So you agree and good for you to admit the obvious. Many of the posters here claim to own a gun for safety, protection. You and I realize it actually makes people living in the home less safe.
they own a gun because it’s very easy for criminals to get guns in a country that makes it so. as we know, in countries with stronger gun laws, they only affect law-abiding citizens and criminals still have arsenals of firearms.
That's only true if you count only shots fired as self defense. Which is how they came up with that number. They discounted the times the gun was used in self defense but never fired.
Do you have and facts on this? The last study I saw had accidental shootings and suicides four times more common than using a gun in self defense.
I would also question the numbers for people claiming they have used a gun in self defense. How many of the creeps on this board have claimed using their gun in such a way? None have ever been able to offer any proof. I mean pointing your gun at someone is a crime in many states so if I did that to someone I would file a police report and have that as proof.
The fact that you actually worry about armed invaders and shooting your way out of trouble has got the wreak havoc on your nervous system and have long term negative affect on your health. I am sorry you live in fear like this.
Can you see how your fear puts your family in danger with having guns around?
You see, because I am not afraid, I don't need guns around. This actually makes my family more safe than yours.
It doesn't really dude. Its not active unless I'm at the range it's all passive stuff. I prepare so I don't have to worry....like a walking version of the worst case scenario survival hand book
You are totally misunderstanding me. Deliberately at this point in fact. But here it is. What I fear is not being prepared for whatever might go wrong and feeling powerless to aid my people or myself.if you want to analyze that i was the kid whos dad always said he was coming and left me sitting on the curb looking probably about as sad as you imagine and both my parents died early and i lived in some less than great places where lifes got a bit of an edge to it...leaving me a real nead to have a plan for whatever might go wrong so you dont ever have to feel that way ever again.i also am someone who everytime something goes wrong adds it to the list of shit to prepare for l.Combine that with a love for a lot of gun culture and that's kinds where I'm coming from
The thing I fear isn't bad guys with guns the thing I Hate is not being prepared or having a plan... whatever it is I'm usually giving it my all. And I don't feel I'm incorrect in the lesson learned in life is that success depends on preparation and a confidence in yourself that you can....whatever can might mean on any given day.
Do you have and facts on this? The last study I saw had accidental shootings and suicides four times more common than using a gun in self defense.
I would also question the numbers for people claiming they have used a gun in self defense. How many of the creeps on this board have claimed using their gun in such a way? None have ever been able to offer any proof. I mean pointing your gun at someone is a crime in many states so if I did that to someone I would file a police report and have that as proof.
"Conclusions: Guns kept in homes are more likely to be involved in a fatal or nonfatal accidental shooting, criminal assault, or suicide attempt than to be used to injure or kill in self-defense."
The overwhelming number of times a firearm is used in self defense it's not fired. First ask any cop the number of times he draws their weapons vs the number of times they fore them.
Two studies one by Clinton stated firearms were used appropriately 1.5 millon times a year for self defence. Then the NRA says 2.5 million times a year. I say closer to the Clinton study. The overwhelming number of times the firearm was not fired.
Here is a more updated.
"The largest and most comprehensive survey of American gun owners ever conducted suggests that they use firearms in self-defense about 1.7 million times a year.Sep 9, 2022"
And yes I have used one and not fired. I was younger and I do regret not firing. It might have saved other people pain. I hope to never make a mistake like that again.
So you agree and good for you to admit the obvious. Many of the posters here claim to own a gun for safety, protection. You and I realize it actually makes people living in the home less safe.
I don't really want to own them but the nutbags in this country you have to. Horrible that my thought process that I'll shoot to kill if you enter my property.
I'll buy a decent couple of guns. A handgun next to the bed, the same in the lounge.
Which courses have you been on to get your license? I renewed my Guard Card but not needed apparently.
After the shooting of 3 kids the other week with a person legally allowed to buy guns while under doctor care, wondering how easy it is to get your hands on damaging weapons.
Its good to have defensive capabilities, and to be in charge of your own safety, not dependant on the (corrupt) state for such things.
Congratulations.
That said, you're operating from a position of irrational fear, based upon media sensationalism. Your chances of being shot on any given day are very low, and you're much more likely to die from heart disease or cancer.
People in homes with handguns more likely to be shot dead, major study finds
Researchers find ‘zero evidence of any kind of protective effects’, with women at particular risk
Most American gun owners say they own firearms to protect themselves and their loved ones, but a study published this week suggests people who live with handgun owners are shot to death at a higher rate than those who don’t have such weapons at home.
