You can view the page at http://www.northeastshooters.com/vbulletin/content/726-STUDY-SELF-DEFENSE-GUN-USE-IS-A-MYTH
-
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
Article: STUDY: SELF-DEFENSE GUN USE IS A MYTH
- Thread starter Admin
- Start date
A family member in the home is 32 times more likely to commit criminal assault or criminal homicide on someone in their own family than to commit justifiable homicide.
Conclusion: ban family members? Ban making up scary sounding deceptive statistics?
Conclusion: ban family members? Ban making up scary sounding deceptive statistics?
"In the study, VPC actually suggests gun owners are 32 times more likely to use a gun for “criminal homicide” rather than “justifiable homicide.” "
I actually believe this is true.
All human deaths caused by another human whether Justifiable or criminal are homicides. After all, that is the definition of Homicide.
Homicide - The killing of one human being by another human being.
So now what is the determining factor between justifiable and criminal. Well, that line is a moving target based on the latest and greatest political agenda and anti-gun lobby who succeed at making it more difficult for legal gun owners to defend themselves.
So what is the standard of self defense? If the scope is so narrow then most if not all homicides will be criminal.
So the study is a huge pile of bull $hit.
I actually believe this is true.
All human deaths caused by another human whether Justifiable or criminal are homicides. After all, that is the definition of Homicide.
Homicide - The killing of one human being by another human being.
So now what is the determining factor between justifiable and criminal. Well, that line is a moving target based on the latest and greatest political agenda and anti-gun lobby who succeed at making it more difficult for legal gun owners to defend themselves.
So what is the standard of self defense? If the scope is so narrow then most if not all homicides will be criminal.
So the study is a huge pile of bull $hit.
In the study, VPC actually suggests gun owners are 32 times more likely to use a gun for “criminal homicide” rather than “justifiable homicide.”
I bet this number doesn't hold up for either Jamal from the hood or Joe from the farm. What this number tells me (if it's real) is that you had better have a gun because there are way more Jamals out there than there are Joes and they are either targeting unarmed people or they are very good at taking down armed people - hence the 32:1 ratio. If they weren't so skilled at targeting armed people, you would expect the ratio to be closer to 1:1.
Must be some pretty good drugs at vpc:
"VPC says the real number of DGUs per year is about “259,” or at least that is how many DGUs they admit for the year 2012."
I bet this number doesn't hold up for either Jamal from the hood or Joe from the farm. What this number tells me (if it's real) is that you had better have a gun because there are way more Jamals out there than there are Joes and they are either targeting unarmed people or they are very good at taking down armed people - hence the 32:1 ratio. If they weren't so skilled at targeting armed people, you would expect the ratio to be closer to 1:1.
Must be some pretty good drugs at vpc:
"VPC says the real number of DGUs per year is about “259,” or at least that is how many DGUs they admit for the year 2012."
- Joined
- Sep 29, 2014
- Messages
- 364
- Likes
- 64
I wonder how many DGU go UNREPORTED?!
These numbers are based on, I would believe, reported (to the police) uses.
JohnZ makes a great observation as far as the criminal element being armed.
Further the article states "gun owners" it doesn't state LEGAL gun owners, i.e. NOT the criminal elements that answer these surveys. Ask the demographics you want to get the answers you seek for furthering your agenda..nice VPC. And to further on robjax's observation, perhaps there was an arrest by police for criminal homicide. Well, what was the outcome of said case? Just using the charges/arrest for numbers is not good follow through. How many arrested for "criminal homicide" were exonerated in court?
That's why I so dislike these people and their skewed perception of reality and the twisting of numbers and words. Just can't trust VPC, Bloomberg and their ilk.
Zero Hour Arms
These numbers are based on, I would believe, reported (to the police) uses.
JohnZ makes a great observation as far as the criminal element being armed.
Further the article states "gun owners" it doesn't state LEGAL gun owners, i.e. NOT the criminal elements that answer these surveys. Ask the demographics you want to get the answers you seek for furthering your agenda..nice VPC. And to further on robjax's observation, perhaps there was an arrest by police for criminal homicide. Well, what was the outcome of said case? Just using the charges/arrest for numbers is not good follow through. How many arrested for "criminal homicide" were exonerated in court?
That's why I so dislike these people and their skewed perception of reality and the twisting of numbers and words. Just can't trust VPC, Bloomberg and their ilk.
Zero Hour Arms
This is arguing how many fairies can dance on the head of a pin... I don't give a crap if the answer is "possibly one"... if YOU are the one, you have the right to defend yourself-
Proponents of gun control rail on at length about how "if it saves one life"... I wonder what goes through their heads in those minutes they're waiting for the police to arrive...
Proponents of gun control rail on at length about how "if it saves one life"... I wonder what goes through their heads in those minutes they're waiting for the police to arrive...
Really now?
https://www.nraila.org/gun-laws/armed-citizen/
https://www.nraila.org/gun-laws/armed-citizen/
Also, not all defensive gun uses result in a death (homicide). In fact, I would expect most of them do not.
The "study" also goes on to quote parts of the National Crime Victimization Survey to claim that most firearms are rarely used in response to a threat. That is not too surprising.
However, they fail to mention the injuries received by victims based on type of resistance offered. As I recall from the last time I looked at the NCVS, fewest (or among fewest) injuries were sustained when firearms were used to resist.
However, they fail to mention the injuries received by victims based on type of resistance offered. As I recall from the last time I looked at the NCVS, fewest (or among fewest) injuries were sustained when firearms were used to resist.
