive gun uses each year. There are only 6-700 accidental gun deaths a year....

all of that in a country of 320 million people, with over 310 million guns in private hands, and over 11.1 million people carrying guns for self defense......

and yet....anti gunners think those numbers say we need to disarm regular, law abiding people.....while the majority of gun crime and murders are committed by gang members in isolated areas in large cities.....

They are irrational...considering as has been pointed out the death rates with other ordinary actives like driving cars or swimming....guns don't even compare.....yet they want them banned and controlled.....

I look at all my sources before I use them and don't think I use any that are incorrect. I feel both sides will use incorrect information. And as you know I don't try to disarm everyone, but I don't try to arm everyone either. For the vast majority they will never need a gun for anything. And many of those will actually be putting themselves at risk. So I think it is important everyone knows the risks involved. If anything I hope my posts make people more careful and it brings down accidental shootings.

 

[Brain357]

Sorry Brain....

such as unlawful gun possession, by the gun-using victim

And he was also talking about outside the home...hence the "illegal possession" in most states.....hence, the reluctance to admit to police a gun was used to stop a violent criminal attack....

No he is talking about DGUs. He does not say only DGUs outside of the home. Sorry but you have no basis for that claim. And again unlawful gun possession includes FELONS.

Which, I disagree with.

If a felon is to be released into society, then they should be at the point where they are safe in society, even with a gun.

If you can't trust a convicted felon with a gun in society, then they shouldn't be released to begin with.

But if you are going to release them, then they should have full rights, including the right to defend themselves. This idea that you are going to say to a convicted felon "you have served your time, and paid your debt to society.... but you are actually going to be punished the rest of your life by not having the rights and freedoms of everyone else to defend yourself".... that does not make sense to me.

Beyond that point, I agree with the other poster. Because of the way the laws are written, people who defend themselves with guns, will never say anything to anyone in many cases, because it's too risky.

You flash a gun at someone who is out of control, and behaving in an aggressive and dangerous manor... you are more likely to get into trouble for defending yourself, than the person who is going nuts.

There was a case not too long ago out of California, where a veteran was approached on his own property, by a man wielding a knife I believe, and the vet got a rifle, and fired a shot into the ground, in his own backyard.

The vet made the mistake of reporting it to the police, who having no proof there was a dude in this guys back yard, promptly arrested him for, by his own admission, firing a weapon inside the city limits.... which was illegal.

So the bad guy gets away, and the good guy goes to jail (thanks to anti-gun people), and then you want to argue that there is no mass of people who defend themselves with guns and never report it? I know I wouldn't report it.

Well I see no reason to legally arm felons. That is its own discussion. Regardless if a felon has a gun they aren't law abiding.

it is against the law,for felons to have guns in their possession.....already.....and yet they still do it....

Some do, some don't.

 

[Brain357]

Yes you don't care about what really happens. You just argue from emotion and paranoia.

You and you alone are responsible for your choices.

What other people choose to do is none of your business.

I don't understand your need to tell other people how to live.

That statement is not emotional nor is it paranoid.

You're the one so afraid that there may be accidents that you feel the need to tell people they shouldn't own guns.

You live in fear not me.

I'm warning people about what can happen. I wish the woman shot by her 2 year old had been more careful. Clearly carrying a gun was a bad idea for her. I'm not afraid at all. I've gone my whole life not carrying and I've never needed a gun. You run around scared and paranoid. It's sad that in such a safe country you are still so scared.

Her being stupid was a bad idea.

And what makes you think people want you to warn them about their life choices? WHat other people do is none of your business

I very rarely carry a gun but I have the option. My weapons are more for home defense than anything else because where I live it would take the cops at least 30 minutes if not more to respond. I'm not fearful of a break in but I am prepared nonetheless. You aren't and that's your choice.
You live in fear of accidents. FYI accidents are the leading cause of death in people under the age of 45.

Some people on here act like you need to carry to be safe. I just give the other side of the story. I don't see why gun people are so offended by statistics, surveys, and studies. Do you prefer to be blind to the facts?

Some people actually do need to carry to be safe....about 1.6 million people a year....and we don't know who they are until criminals select them for attack....

