Gun Carrying Catholics Armed

[Vonsalza]

Call me a skeptic. Defensive gun use is not the same as people who use their gun for defense.

Oh you’re on to something there.

In all fairness, if you felt threatened enough that you grabbed a gun and reported the perceived crime, it counted in the study.

That reality is separate from whether you were actually under any real danger, obviously.

I wonder how the data would look if you excluded data points from folks 70+ and those who lived alone for example - groups prone to paranoia due to age or isolation.

 

[pnewton]

Why do you only connect it with murder?

That is extremely bad logic, and very self serving.

My brother in law stopped a robbery just by showing he was armed.

At the end of the day, there was nothing to report to the police.

At most I would argue that some people are exaggerating, and not all the incidents would have ended up with a crime reported.

At most? Again, I was generous with 100 to one. The real figure was 150 to one. So even adding in robberies, rapes and other similar crimes, the figure in the article is absurd. I guess self-reporting might account for some of it, in which case the CDC would be right to bury such a poorly-designed study, if it every really existed, something the article provided no evidence of.

My gut reaction is that it is made up. Even bad scientists aren’t that bad, and the ones that are don’t brag about their work. I know what happens here. Self-defense happens, but is a rarity.

 

[Theo520]

Lots of studies must be based on self reporting.
That doesn’t make them irrelevant, it only opens up questions on how best to interpret the data. It’s perfectly reasonable to filter down a degree of self reported incidents. Heck, maybe it should lead to research on paranoia

 

[anon10271182]

In most states, one can legally use deadly force if one has reasonable fear of being a victim of great bodily harm. The assailant doesn’t even have to be carrying a weapon, though that might help, in court. Some jurisdictions require that you retreat until you can’t retreat anymore. Like the lady in Georgia did.

 

[Theo520]

I expect that when the criminal component is not carrying/showing a gun,
it’s much more likely to end in their retreat and no crime being committed.

It also may not reduce the overall crime level much, they may just pick an unarmed target.

 

[anon10271182]

Hopefully they run off but yes, sadly they’ll most likely look for an easier target.

 

[Theo520]

Hopefully they run off but yes, sadly they’ll most likely look for an easier target.

I think when the crime is driven by addiction, they are more than likely to just find another easier target.

I think career criminal are more likely to avoid the whole scenario by doing burglary instead of robbery.

 

[Ender]

Here is why I ignore that article. If there was a year with 2 million plus defensive uses, that means there would be over one hundred times someone used a fire arm to stop a murderer, for every successful murder. The number is simply absurdly high. Here, which is all I know, there are far few uses of firearms defensively for every offensive use. So I consider that whole article a pack of lies.

The CDC and Kleck studies both found about 2.5M defensive gun uses per year. This compares with something under a half million gun crimes committed annually.

According to the National Crime Victimization Survey, 467,321 persons were victims of a crime committed with a firearm in 2011.

That is, guns are used defensively about five times as often as used in crimes.

 

[pnewton]

The CDC and Kleck studies both found about 2.5M defensive gun uses per year.

Does it? The link you gave actual reports something. The news article gave zero evidence that the whole story is anything but fabricated. I do not believe it is real, or if it was, it was totally fabricated, with those outlandish numbers.

If half, even half of crimes here resulted in some defensive firearm use, I might be persuaded to believe a tenth the number that supposed report states.

 

[Ender]

Does it? The link you gave actual reports something. The news article gave zero evidence that the whole story is anything but fabricated. I do not believe it is real, or if it was, it was totally fabricated, with those outlandish numbers.

If half, even half of crimes here resulted in some defensive firearm use, I might be persuaded to believe a tenth the number that supposed report states.

Did you look at the Kleck and Gertz study? This comment is relevant to your concern.