Chevy 2 65
NES Member
Your brain is a myth
hv55maxx
NES Member
any and all statistics and data are instantly moot after i read "Violence Policy Center"
bunch of nut-gobbling pee pee touchers
bunch of nut-gobbling pee pee touchers
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2015
- Messages
- 1,400
- Likes
- 609
"Gun Control Facts." By James D. Agresti and Reid K. Smith. Just Facts, September 13, 2010. Revised 2/7/15. http://justfacts.com/guncontrol.asp
* A 1993 nationwide survey of 4,977 households found that over the previous five years, at least 0.5% of households had members who had used a gun for defense during a situation in which they thought someone "almost certainly would have been killed" if they "had not used a gun for protection." Applied to the U.S. population, this amounts to 162,000 such incidents per year. This figure excludes all "military service, police work, or work as a security guard."[12]
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]
* A 1993 nationwide survey of 4,977 households found that over the previous five years, at least 3.5% of households had members who had used a gun "for self-protection or for the protection of property at home, work, or elsewhere." Applied to the U.S. population, this amounts to 1,029,615 such incidents per year. This figure excludes all "military service, police work, or work as a security guard."[19]
* A 1994 survey conducted by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found that Americans use guns to frighten away intruders who are breaking into their homes about 498,000 times per year.[20]
* A 1982 survey of male felons in 11 state prisons dispersed across the U.S. found:[21]
• 34% had been "scared off, shot at, wounded, or captured by an armed victim"
• 40% had decided not to commit a crime because they "knew or believed that the victim was carrying a gun"
• 69% personally knew other criminals who had been "scared off, shot at, wounded, or captured by an armed victim"[22]
* "In homes with guns, the homicide of a household member is almost 3 times more likely to occur than in homes without guns."[12] [13]
* Reasons for elimination: This statistic is based on a three-county study comparing households in which a homicide occurred to demographically similar households in which a homicide did not occur. After controlling for several variables, the study found that gun ownership was associated with a 2.7 times increase in the odds of homicide.[14] This study does not meet Just Facts' Standards of Credibilitybecause:
1) The study blurs cause and effect. As explained in a comprehensive analysis of firearm research conducted by the National Research Council, gun control studies such as this (known as "case-control" studies) "fail to address the primary inferential problems that arise because ownership is not a random decision. ... Homicide victims may possess firearms precisely because they are likely to be victimized."[15]
2) The study's results are highly sensitive to uncertainties in the underlying data. For example, minor variations in firearm ownership rates (which are determined by interview and are thus dependent upon interviewees' honesty) can negate the results.[16] [17]
3) The results are arrived at by subjecting the raw data to statistical analyses instead of letting the data speak for itself. (For reference, the raw data of this study shows that households in which a homicide occurred had a firearm ownership rate of 45% as compared to 36% for non-homicide households. Also, households in which a homicide occurred were twice as likely have a household member who was previously arrested (53% vs. 23%), five times more likely to have a household member who used illicit drugs (31% vs. 6%), and five times more likely to have a household member who was previously hit or hurt during a fight in the home (32% vs. 6%).[18])
https://www.justfacts.com/guncontrol.fourexamples.asp#times
* A 1993 nationwide survey of 4,977 households found that over the previous five years, at least 0.5% of households had members who had used a gun for defense during a situation in which they thought someone "almost certainly would have been killed" if they "had not used a gun for protection." Applied to the U.S. population, this amounts to 162,000 such incidents per year. This figure excludes all "military service, police work, or work as a security guard."[12]
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]
* A 1993 nationwide survey of 4,977 households found that over the previous five years, at least 3.5% of households had members who had used a gun "for self-protection or for the protection of property at home, work, or elsewhere." Applied to the U.S. population, this amounts to 1,029,615 such incidents per year. This figure excludes all "military service, police work, or work as a security guard."[19]
* A 1994 survey conducted by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found that Americans use guns to frighten away intruders who are breaking into their homes about 498,000 times per year.[20]
* A 1982 survey of male felons in 11 state prisons dispersed across the U.S. found:[21]
• 34% had been "scared off, shot at, wounded, or captured by an armed victim"
• 40% had decided not to commit a crime because they "knew or believed that the victim was carrying a gun"
• 69% personally knew other criminals who had been "scared off, shot at, wounded, or captured by an armed victim"[22]
* "In homes with guns, the homicide of a household member is almost 3 times more likely to occur than in homes without guns."[12] [13]
* Reasons for elimination: This statistic is based on a three-county study comparing households in which a homicide occurred to demographically similar households in which a homicide did not occur. After controlling for several variables, the study found that gun ownership was associated with a 2.7 times increase in the odds of homicide.[14] This study does not meet Just Facts' Standards of Credibilitybecause:
1) The study blurs cause and effect. As explained in a comprehensive analysis of firearm research conducted by the National Research Council, gun control studies such as this (known as "case-control" studies) "fail to address the primary inferential problems that arise because ownership is not a random decision. ... Homicide victims may possess firearms precisely because they are likely to be victimized."[15]
2) The study's results are highly sensitive to uncertainties in the underlying data. For example, minor variations in firearm ownership rates (which are determined by interview and are thus dependent upon interviewees' honesty) can negate the results.[16] [17]
3) The results are arrived at by subjecting the raw data to statistical analyses instead of letting the data speak for itself. (For reference, the raw data of this study shows that households in which a homicide occurred had a firearm ownership rate of 45% as compared to 36% for non-homicide households. Also, households in which a homicide occurred were twice as likely have a household member who was previously arrested (53% vs. 23%), five times more likely to have a household member who used illicit drugs (31% vs. 6%), and five times more likely to have a household member who was previously hit or hurt during a fight in the home (32% vs. 6%).[18])
https://www.justfacts.com/guncontrol.fourexamples.asp#times
Lucus
NES Member
I bet those 9 poor souls in S.C. wished there was a DGU in the room...![[shocked]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/007.gif "Shocked [shocked]")
Anti gun= Internet troll
thats all this is
thats all this is