Some do, but the 1.6 million is a hugely exaggerated number that has been debunked many times over. It is more close to 100k if you want to talk only the law abiding defending themselves, which I feel is still a big number. If you are involved in criminal activity you probably will need one. If you own a bar or a convenience store you might want one. If you have a stalker or a crazy ex you might want one. But for the vast majority of people they will never need one.

 

[2aguy]

Again...these are the studies the 1.6 million defensive gun uses are based on....collected over a 40 year period....and these aren't even all of the studies...the rest also support a high, very high number of defensive gun uses....one Police federation study...1.5 million defensive gun uses a year...

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
DMIa 1978...2,141,512
L.A. TIMES...1994...3,609,68
Kleck...2.5 million
Obama's CDC....2013....500,000--3million

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


Bordua...1977...1,414,544
DMIb...1978...1,098,409
Hart...1981...1.797,461
Mauser...1990...1,487,342
Gallup...1993...1,621,377
DEPT. OF JUSTICE...1994...1.5 million
Journal of Quantitative Criminology--- 989,883 times per year."
-------------------------------------------
Ohio...1982...771,043
Gallup...1991...777,152
Tarrance... 1994... 764,036
Lawerence Southwich Jr. 400,000 fewer violent crimes and at least 800,000 violent crimes deterred..



NCVS (National Crime Victimization Survey)....108,000


Notice, the 3 different groupings of stats from the research listed so far.....not one of them approaches the NCVS number of 100,000...

 

[Brain357]

Again...these are the studies the 1.6 million defensive gun uses are based on....collected over a 40 year period....and these aren't even all of the studies...the rest also support a high, very high number of defensive gun uses....one Police federation study...1.5 million defensive gun uses a year...

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
DMIa 1978...2,141,512
L.A. TIMES...1994...3,609,68
Kleck...2.5 million
Obama's CDC....2013....500,000--3million

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


Bordua...1977...1,414,544
DMIb...1978...1,098,409
Hart...1981...1.797,461
Mauser...1990...1,487,342
Gallup...1993...1,621,377
DEPT. OF JUSTICE...1994...1.5 million
Journal of Quantitative Criminology--- 989,883 times per year."
-------------------------------------------
Ohio...1982...771,043
Gallup...1991...777,152
Tarrance... 1994... 764,036
Lawerence Southwich Jr. 400,000 fewer violent crimes and at least 800,000 violent crimes deterred..



NCVS (National Crime Victimization Survey)....108,000


Notice, the 3 different groupings of stats from the research listed so far.....not one of them approaches the NCVS number of 100,000...

The NCVS is the only one that would weed out criminals defending against criminals. It is the most accurate for law abiding defending themselves.

How can you say 1.6 million when you have such a broad range of studies? If the 100k is correct you are off by 1.1 million. If the ones in the 700k range are correct you are off by 900k. They go from 100k to 3.6 million. It's pretty clear they aren't accurate.

 

[2aguy]

You and you alone are responsible for your choices.

What other people choose to do is none of your business.

I don't understand your need to tell other people how to live.

That statement is not emotional nor is it paranoid.

You're the one so afraid that there may be accidents that you feel the need to tell people they shouldn't own guns.

You live in fear not me.

I'm warning people about what can happen. I wish the woman shot by her 2 year old had been more careful. Clearly carrying a gun was a bad idea for her. I'm not afraid at all. I've gone my whole life not carrying and I've never needed a gun. You run around scared and paranoid. It's sad that in such a safe country you are still so scared.

Her being stupid was a bad idea.

And what makes you think people want you to warn them about their life choices? WHat other people do is none of your business

I very rarely carry a gun but I have the option. My weapons are more for home defense than anything else because where I live it would take the cops at least 30 minutes if not more to respond. I'm not fearful of a break in but I am prepared nonetheless. You aren't and that's your choice.
You live in fear of accidents. FYI accidents are the leading cause of death in people under the age of 45.

Some people on here act like you need to carry to be safe. I just give the other side of the story. I don't see why gun people are so offended by statistics, surveys, and studies. Do you prefer to be blind to the facts?

Some people actually do need to carry to be safe....about 1.6 million people a year....and we don't know who they are until criminals select them for attack....

Some do, but the 1.6 million is a hugely exaggerated number that has been debunked many times over. It is more close to 100k if you want to talk only the law abiding defending themselves, which I feel is still a big number. If you are involved in criminal activity you probably will need one. If you own a bar or a convenience store you might want one. If you have a stalker or a crazy ex you might want one. But for the vast majority of people they will never need one.