“We found zero evidence of any kind of protective effects” from living in a home with a handgun, said David Studdert, a Stanford University researcher who was the lead author of the Annals of Internal Medicine study.
In particular, the researchers found, people who lived with handgun owners had a much higher rate of being fatally shot by a spouse or intimate partner. The vast majority of such victims, 84%, were women, they said.
Living with a handgun owner particularly increased the risk of being shot to death in a domestic violence incident, and it did not provide any protection against being killed at home by a stranger, the researchers found.
People who lived with handgun owners “did not experience such fatal [stranger] attacks at lower rates than their neighbors in gun-free homes”, the researchers wrote, noting that stranger homicides at home were “a small minority” of the homicides observed in the study.
Statistically, having a gun in your home is more dangerous for you and your family, especially if you have young children or teens. A 2014 review in the Annals of Internal Medicine concluded having a firearm in the home, even when it’s properly stored, doubles your risk of becoming a victim of homicide and triples the risk of suicide.
Record-breaking spikes in gun sales over the last two years, alongside surveys indicating that self-protection continues to be the dominant reason for buying guns, underscore a widely-held belief that a gun in the home has security benefits.
A new study from my research team, recently published in the Annals of Internal Medicine, shows no such benefits. We found the opposite: people living in homes with guns face substantially higher risks of being fatally assaulted.
People living with handgun owners died by homicide at twice the rate of their neighbors in gun-free homes. That difference was driven largely by homicides at home, which were three times more common among people living with handgun owners.
We detected much larger differences for particular types of homicide. Most notably, people living with handgun owners were seven times more likely to be shot by their spouse or intimate partner. In many of these cases, instead of being protective, the household gun probably operated as the instrument of death.
An especially troubling finding was that the vast majority of victims in these intimate partner shootings—84% in all—were female.
Study findings in one other area were noteworthy: homicides perpetrated by strangers. Homicides of this kind were relatively uncommon in our study population—much less common than deaths perpetrated by the victim’s partner, family members, or friends. But when they happened, people living with gun owners did not experience them less often than people in gun-free homes.
This result clashes with a classic narrative promulgated by gun rights groups: firearm owners use their weapon to turn away or overpower a threatening intruder, thereby protecting home and hearth. We did not detect even a hint of such protective benefits.
A second study by our team, published in JAMA Psychiatry on April 29, switched the focus of second-hand risks to suicide in a large sample of women living with handgun owners in California. They were 50% more likely to die by suicide than their female neighbors in gun-free homes, and more than four times as likely to die by suicides that involved the use of firearms.
Objective: Determine the relative frequency with which guns in the home are used to injure or kill in self-defense, compared with the number of times these weapons are involved in an unintentional injury, suicide attempt, or criminal assault or homicide.
Conclusions: Guns kept in homes are more likely to be involved in a fatal or nonfatal accidental shooting, criminal assault, or suicide attempt than to be used to injure or kill in self-defense.
People in homes with handguns more likely to be shot dead, major study finds
Researchers find ‘zero evidence of any kind of protective effects’, with women at particular risk
Most American gun owners say they own firearms to protect themselves and their loved ones, but a study published this week suggests people who live with handgun owners are shot to death at a higher rate than those who don’t have such weapons at home.
“We found zero evidence of any kind of protective effects” from living in a home with a handgun, said David Studdert, a Stanford University researcher who was the lead author of the Annals of Internal Medicine study.
In particular, the researchers found, people who lived with handgun owners had a much higher rate of being fatally shot by a spouse or intimate partner. The vast majority of such victims, 84%, were women, they said.
Living with a handgun owner particularly increased the risk of being shot to death in a domestic violence incident, and it did not provide any protection against being killed at home by a stranger, the researchers found.
People who lived with handgun owners “did not experience such fatal [stranger] attacks at lower rates than their neighbors in gun-free homes”, the researchers wrote, noting that stranger homicides at home were “a small minority” of the homicides observed in the study.
Statistically, having a gun in your home is more dangerous for you and your family, especially if you have young children or teens. A 2014 review in the Annals of Internal Medicine concluded having a firearm in the home, even when it’s properly stored, doubles your risk of becoming a victim of homicide and triples the risk of suicide.
Record-breaking spikes in gun sales over the last two years, alongside surveys indicating that self-protection continues to be the dominant reason for buying guns, underscore a widely-held belief that a gun in the home has security benefits.
A new study from my research team, recently published in the Annals of Internal Medicine, shows no such benefits. We found the opposite: people living in homes with guns face substantially higher risks of being fatally assaulted.
People living with handgun owners died by homicide at twice the rate of their neighbors in gun-free homes. That difference was driven largely by homicides at home, which were three times more common among people living with handgun owners.
