Privately owned guns save more lives than they take

[HalfLotus]

Surprised and impressed that their isn't a Trayvon thread here. Besides the boring and predictable agitation for racial conflict surrounding the case, are the boring and predictable arguments against private gun ownership.

Unbelievably, guns are used almost 7000 times a day in self-defense.

Fact Sheet: Guns Save Lives

A. Guns save more lives than they take; prevent more injuries than they inflict

* Guns used 2.5 million times a year in self-defense. Law-abiding citizens use guns to defend themselves against criminals as many as 2.5 million times every year -- or about 6,850 times a day.1 This means that each year, firearms are used more than 80 times more often to protect the lives of honest citizens than to take lives.2

* Of the 2.5 million times citizens use their guns to defend themselves every year, the overwhelming majority merely brandish their gun or fire a warning shot to scare off their attackers. Less than 8% of the time, a citizen will kill or wound his/her attacker.3

* As many as 200,000 women use a gun every year to defend themselves against sexual abuse.4

* Even anti-gun Clinton researchers concede that guns are used 1.5 million times annually for self-defense. According to the Clinton Justice Department, there are as many as 1.5 million cases of self-defense every year. The National Institute of Justice published this figure in 1997 as part of "Guns in America" -- a study which was authored by noted anti-gun criminologists Philip Cook and Jens Ludwig.5

* Armed citizens kill more crooks than do the police. Citizens shoot and kill at least twice as many criminals as police do every year (1,527 to 606).6 And readers of Newsweek learned that "only 2 percent of civilian shootings involved an innocent person mistakenly identified as a criminal. The 'error rate' for the police, however, was 11 percent, more than five times as high."7

* Handguns are the weapon of choice for self-defense. Citizens use handguns to protect themselves over 1.9 million times a year.8 Many of these self-defense handguns could be labeled as "Saturday Night Specials."

B. Concealed carry laws help reduce crime

* Nationwide: one-half million self-defense uses. Every year, as many as one-half million citizens defend themselves with a firearm away from home.9

* Concealed carry laws are dropping crime rates across the country. A comprehensive national study determined in 1996 that violent crime fell after states made it legal to carry concealed firearms. The results of the study showed:

* States which passed concealed carry laws reduced their murder rate by 8.5%, rapes by 5%, aggravated assaults by 7% and robbery by 3%;10 and

* If those states not having concealed carry laws had adopted such laws in 1992, then approximately 1,570 murders, 4,177 rapes, 60,000 aggravated assaults and over 11,000 robberies would have been avoided yearly.11

* Vermont: one of the safest five states in the country. In Vermont, citizens can carry a firearm without getting permission... without paying a fee... or without going through any kind of government-imposed waiting period. And yet for ten years in a row, Vermont has remained one of the top-five, safest states in the union -- having three times received the "Safest State Award."12

* Florida: concealed carry helps slash the murder rates in the state. In the fifteen years following the passage of Florida's concealed carry law in 1987, over 800,000 permits to carry firearms were issued to people in the state.13 FBI reports show that the homicide rate in Florida, which in 1987 was much higher than the national average, fell 52% during that 15-year period -- thus putting the Florida rate below the national average. 14

* Do firearms carry laws result in chaos? No. Consider the case of Florida. A citizen in the Sunshine State is far more likely to be attacked by an alligator than to be assaulted by a concealed carry holder.

1. During the first fifteen years that the Florida law was in effect, alligator attacks outpaced the number of crimes committed by carry holders by a 229 to 155 margin.

2. And even the 155 "crimes" committed by concealed carry permit holders are somewhat misleading as most of these infractions resulted from Floridians who accidentally carried their firearms into restricted areas, such as an airport.15

C. Criminals avoid armed citizens

* Kennesaw, GA. In 1982, this suburb of Atlanta passed a law requiring heads of households to keep at least one firearm in the house. The residential burglary rate subsequently dropped 89% in Kennesaw, compared to the modest 10.4% drop in Georgia as a whole.16

* Ten years later (1991), the residential burglary rate in Kennesaw was still 72% lower than it had been in 1981, before the law was passed.17

* Nationwide. Statistical comparisons with other countries show that burglars in the United States are far less apt to enter an occupied home than their foreign counterparts who live in countries where fewer civilians own firearms. Consider the following rates showing how often a homeowner is present when a burglar strikes:

* Homeowner occupancy rate in the gun control countries of Great Britain, Canada and Netherlands: 45% (average of the three countries); and,

* Homeowner occupancy rate in the United States: 12.7%.18

Rapes averted when women carry or use firearms for protection

* Orlando, FL. In 1966-67, the media highly publicized a safety course which taught Orlando women how to use guns. The result: Orlando's rape rate dropped 88% in 1967, whereas the rape rate remained constant in the rest of Florida and the nation.19

* Nationwide. In 1979, the Carter Justice Department found that of more than 32,000 attempted rapes, 32% were actually committed. But when a woman was armed with a gun or knife, only 3% of the attempted rapes were actually successful.20

Justice Department study:

* 3/5 of felons polled agreed that "a criminal is not going to mess around with a victim he knows is armed with a gun."21

* 74% of felons polled agreed that "one reason burglars avoid houses when people are at home is that they fear being shot during the crime."22

* 57% of felons polled agreed that "criminals are more worried about meeting an armed victim than they are about running into the police."23

[Al B. Sure!]

Surprised and impressed that their isn't a Trayvon thread here.

Isn't a Trayvon thread here? We have two. The main one got to 650 replies. The other one was at 115.

Real one: http://apolyton.net/showthread.php/1...-t-this-murder
MrFun all late with it: http://apolyton.net/showthread.php/1...and-suspicious

[DaShi]

Unbelievable!

[Berzerker]

* Vermont: one of the safest five states in the country. In Vermont, citizens can carry a firearm without getting permission... without paying a fee... or without going through any kind of government-imposed waiting period. And yet for ten years in a row, Vermont has remained one of the top-five, safest states in the union -- having three times received the "Safest State Award."

the home of Bernie Sanders?

[HalfLotus]

Isn't a Trayvon thread here? We have two. The main one got to 650 replies. The other one was at 115.

Real one: http://apolyton.net/showthread.php/1...-t-this-murder
MrFun all late with it: http://apolyton.net/showthread.php/1...and-suspicious

Oh hell.

Its what I get for ignoring every Fun thread, and assuming all threads over 8 pages are banal religious tiffs.

[HalfLotus]

the home of Bernie Sanders?

And more lefties than Red China? Yeah, shocking. I spent 6 months there and might attribute the peace less to defensive gun ownership and more to the fact that every person there is stoned to the high heavens on a daily basis.

[regexcellent]

I'll start this off with the caveat that I am 100% in favor of privately owned guns and enjoy them myself.

However let's think about this problem for a minute. Unless people are using their guns to defend themselves from wild animals, which is, I suspect, an unusual scenario, people are defending themselves against armed adversaries. Unless said adversaries are armed with knives, which again I suspect is the exception rather than the rule, they are defending themselves against other people with privately owned guns.

Long story short, for any specific defensive gun use, there is a very high probability that there is a cooresponding offensive gun use. For every offensive gun use, there is not as high a probability that there will be a cooresponding defensive gun use.

If we define "privately owned guns" as "privately and legally owned guns" then this may very well be accurate, but otherwise the proposition is absurd.

EDIT: well actually this thread was about lives lost/saved, so I guess it might still be true. Nonetheless, the ratio of offensive gun uses to defensive gun uses is almost certainly greater than 1:1.

[MRT144]

I'll start this off with the caveat that I am 100% in favor of privately owned guns and enjoy them myself.

However let's think about this problem for a minute. Unless people are using their guns to defend themselves from wild animals, which is, I suspect, an unusual scenario, people are defending themselves against armed adversaries. Unless said adversaries are armed with knives, which again I suspect is the exception rather than the rule, they are defending themselves against other people with privately owned guns.

Long story short, for any specific defensive gun use, there is a very high probability that there is a cooresponding offensive gun use. For every offensive gun use, there is not as high a probability that there will be a cooresponding defensive gun use.

If we define "privately owned guns" as "privately and legally owned guns" then this may very well be accurate, but otherwise the proposition is absurd.

EDIT: well actually this thread was about lives lost/saved, so I guess it might still be true. Nonetheless, the ratio of offensive gun uses to defensive gun uses is almost certainly greater than 1:1.