But for the vast majority of people they will never need one.

Absolutely, 100% true......and 100% irrelevant to the gun issue.....

1) no one ever knows when or where they will be attacked by a criminal....it happens every day, in every country of the world....and until we have Tom Cruise "Minority Report" capabilities.......there is no sense in disarming law abiding people.....

2) And of those people who carry guns for protection and never need them.....great.....they were protected and fortunately for them they never had to clear Kydex in defense of their lives.........but if they ever had to they had the means to save themselves and others....another layer for the protection of society....with no tax payer expense....

3) It only took Germany 20 years to go from a modern nation state to a nation that murdered upwards of 12 million of it's own citizens and invaded and enslaved countless other defenseless countries.....right now democrats are arguing for arming the Ukraine against Russian aggression...while also arguing for disarming Americans....history reveals one truth...disarmed citizens are easy prey for an out of control governmnent intent on murder....

-Mexico...drug cartels and the government are murdering thousands of disarmed Mexican citizens...kenya...boko haram kills thousands of disarmed citizens.....Rwanda...machete armed, government backed killers murdered 800,000 disarmed citizens....China....70 million murdered....Russia....25 million murdered.....

We have seen the example of what happens to disarmed people.....how about we go the other way and see what happens if the government turns on us.........for once.....

 

[2aguy]

Again...these are the studies the 1.6 million defensive gun uses are based on....collected over a 40 year period....and these aren't even all of the studies...the rest also support a high, very high number of defensive gun uses....one Police federation study...1.5 million defensive gun uses a year...

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
DMIa 1978...2,141,512
L.A. TIMES...1994...3,609,68
Kleck...2.5 million
Obama's CDC....2013....500,000--3million

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


Bordua...1977...1,414,544
DMIb...1978...1,098,409
Hart...1981...1.797,461
Mauser...1990...1,487,342
Gallup...1993...1,621,377
DEPT. OF JUSTICE...1994...1.5 million
Journal of Quantitative Criminology--- 989,883 times per year."
-------------------------------------------
Ohio...1982...771,043
Gallup...1991...777,152
Tarrance... 1994... 764,036
Lawerence Southwich Jr. 400,000 fewer violent crimes and at least 800,000 violent crimes deterred..



NCVS (National Crime Victimization Survey)....108,000


Notice, the 3 different groupings of stats from the research listed so far.....not one of them approaches the NCVS number of 100,000...

The NCVS is the only one that would weed out criminals defending against criminals. It is the most accurate for law abiding defending themselves.

How can you say 1.6 million when you have such a broad range of studies? If the 100k is correct you are off by 1.1 million. If the ones in the 700k range are correct you are off by 900k. They go from 100k to 3.6 million. It's pretty clear they aren't accurate.

The number of studies shows the 100,000 number is innacurrate...it isn't even close to the lowest of the low of the studies....it is the only study with that low of a number.....out of 19 and you don't know how the other studies were conducted....we do know Kleck's studyand his methods...which were the most thorough of them all...and as John Lott said, he believes that the people responding were law abiding....I'll take his word and experience doing the research over your biased opinions.....

 

[2aguy]

And of those multiple gun studies.....several of them were conducted by anti gunners...the clinton Justice Dept. study and the obama CDC study for example...and the L.A. times....not exactly a pro gun organization...dittos for the Police Association study.....

 

[2aguy]

Again...these are the studies the 1.6 million defensive gun uses are based on....collected over a 40 year period....and these aren't even all of the studies...the rest also support a high, very high number of defensive gun uses....one Police federation study...1.5 million defensive gun uses a year...

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
DMIa 1978...2,141,512
L.A. TIMES...1994...3,609,68
Kleck...2.5 million
Obama's CDC....2013....500,000--3million

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


Bordua...1977...1,414,544
DMIb...1978...1,098,409
Hart...1981...1.797,461
Mauser...1990...1,487,342
Gallup...1993...1,621,377
DEPT. OF JUSTICE...1994...1.5 million
Journal of Quantitative Criminology--- 989,883 times per year."
-------------------------------------------
Ohio...1982...771,043
Gallup...1991...777,152
Tarrance... 1994... 764,036
Lawerence Southwich Jr. 400,000 fewer violent crimes and at least 800,000 violent crimes deterred..