We detected much larger differences for particular types of homicide. Most notably, people living with handgun owners were seven times more likely to be shot by their spouse or intimate partner. In many of these cases, instead of being protective, the household gun probably operated as the instrument of death.
An especially troubling finding was that the vast majority of victims in these intimate partner shootings—84% in all—were female.
Study findings in one other area were noteworthy: homicides perpetrated by strangers. Homicides of this kind were relatively uncommon in our study population—much less common than deaths perpetrated by the victim’s partner, family members, or friends. But when they happened, people living with gun owners did not experience them less often than people in gun-free homes.
This result clashes with a classic narrative promulgated by gun rights groups: firearm owners use their weapon to turn away or overpower a threatening intruder, thereby protecting home and hearth. We did not detect even a hint of such protective benefits.
A second study by our team, published in JAMA Psychiatry on April 29, switched the focus of second-hand risks to suicide in a large sample of women living with handgun owners in California. They were 50% more likely to die by suicide than their female neighbors in gun-free homes, and more than four times as likely to die by suicides that involved the use of firearms.
Objective: Determine the relative frequency with which guns in the home are used to injure or kill in self-defense, compared with the number of times these weapons are involved in an unintentional injury, suicide attempt, or criminal assault or homicide.
Conclusions: Guns kept in homes are more likely to be involved in a fatal or nonfatal accidental shooting, criminal assault, or suicide attempt than to be used to injure or kill in self-defense.
Thanks for pointing that out. I don't always have time to read long threads before commenting. Don't feel you have to repeat your points if you have already made them earlier.
"Conclusions: Guns kept in homes are more likely to be involved in a fatal or nonfatal accidental shooting, criminal assault, or suicide attempt than to be used to injure or kill in self-defense."
The overwhelming number of times a firearm is used in self defense it's not fired. First ask any cop the number of times he draws their weapons vs the number of times they fore them.
Two studies one by Clinton stated firearms were used appropriately 1.5 millon times a year for self defence. Then the NRA says 2.5 million times a year. I say closer to the Clinton study. The overwhelming number of times the firearm was not fired.
Here is a more updated.
"The largest and most comprehensive survey of American gun owners ever conducted suggests that they use firearms in self-defense about 1.7 million times a year.Sep 9, 2022"
And yes I have used one and not fired. I was younger and I do regret not firing. It might have saved other people pain. I hope to never make a mistake like that again.
1-3. Guns are not used millions of times each year in self-defense
We use epidemiological theory to explain why the “false positive” problem for rare events can lead to large overestimates of the incidence of rare diseases or rare phenomena such as self-defense gun use. We then try to validate the claims of many millions of annual self-defense uses against available evidence. We find that the claim of many millions of annual self-defense gun uses by American citizens is invalid.
4. Most purported self-defense gun uses are gun uses in escalating arguments, and are both socially undesirable and illegal
We analyzed data from two national random-digit-dial surveys conducted under the auspices of the Harvard Injury Control Research Center. Criminal court judges who read the self-reported accounts of the purported self-defense gun use rated a majority as being illegal, even assuming that the respondent had a permit to own and to carry a gun, and that the respondent had described the event honestly from his own perspective.
5. Firearms are used far more often to intimidate than in self-defense
Using data from a national random-digit-dial telephone survey conducted under the direction of the Harvard Injury Control Center, we examined the extent and nature of offensive gun use. We found that firearms are used far more often to frighten and intimidate than they are used in self-defense. All reported cases of criminal gun use, as well as many of the so-called self-defense gun uses, appear to be socially undesirable.
11. Self-defense gun use is rare and not more effective at preventing injury than other protective actions
Victims use guns in less than 1% of contact crimes, and women never use guns to protect themselves against sexual assault (in more than 300 cases). Victims using a gun were no less likely to be injured after taking protective action than victims using other forms of protective action. Compared to other protective actions, the National Crime Victimization Surveys provide little evidence that self-defense gun use is uniquely beneficial in reducing the likelihood of injury or property loss.
This article helps provide accurate information concerning self-defense gun use. It shows that many of the claims about the benefits of gun ownership are largely myths.
Despite what the gun lobby wants you to believe, the truth is that self-defensive gun use is rare, and that guns are many times more likely to be used for suicide or homicide than they are for self defense. In 2018, for every justifiable homicide with a gun, there were 34 gun homicides, 82 gun suicides, and two unintentional gun deaths.
People successfully defend themselves with guns in less than 1% of crimes in which there is contact between a perpetrator and a victim.