Well said.

[Al B. Sure!]

Yeah the criminals had to get the guns from somewhere. They didn't make them.

This:

The 'error rate' for the police, however, was 11 percent, more than five times as high

is disturbing, though. 11% of people killed by cops were innocent? Can we get stats on race, too? The common belief is, from numerous high-profile incidents, that police are quicker to pull the trigger on Black suspects.

[SlowwHand]

Al, at the risk of encountering your wrath, there are more violent Black criminals than White. Black leaders acknowledge that their people are slaughtering their own.

Surprised and impressed that their isn't a Trayvon thread here. Besides the boring and predictable agitation for racial conflict surrounding the case, are the boring and predictable arguments against private gun ownership.

Unbelievably, guns are used almost 7000 times a day in self-defense.

It's not guns, as you can see. I've said it before. A rock will do. Ask Cain.

[Al B. Sure!]

Al, at the risk of encountering your wrath, there are more violent Black criminals than White. Black leaders acknowledge that their people are slaughtering their own.

Of course although my liberal friends would lie to themselves and not admit it.

But I was mentioning INNOCENT men who were killed. If cops are more likely to be suspicious of a Black person that would be acting on statistical probability... but doing so is called racial profiling, so such a thing would never be admitted and would be publicly scolded even if it may be more efficient... but that's something different than actually killing a suspect.

It's not good that 11% of people killed by cops are innocent. It's also distressing if Black males are over-represented among those innocent men. No innocent man should be killed by cops but even that gets worse if there's a racial bias. If there's a small X% chance you could get killed by a cop but if it's, let's say, 3 times that for a Black guy, both of you equally innocent, that's bad for the Black dude.

Of course, I'm just asking if there are stats on that. For all we know, innocent whites are disproportionately killed and the high-profile cases that get in the media are just because the media likes race stories.

Regardless, it's distressing that 11% of lives taken by cops should not have been lost.

[SlowwHand]

It's bad no matter what. Profiling, as bad as it is, exists for a reason. No, it's not because cops are comprised of solely bigoted Whites.

[Al B. Sure!]

It's bad no matter what. Profiling, as bad as it is, exists for a reason.

Of course. I think profiling gets a bad rap if the statistics bear it out, as it does for Black male offenders. No one would have the guts to come out and champion profiling as a means of efficient policing, though.

There are problems with it, however. You devote police resources to hounding young Black males and you could wind up accosting Black college students while white criminals don't get a second glance.

The fact of the matter is and this is real talk that no one wants to admit: racism (from whites) created the perception of the predatory Black man but large numbers of Black men are doing their best to give credence to that perception.

[Al B. Sure!]

Oh and Sloww, don't let the above get to your head because you just got support from an 'urban' man with a tan. I'm still a conservative Republican with a very high esteem for cops that is borne by my experience as a white man in a predominately Black community; police never gave me trouble and have always treated me with respect, whereas I've only ever been assaulted, robbed, or witnessed crimes perpetuated by Black men. This experience is not shared by many of my neighbors who have said they are often mistreated by cops. I've heard them say cops have called them 'ni**er', even. So I may be benefiting from the privilege of being white in my dealings with cops and the negative of being white to Black criminals (did you know by the way that the Philly PD only has 3 classifications for race: white, Black, and '2 or more races'; Asians, Indians, Hispanics, etc. are considered white).

When I say such things to people, though, or suggest that every time I was robbed, it was a hate crime since I believe my race played a role in my selection as a victim, people get disgusted by me. Whatever. I'm being real.

[SlowwHand]

Racism is racism and it sure isn't a problem confined to the White population. If Blacks only reciprocated, that wouldn't make them right. The old "two wrongs don't make a right" parable.
It's embarrassing that some people remain ignorant. No, not ignorant. Stupid. They've been told, so ignorant isn't an option. I have no truck with stupidity.

[Dinner]

Partisan organizations, such as the one linked to in the OP, often lie. I'd be hugely surprised if the number of killings was in reality surpassed by the number of people defending themselves. I'd be willing to bet just accidental killings were larger than the defensive shootings much less the murders.

[SlowwHand]

The Barney Fife syndrome. Highly possible.