NCVS (National Crime Victimization Survey)....108,000


Notice, the 3 different groupings of stats from the research listed so far.....not one of them approaches the NCVS number of 100,000...

The NCVS is the only one that would weed out criminals defending against criminals. It is the most accurate for law abiding defending themselves.

How can you say 1.6 million when you have such a broad range of studies? If the 100k is correct you are off by 1.1 million. If the ones in the 700k range are correct you are off by 900k. They go from 100k to 3.6 million. It's pretty clear they aren't accurate.

And the NCVS is a study conducted in in person interviews with badge wearing government agents asking people to talk about crime....and not directly asking about gun use...unlike Kleck....who specifically asked about gun use in self defense as the focus of his study.....

 

[2aguy]

And here is the Kleck perspective where he mentions the Police Association study....not a pro gun organization...

Guns and Self-Defense by Gary Kleck Ph.D.

At least 12 national and 3 state-wide surveys have asked probability samples of the general adult population about defensive gun use. The surveys differ in many important respects. The two most sophisticated national surveys are the National Self-Defense Survey done by Marc Gertz and myself in 1995 and a smaller scale survey done by the Police Foundation in 1996.

A national survey conducted in 1994 by the Police Foundation and sponsored by the National Institute of Justice almost exactly confirmed the estimates from the National Self-Defense Survey. This survey's person-based estimate was that 1.44% of the adult population had used a gun for protection against a person in the previous year, implying 2.73 million defensive gun users. These results were well within sampling error of the corresponding 1.33% and 2.55 million estimates produced by the National Self-Defense Survey.

The one survey that is clearly not suitable for estimating the total number of defensive gun uses is the National Crime Victimization Survey. This is the only survey that has ever generated results implying an annual defensive-gun-use estimate under 700,000. Not surprisingly, it is a favorite of academic gun-control supporters. If one is to make even a pretense of empirically supporting the claim that defensive gun use is rare in America, one must rely on the National Crime Victimization Survey, warts and all.

That the National Crime Victimization Survey estimate is radically wrong is now beyond serious dispute. Ultimately, the only foundation one ever has for knowing that a measurement is wrong is that it is inconsistent with other measurements of the same phenomenon. There are now at least 15 other independent estimates of the frequency of defensive gun uses and every one of them is enormously larger than the National-Crime-Victimization-Survey estimate. Unanimity is rare in studies of crime, but this is one of those rare cases. Apparently, however, even unanimous and overwhelming evidence is not sufficient to dissuade the gun control advocacy organizations, such as Handgun Control, Inc., and the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence, that the National Crime Victimization Survey estimate is at least approximately valid and that defensive gun use is rare.

 

[Andylusion]

Do I want to spend my life being a victim and a coward, but with less risk of being killed?

When you look around the world at other modern countries, and see that we have tons of crime relative to them... I think this wussy pathetic "don't be armed, because you are less likely to be shot!" idea is the reason.

I'd rather go down fighting.

That is your choice. It really depends on the situation. I wouldn't want to get shot over my wallet. I just think people should know the facts.

Just be prepared to be a victim for the rest of your life.

Family Says Friendly 20-year-old Shot for No Reason - FOX16.com

See, if you could make the case that not being armed would guarantee not being shot.... I'd be on your side of the argument.

But completely an utterly defenseless people are shot, stabbed, raped, and killed all the time.

The difference between Daniel in this story, and the lady in the OP story, is that the lady was armed and could fight back, Daniel was unarmed, and couldn't. Daniel is dead. The lady is not.

I just think people should know the facts, too.

I've never been a victim.

There are very few guarantees. You can't guarantee that carrying a gun will keep you from being shot. In fact it makes you more likely to be shot:
Carrying a gun increases risk of getting shot and killed - science-in-society - 06 October 2009 - New Scientist

I can guarantee if you don't own a gun that you won't accidently shoot yourself or another innocent person. More people are accidently shot each year than are criminals in defense.

I don't think being armed would have really helped Daniel. I don't think he was expecting them to kill him. In this case the criminal would have a big advantage.

How about this example:
Las Vegas Cop Killers Were Husband-Wife Team - ABC News

The armed guy in the Walmart was the only one shot and killed.

There are several countries with few guns and much lower crime rates than us. You don't need guns for people to not be raped and killed, that's just silly.