Having access to a gun doesn’t better protect people from being injured during a crime compared to other protective actions like calling law enforcement or fleeing the scene.
Research indicates that carrying a firearm may increase a victim’s risk of injury when a crime is committed, with one study indicating that people in possession of a gun may be more than four times more likely to be shot in an assault.
States with higher rates of gun ownership have higher rates of gun death, confirming the commonsense conclusion that more guns create more opportunities for injury and death, not fewer.
/
Your comment about regretting not shooting someone is unpleasant and disturbing, although it might be less so if context were provided. It provides an insight into the mentality of many gun advocates.
Do you have and facts on this? The last study I saw had accidental shootings and suicides four times more common than using a gun in self defense.
I would also question the numbers for people claiming they have used a gun in self defense. How many of the creeps on this board have claimed using their gun in such a way? None have ever been able to offer any proof. I mean pointing your gun at someone is a crime in many states so if I did that to someone I would file a police report and have that as proof.
Yea dude criminals call the hook and are all like yo i was gonna rape this woman but she pointed a gun at me so I ran away and wanna file assault changes or i was creepin on this dudes house but he had a gun so i left and i was wondering if it would be ok if i filed a brandishing a weapon charge. Thats pretty absurd. Then there's the fact that if you pull it don't fire and there's no bad guy to be found it doesn't leave a paper trail and that Stat isn't really kept track of. You don't buy it because you have never lived in a post industrial hell scape and you seem to be showing a bit of classism or privilege. You've had all this explained to you 400 times before as well and don't want to believe it as it completely goes against a narrative you are dead set on believing.
The fact that you actually worry about armed invaders and shooting your way out of trouble has got the wreak havoc on your nervous system and have long term negative affect on your health. I am sorry you live in fear like this.
Can you see how your fear puts your family in danger with having guns around?
You see, because I am not afraid, I don't need guns around. This actually makes my family more safe than yours.
not that i ever wish home invasions on anyone, but fuck. if your home is ever hit, i feel really bad for your family. what are you going to do? turn the lights on (apparently, your go-to) and yell that you're unarmed?
they own a gun because it’s very easy for criminals to get guns in a country that makes it so. as we know, in countries with stronger gun laws, they only affect law-abiding citizens and criminals still have arsenals of firearms.
I like colin but it's not and I do understand exactly why people feel that way it's just that i don't agree with them or believe they are correct on what the solution is. It's horrible when some fuck murders kids and it should be upsetting and no one wants to see that shit happen ever again .Its just that I think the second ammendment is worth preserving and I think the question of why do so many people seem to want to self destruct and take others with them is a deep cultural problem that neither party and most people do not want to dig into as it will likely mean we have to make some hard changes and admit a few things we really don't want to admit. Blaming guns is a lot easier and a lot less complicated to unpack.Mainly our system of governance and capitalism is failing , we are basically telling people that the future is bleak , people have been priced out of productive lives and we have been told we are all individuals that have no obligations to one another and that any idea contrary to that is socialism. We are teaching people their country sucks , we are teaching people that they should break up with their families and friends over virtue signal bullshit. We are driving ourselves crazy by destabilizing every facet of life.Remove the guns and leave the underlying problems and I don't think it will be the solution a lot of folks think it will be. Where are we when we give up our rights but this kinda shit persists? Govt gonna give them back and say our bad let's try something else ? Will parents and kids want even more drastic laws and surveillance? Will we just say fuck it man's nature is violent and just leave people st the mercy of the biggest thug in the shithole city they are stuck in ?
Thanks for pointing that out. I don't always have time to read long threads before commenting. Don't feel you have to repeat your points if you have already made them earlier.
1-3. Guns are not used millions of times each year in self-defense
We use epidemiological theory to explain why the “false positive” problem for rare events can lead to large overestimates of the incidence of rare diseases or rare phenomena such as self-defense gun use. We then try to validate the claims of many millions of annual self-defense uses against available evidence. We find that the claim of many millions of annual self-defense gun uses by American citizens is invalid.
4. Most purported self-defense gun uses are gun uses in escalating arguments, and are both socially undesirable and illegal
We analyzed data from two national random-digit-dial surveys conducted under the auspices of the Harvard Injury Control Research Center. Criminal court judges who read the self-reported accounts of the purported self-defense gun use rated a majority as being illegal, even assuming that the respondent had a permit to own and to carry a gun, and that the respondent had described the event honestly from his own perspective.