[Dinner]

Or maybe you just agree with halflotus's links claiming Bush did 9/11?

[Braindead]

When I say such things to people, though, or suggest that every time I was robbed, it was a hate crime since I believe my race played a role in my selection as a victim, people get disgusted by me. Whatever. I'm being real.

I will go right out on a limb here by suggesting the possibility that robbers rob people to get money. Or at least, getting money is the dominant motive. There is the possibility that a robber might imagine a white person to be more likely to have a few dollars in his pocket (which may be some sort of racial stereotyping on the part of the robber).

[MRT144]

It's bad no matter what. Profiling, as bad as it is, exists for a reason. No, it's not because cops are comprised of solely bigoted Whites.

When will most white people be pulled over for meth.

[SlowwHand]

When will most white people be pulled over for meth.

I don't know. What are the stats on meth possession?

Or maybe you just agree with halflotus's links claiming Bush did 9/11?

That is so stupid that I don't even want to really give more than a passing nod of recognition that he said something.

[MRT144]

That is so stupid that I don't even want to really give more than a passing nod of recognition that he said something.

I think we need a beer meetup. All of us.

[SlowwHand]

I'll be the one drinking Shiner. Good looking guy. Awe-inspiring even.

[Al B. Sure!]

I will go right out on a limb here by suggesting the possibility that robbers rob people to get money. Or at least, getting money is the dominant motive. There is the possibility that a robber might imagine a white person to be more likely to have a few dollars in his pocket (which may be some sort of racial stereotyping on the part of the robber).

All I know is I've been robbed 5 times and got away 2 other times. The muggers (they approached me in groups of no less than two) were, except for one instance, 20-something Black males wearing hoodies. The one exception was a group of a dozen Black teenagers who jumped me.

I actually live in a predominately Puerto Rican neighborhood but have never been bothered by those who look like me. It's walking through predominately Black areas that is problematic. None of my Black friends have been robbed as many times as me despite many of them having even more exposure to walking alone in ghettos at night than me. I'm not the largest guy but at 6'2", you would think they'd go after easier targets. Though for all I know, my height makes me more noticeable.

I had considered wearing a hood up to make determination of my race harder but that reduces my visibility too much.

Regardless, I'm certain there's a racial component to victim selection for mugging.


I will say, though, my first time getting mugged, the muggers wanted weed and kept punching me in the face instead of taking my wallet and cd player which I begged them to take. They must have thought I was a dealer. They then jumped in a car and drove off.

[SlowwHand]

Which is odd to me. Stateside, I've been in Watts. Alone at night in D.C. and Oakland.Visited the rougher parts of both Dallas and Ft. Worth. I've never been bothered.

[Al B. Sure!]

Which is odd to me. Stateside, I've been in Watts. Alone at night in D.C. and Oakland.Visited the rougher parts of both Dallas and Ft. Worth. I've never been bothered.

Have you been to Philadelphia?

Exactly.

[SlowwHand]

Al, contrary to your beliefs and experiences, Philly scares me none. I'm not saying that in a confrontational way, nor am I "disparaging" the toughness of your town.
I'm only stating a fact.

[Al B. Sure!]

Al, contrary to your beliefs and experiences, Philly scares me none. I'm not saying that in a confrontational way, nor am I "disparaging" the toughness of your town.
I'm only stating a fact.

That's odd. I'm scared to death of Philly at night. When I would get off work at 2am, I would take a bus several miles out of my way to the much safer Independence Hall then wait for a bus that ran only once an hour but would drop me off at my corner, adding literally hours to my commute home, just so I wouldn't have to walk 7 blocks through the hood.

[MRT144]

That's odd. I'm scared to death of Philly at night. When I would get off work at 2am, I would take a bus several miles out of my way to the much safer Independence Hall then wait for a bus that ran only once an hour but would drop me off at my corner, adding literally hours to my commute home, just so I wouldn't have to walk 7 blocks through the hood.

They can smell the virgin *****...

[Bugs ****ing Bunny]

* Orlando, FL. In 1966-67, the media highly publicized a safety course which taught Orlando women how to use guns. The result: Orlando's rape rate dropped 88% in 1967, whereas the rape rate remained constant in the rest of Florida and the nation.19

Proof- advertising stops rapes.