Data from the NCVS imply that each year there are only about 68,000 defensive uses of guns in connection with assaults and robberies, or about 80,000 to 82,000 if one adds in uses linked with household burglaries. These figures are less than one ninth of the estimates implied by the results of at least thirteen other surveys, summarized in Table 1, most of which have been previously reported.

 

[o_mlly]

Often just showing your weapon does cause a retreat, no shots fired.

Then often a toy gun would suffice.

Whether a split second matters would vary with the actual situation.

In all actual situations, no matter how the situation developed, there is more often than not the moment when an armed victim points his weapon and, prior to shooting, hesitates. The victim who hesitates is likely a moment later shot. The point is that if you are not mentally ready to shoot without hesitating then do not even show your gun.

Also, shooting someone doesn’t equal killing them. Incapacitate and call an ambulance.

Hesitating and then shooting to incapacitate does not seem to me a viable strategy to survive an armed robbery.

 

[anon10271182]

You don’t shoot to incapacitate. You shoot center of mass and then stop when the perp stops the attack. If he is only incapacitated, lucky for him. In the Georgia case, the perp took five hits and was still able to flee the scene. He crashed his car into a utility pole down the road, where he was apprehended.
Five rounds, and he was still able to flee the scene.

 

[Theo520]

And some people drop after a single fleshwound.

Not suggesting ‘winging’ them is your goal, but if they drop after 1-2 shots, you don’t walk up to them adding more lead, reload and unload again.

 

[anon10271182]

Yes. My point about the lady who shot the bad guy five times in Georgia is that she obviously didn’t fire an excessive number of times, since perp was able to leave the scene. Guessing he was seriously amped up on drugs.

 

[pnewton]

Did you look at the Kleck and Gertz study?

Yes, I and think it is all garbage. They can make all sort of claims about what they say wasn’t reported, assuming they ever did any sort of study to begin with and didn’t make the whole thing up. It doesn’t matter. I know better that this claim they made. It is to me as if they said 90% of all people are female. I know better of my own experience it is garbage.

 

[Ender]

Yes, I and think it is all garbage. They can make all sort of claims about what they say wasn’t reported, assuming they ever did any sort of study to begin with and didn’t make the whole thing up.

From this comment it would appear that you’ve not really followed what has been said. Kleck and Gertz published a study on defensive gun use in 1995 where they said there were about 2.5M DGUs per year. That report was roundly criticized for that estimate.

Some years later, Kleck was going through data from the CDC and discovered that they had done their own study of DGUs for the years 1996-1998. The CDC study, unlike Kleck & Gertz, was unpublished, but after reviewing their data, Kleck discovered that they reached virtually the same conclusion - about 2.5 DGUs per year.

In the Kleck & Gertz study they noted that there were thirteen other studies relevant to the topic, and the lowest estimate of DGUs was 700k/yr. What you “know” to be true seems very different from what would appear to actually be true.

 

[Theo520]

In the Kleck & Gertz study they noted that there were thirteen other studies relevant to the topic, and the lowest estimate of DGUs was 700k/yr. What you “know” to be true seems very different from what would appear to actually be true.

When the facts don’t support preconceived opinions, some just fall back on this tactic

 

[pnewton]

I do not have preconceived opinions on this. I live it. Guns are not used defensively a hundred, fifty, or even ten times, for every time they are used offensively. What I said earlier, and what has not been addressed, is that none of this supposed study, or the claims of the CDC cover-up has actually been documented, as in referenced where it can be seen and studied by all, including all in academia, for it veracity, even for its actual existence.

And only then does the problem with self-reporting become an issue, after the actual existence of this study is established independent of bloggers.

BTW - Another issue that always needs addressing is the worthlessness of any study designed to prove a political point. They always prove the point they intend, though such studies are not real science.

 

[Theo520]

The unpublished CDC studies were not commissioned with the agenda of supporting the NRA, you ignore this basic fact that adds weight to their findings.

 

[TheOldColonel]

100% of home invasions happen while the occupants are home. Interesting fact.