Risks of a gun in the home according to Brady Center

[hminsky]

THE RISKS OF GUNS IN THE HOME

*

Currently, an estimated 39% of households have a gun; 24% have a handgun.[1]

*

There are approximately 192 million privately owned firearms in the U.S. — including 65 million handguns.[2]

*

Approximately 29% of adults personally own a firearm, and 18% personally own a handgun.[3]

*

In 1994, 35% of the homes with children younger than 18 reported having at least 1 firearm; 43% of those had at least 1 unlocked firearm.[4]

*

A gun kept in the home is 22 times more likely to be used in an unintentional shooting (4 times), a criminal assault or homicide (7 times), or an attempted or completed suicide (11 times) than to be used to injure or kill in self-defense.[5]

*

When someone is home, a gun is used for protection in fewer than two percent of home invasion crimes.[6]

Home invasion is scary.

*

The risk of homicide in the home is three times greater in households with guns.[7]

Does it depend on anything else specific besides just the presence of a gun?

*

The risk of suicide is five times greater in households with guns.[8]

Is that a cause or effect?

*

From 1987-1990, victims used firearms to protect themselves in fewer than one percent of all violent offenses.[9]

Maybe more people should carry weapons?

*

In 1998, there were only 134 justifiable handgun homicides by a private citizen compared with a total of 6,498 handgun murders in the United States.[10]

Maybe not enough private citizens are armed?

*

A 1994 national survey found that 71 percent of the U.S. population feels less safe when others in the community acquire firearms.[11]

So nobody should own weapons.

*

From 1990-1998, two-thirds of spouse and ex-spouse murder victims were killed by guns.[12]

They ought to lock up the people who committed those crimes.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

A gun kept in the home is 22 times more likely to be used in an unintentional shooting (4 times), a criminal assault or homicide (7 times), or an attempted or completed suicide (11 times) than to be used to injure or kill in self-defense.[5]

This math is fascinating - the way those probabilities all add up.

Consider this:

Joe drives to work two days a week, and goes through towns A, B, C, D and E on the way to work each time he drives. His work schedule goes to 4 days a week, so he has increased his chances of getting into an accident in town A by (2), town B by (2), town C by (2), town D by (2) and town E by (2), so his overall risk of getting into an accident has increase ten-fold.

 

[Chris]

Some of the methodologies used to make those statistics could also be used to show that the posession of insulin causes diabetes.

 

[JuergenG]

 

[C-pher]

Or that if you have a trash can, you're risk of attracting flys are greater.

 

[Another_David]

One more statistic to add:

Mrs. Brady bought a rifle for her son, Jame Brady, Jr. It was arguably a straw purchase to boot!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_purchase

These antis, like the chiefs that refuse to issue LTC ALP, should be using the tag line, "Guns are bad for you, but good for us"

 

[hminsky]

One more statistic to add:

Mrs. Brady bought a rifle for her son, Jame Brady, Jr. It was arguably a straw purchase to boot!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_purchase

These antis, like the chiefs that refuse to issue LTC ALP, should be using the tag line, "Guns are bad for you, but good for us"

Maybe she was trying to get him to commit suicide?

 

[Thor67]

You can't even look at these stats without know what the actual statistical basis of these numbers are.

For instance the one where Brday says you're more likely to be killed by a criminal than you are to kill one is probably true, but taken out of context. Most law abiding gun owners don't kill or wound there attackers because they don't shoot them. They use the gun to scare them away or hold them until the police arrive. This stat in particular came from a study in Kent County, WA I believe. The statistician has since disavowed the conclusion I believe.

Guns are used in approx. 2.5 million cases to prevent crime. Without know Brady's comparisson data, you can't say these are fact or fiction. In all cases where I've looked into the Brady claims using FBI, and CDC data, they've come out as B.S. - and by significant margins!

 

[Pilgrim]

I would say that if there was a gun in the house, you are 100% more likely to have an accident with it than if there was no gun in the house.

Same as if you are 100% more likely to be in a car accident if you are in a car than if you are not in a car.

IDIOTS they are !

 

[hminsky]

It kind of reminds me of the statistics I used to see about the effectiveness of condoms. They said the pregnancy rate per year of use was 15%. But when used "correctly" the rate was closer to 3%.

So the wide difference in the statistics is due to operator error. It is not really helpful to an individual to tell them that the failure rate of condoms is so high, when the statistic includes all the dimwits who put them on their heads or something. It might make sense from a public health point of view, but it doesn't seem fair to penalize the people who use them properly just to account for the people who don't.

I try to take sufficient precautions with firearms that the dangers of accidents or unauthorized access are close to zero in the house, or at least a lot smaller than the other household dangers (poisons, fire, drowning in the bathtub , tripping down the stairs, getting hit by a car crossing the street or backing out of the driveway)

 

[Nashmack]

IIRC you are about 3,000,000,000,000 times more likely to be hit by Sen. Kennedy's car or to drown at Chappaquiddick while riding with him than to be shot by the guns in your household. See? Guns aren't dangerous, Kennedys are! I'm starting a petition for Kennedy control!

 

[SiameseRat]

it's funny because it's true. Guns don't kill people, Kennedys kill people...

 

[KMaurer]

it's funny because it's true. Guns don't kill people, Kennedys kill people...

Or more generally ...

 

[dreppucci007]

it's funny because it's true. Guns don't kill people, Kennedys kill people...

That should be a t-shirt

 

[Coyote33]

*

From 1987-1990, victims used firearms to protect themselves in fewer than one percent of all violent offenses.[9]

Maybe more people should carry weapons?

What about the ones who used firearms which avoided becoming victims?

 

[Thor67]

Brady's "From 1987-1990, victims used firearms to protect themselves in fewer than one percent of all violent offenses.[9]" is a completely ridiculous statement!

How do they know who did and did not use a weapon to protect themselves. Even the FBI has to estimate, as many of the time that the victim protects themselves with or without a weapon doesn't get reported because the victim is afraid.

Also, bear in mind that these "statistics" are 15 - 20 years old in most cases.

Brady published these statistics which conveniently came in time before the Clinton Justice Department's study that showed approx. 1.5 million cases of self-defense using a firearm every year. The National Institute of Justice published the study in 1997 as part of "Guns in America" which was done by Philip Cook and Jens Ludwig - who were both anti-gun.

John Lott's study estimates that the number is closer to 2.5mm.

 

[Marty]

{On soap box}
At the risk of over simplifying the "gun in the home" issue: A gun is a tool - allbeit a potentially deadly one. There are those of us who are comfortable with tools - know their benefits and dangers. And there are those who are uncomfortable with them. We know who we are, and we know who they are. As a protective tool in the hands of a responsible and competent user, a gun (in the home) provides one means of family security. To others it appears as a threat, a ticking bomb waiting to go bang. That's the way it is, and that's the way it will be. It's really a cultural issue. When (if) the "Bradys" of the world sufficiently outnumber us they will take our guns - game over. The good news is that most people in this country are apolitical - this works to our favor.
{Off soap box}