Z
Zoltan_Cobalt
Guest
I agree…
The flawed premise of this thread has been debunked over and over again. As one forum member pointed out:
End of argument…End of thread
- Status
The flawed premise of this thread has been debunked over and over again. As one forum member pointed out:
R
Robert_Sock
Guest
Z
Zoltan_Cobalt
Guest
No Robert…And how was this ‘debunking’ done? By wishing it away?
LOVE!
All it takes is a closer look at its own numbers to show that its author is guilty of the very thing he ascribes to those on the other side of the debate.
Essentially it is a phony article.
R
Robert_Sock
Guest
The stats that I’m most concerned with are in Myth #5: The probability of having a gun in the household on domestic homicide, suicide and accidental shootings. If you need additional stats, do a Google search using the keywords: “household guns homicide” and take your pick of the many studies and articles presented their.
LOVE!
Y
YADA
Guest
As many have said - often times the criminal runs away when confronted - every year people deter crimes by being armedThe stats that I’m most concerned with are in Myth #5: The probability of having a gun in the household on domestic homicide, suicide and accidental shootings. If you need additional stats, do a Google search using the keywords: “household guns homicide” and take your pick of the many studies and articles presented their.
LOVE!
object.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/pubs/pdf/WP-Tough-Targets.pdf
cato.org/guns-and-self-defense
civilliberty.about.com/od/guncontrol/a/Gun-Rights-Self-Defense-Deterrent.htm
- A 1982 survey of male felons in 11 state prisons dispersed across the U.S. found:
• 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”
From Book: Armed and Considered Dangerous: A Survey of Felons and Their Firearms (Expanded Edition). By James D. Wright and Peter D. Rossi. Aldine De Gruyter, 1986 (Expanded edition published in 1994)
R
Robert_Sock
Guest
We really need to contrast the potential positive and negative consequences of gun ownership.
LOVE!
Z
Zoltan_Cobalt
Guest
We went over that one…The stats that I’m most concerned with are in Myth #5: The probability of having a gun in the household on domestic homicide, suicide and accidental shootings. If you need additional stats, do a Google search using the keywords: “household guns homicide” and take your pick of the many studies and articles presented their.
LOVE!
Without including “stats” showing the number of times a firearm is used to scare away an intruder without firing a shot…Myth #5 is a phony claim.
Actually if those figures were included it would show that keeping a firearm in the home provides a safer environment and over rides accidental shootings as well as suicides.
Z
Zoltan_Cobalt
Guest
Robert…if negative consequences of gun ownership outweigh the positive…who should NOT own guns?We really need to contrast the potential positive and negative consequences of gun ownership.
LOVE!
R
Robert_Sock
Guest
W
White_Tree
Guest
That was an illuminating article. Thank you for sharing.
B
Brendan
Guest
We already didWe really need to contrast the potential positive and negative consequences of gun ownership.
LOVE!
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=11916594&postcount=438
Would you care to address that statistic?
R
Robert_Sock
Guest
L
LongingSoul
Guest
B
Brendan
Guest
And I would state that such an expectation of safety is unfounded. Australia and the UK both have higher rates of violent crime. And, in Australia, the rates are INCREASING, while they are DECREASING in the US
Australia currently has a rate of rapes per capita that is three times higher than of the US. The US is behind Canada in that respect as well.
nationmaster.com/country-info/stats/Crime/Rapes
How exactly are you defining this ‘expectation of safety’?
B
Brendan
Guest
So we agree that a gunowner is statistically more likely to stop a crime using their gun, than to have their gun used in a violent manner.No, I accept it.
LOVE!
L
LongingSoul
Guest
Even though the statistics are ancient and the site not an official statistics site… it qualifies itself by saying…
“Crime statistics are often better indicators of prevalence of law enforcement and willingness to report crime, than actual prevalence.”
So countries like Australia (which use the term sexual assault rather than rape for statistical purposes) NZ, Sweden, Finland, Denmark, have a relatively high intolerance for this sort of crime and a woman can feel confident of justice in reporting sexual offenses. Other countries can discourage reporting through a poor history of convictions for sexual assault.
That isn’t the point though. To think that ‘all women in Australia would be safer if they were armed at all times’ is a fallacy we don’t buy into. Simple maths. With more guns in the community, more guns will be turned on more women in more violent attacks. All that would do is make it safer for the fittest and strongest at the expense of the weak and vulnerable women. But the statistics might look better since it is the weak and vulnerable who are less likely to qualify for or afford guns and that are less likely to report sexual crime against themselves in the first place. That will never happen here.
Y
YADA
Guest
But you are assuming I obtained firearm primarily for self defense which is not the case. I also have a baseball bat that I could use for self defense and kitchen knives … I have never purchased a firearm for self defense especially from humans. So you projected yourself upon me which is totally unacceptable. Like any tool, I always hope and plan to use the appropriate tool available to accomplish a necessary objective. I hunt and fish. I own a large acreage where there is the chance to en ounter dangerous animals. And I live in a rural setting where calling law enforcement will not get any manner of immediate response.
Most individuals own firearms for many uses …which negates your biased analysis…which is present in the OP’s article and the cited studies - as has been shown in multiple posts
R
Robert_Sock
Guest
Hi Brendan!
No, we still need to weigh the pros and cons. We can see from the data you provided that having a gun can prevent a potentially violent crime, but gun owners need to be aware that gun ownership can cause homicide, suicide and accidental shooting within the household.
LOVE!
A
ARSpade
Guest
You also must include the fact that the UK (and many other places) also game their numbers to make their countries look safer.
In the US if there’s a dead body and it didn’t get dead by natural causes or suicide then it’s recorded as a “homicide” in the FBI stats.
Since 1967 the UK doesn’t consider a dead body to equal a homicide unless somebody actually gets convicted of homicide. Unless you’re looking at firearms related homicides, then you get the “real” number.
From a Parliment report:
A
ARSpade
Guest
From the report posted earlier:Hi Brendan!
No, we still need to weigh the pros and cons. We can see from the data you provided that having a gun can prevent a potentially violent crime, but gun owners need to be aware that gun ownership can cause homicide, suicide and accidental shooting within the household.
LOVE!
So, it sounds like the math the government developed already says the “pros” win.
Of course gun ownership can cause that, but statistically it doesn’t or the homicide/suicide/ND rate would be much much higher consider how many people own guns.
Of course, I’m somewhat biased as a guy who owns guns and stopped a domestic violence situation involving my neighbors with one.
- Status