Saying we should not do something, on the risk that you might harm yourself, is ridiculous.

We should ban pools and bathtubs. Thousands of people die every year in pools and bathtubs. I guarantee you will never accidentally drown in a pool or bath tub, if we eliminate all of them.

We should obviously ban cars and bikes.

You have a higher chance of dying, falling down the stairs in an average home, than from a firearm. A higher chance of dying falling from a ladder only 6 feet high, than from a firearm.

So clearly we should ban ladders and stairs, and cars and bikes, and pretty much everything.

I never said there was a guarantee that having a gun will keep you from getting shot.

But there is in fact one guarantee. There is one absolute statement, that I would place a bet of 100% of my entire life time of wages on. If a criminal intends to shoot you, and you are completely unarmed, I guarantee 100%, you will not be able to defend yourself.

Unless there is some divine intervention, or the criminal is so stupid, he drops the gun, and you pick it up. Chances are, you are going to die.

The question is, do you want to be able to defend yourself, or not? And maybe you'd rather be a sheeple. Should the rest of us, who don't want to be helpless, be able to defend ourselves, even if you don't? I say, yes we should.

I haven't suggested banning anything.

Ok what do you think is the chance that some criminal is going to be intent on shooting you? I can tell you if you aren't involved in criminal activity it is extremely unlikely. Based on the stats I have seen you are much more likely to accidently shoot yourself or another person. While there are about 600 accidental shooting deaths each year, only about 230 criminals are shot each year in defense. You can do whatever you want, but be aware you probably aren't really protecting yourself. I am not going to go through life so scared that I need a gun at all times. You should really overcome your fear.

Doesn't matter. I did not suggest you did suggest banning anything, only that If people shouldn't have guns because they might accidentally kill themselves, then the same logic should apply to millions of other things. We should in fact, all become Amish. Of course your cart pulling horse might kill you too, so apparently even the Amish need to get rid of what little they have.

That's just absolutely not true. What you said there is just simply not true. You are lying.

Self-defense killings in US nearly doubled from 2000-2010 statistics show New York Post
First, off, justifyable self defense deaths (victims shooting criminals), is 326 reported, far higher than your suggested 230 shot.

So only 230 criminals were shot in justified self defense, but 326 were killed in self defense? Fewer people were shot, than how many were killed by firearms?

Second, again, you don't seem to grasp how many people routinely scare off a criminal, without firing a single round.

Laundromat employee 90 scares off robber with gun www.whio.com

Guy pulled a gun, and the criminal ran.

No shots fired. No criminal hit. No criminal killed.

When you limit it down to only people killed in a self defense shooting, verses all the ones who were shot and not killed, and all those who were shot at but not hit, and all those who were not shot at, but ran from a gun wielding citizen.... huge difference.

You can claim I'm not protecting myself, but that's only your opinion, based on a faulty interpretation of clearly dubious statistics.

But that's what a forum is about... you speaking your opinion. So here's mine.

I've now had a friend who was physically assaulted and brutalized to the point she was in the hospital. Another that was raped in her own home. I have come home to my house, to find it ransacked, and left in shambles, bedroom torn apart, all the drawers in my dress emptied, closet emptied, even the mattress pulled off the beds. There was a man at one point, who was stalking my sister.

Now perhaps you live in such a sterile upper class elite life style, where you have never had to live with the average people in the lower class of society, like I have. Perhaps you are so sheltered, and hidden away in the white bread world were there are no dangerous people, and everyone is like a monk in a monastery, greeting you with plastic smiles and pleasant peaceful small talk.

If that's really your case, great. I wish everyone had your perfectly little life. I wish everyone was all smiles and joy 24/7.

I live in the real world though, and life isn't perfect. And the fact is, there are crazy people. Do I live in complete fear all the time? Of course not. I wouldn't be able to function if I did. But am I wise in at least having a weapon, in case the horrible happens, and I need to defend myself or those around me, from a nut case? I say yes. Again, perhaps you are the lucky one who lives in such a perfect environment, that in your specific case, you in fact would be more a danger to yourself, than any criminal. If you are, then pat yourself on the back, and give yourself a gold star. More power to you.

Me.... I'm in the real world, as it actually is for us normal average people. Having a gun, isn't a failure to overcome fear. That might be true for you, but in the real world, it is simply a choice to have wise self defense.