5. Firearms are used far more often to intimidate than in self-defense
Using data from a national random-digit-dial telephone survey conducted under the direction of the Harvard Injury Control Center, we examined the extent and nature of offensive gun use. We found that firearms are used far more often to frighten and intimidate than they are used in self-defense. All reported cases of criminal gun use, as well as many of the so-called self-defense gun uses, appear to be socially undesirable.
11. Self-defense gun use is rare and not more effective at preventing injury than other protective actions
Victims use guns in less than 1% of contact crimes, and women never use guns to protect themselves against sexual assault (in more than 300 cases). Victims using a gun were no less likely to be injured after taking protective action than victims using other forms of protective action. Compared to other protective actions, the National Crime Victimization Surveys provide little evidence that self-defense gun use is uniquely beneficial in reducing the likelihood of injury or property loss.
This article helps provide accurate information concerning self-defense gun use. It shows that many of the claims about the benefits of gun ownership are largely myths.
Despite what the gun lobby wants you to believe, the truth is that self-defensive gun use is rare, and that guns are many times more likely to be used for suicide or homicide than they are for self defense. In 2018, for every justifiable homicide with a gun, there were 34 gun homicides, 82 gun suicides, and two unintentional gun deaths.
People successfully defend themselves with guns in less than 1% of crimes in which there is contact between a perpetrator and a victim.
Having access to a gun doesn’t better protect people from being injured during a crime compared to other protective actions like calling law enforcement or fleeing the scene.
Research indicates that carrying a firearm may increase a victim’s risk of injury when a crime is committed, with one study indicating that people in possession of a gun may be more than four times more likely to be shot in an assault.
States with higher rates of gun ownership have higher rates of gun death, confirming the commonsense conclusion that more guns create more opportunities for injury and death, not fewer.
/
Your comment about regretting not shooting someone is unpleasant and disturbing, although it might be less so if context were provided. It provides an insight into the mentality of many gun advocates.
The problem here is the studies you site are no more reliable then the ones I site.
People chose to believe what validates the point the want to prove.
As far as my personal story of the one incident I have told it hear before and I guess I can once more.
This will be a little long.
When I was younger I traveled for work alot. My wife at the time stayed home when I traveled. We live in an upstairs apartment, 2nd floor in a nice but not super expensive area with lots of young couples. Since I was a way alot I tried the make sure she was in a safe area. I have had guns all my life and received training with them. My wife however did not want anything in to do with learning. I was home this night thank whoever for that. Very early in the morning I heard a noise not sure exactly what it was but I knew it was not right. I grabbed my pistol and moved to the bedroom door which was open and took a knee at the frame for concealment. I saw a figure coming down the hall with what looked like a large knife. There was moon light coming through the open sliding glass door. I guess wee saw each other about the same time as a was getting ready to fire. This is when he screamed, I swear it sounded like a little girl screaming. I stopped and hesitated. He turned and ran jumping off the patio. By thr time I got there he was limping at high speed into a Grove of trees. I called the police. The wife did actually because I had shoved her to the floor behind the bed which woke her up. They got there in about 10 minutes or so.
They said they think it was a guy that had been targeting women he thought were single and raping them at knife point. He had probably followed my wife from somewhere and thought he was single. He especially looked for the sliding glass door as they were easy to get in most of the time. The stick in the bottom does little to slow him down. They took the report and looked around but other then some tracks didn't find much. They did some finger printing and such but didn't find any not accounted for.
He went on to attack and rape a couple more women before he was caught.
So by not shooting more women were attacked and had to deal with the aftermath of the experience and the damage.
If anyone breaks into my home I will not make that mistake again. The law supports me with castle doctrine.
The problem here is the studies you site are no more reliable then the ones I site.
People chose to believe what validates the point the want to prove.
As far as my personal story of the one incident I have told it hear before and I guess I can once more.
This will be a little long.
When I was younger I traveled for work alot. My wife at the time stayed home when I traveled. We live in an upstairs apartment, 2nd floor in a nice but not super expensive area with lots of young couples. Since I was a way alot I tried the make sure she was in a safe area. I have had guns all my life and received training with them. My wife however did not want anything in to do with learning. I was home this night thank whoever for that. Very early in the morning I heard a noise not sure exactly what it was but I knew it was not right. I grabbed my pistol and moved to the bedroom door which was open and took a knee at the frame for concealment. I saw a figure coming down the hall with what looked like a large knife. There was moon light coming through the open sliding glass door. I guess wee saw each other about the same time as a was getting ready to fire. This is when he screamed, I swear it sounded like a little girl screaming. I stopped and hesitated. He turned and ran jumping off the patio. By thr time I got there he was limping at high speed into a Grove of trees. I called the police. The wife did actually because I had shoved her to the floor behind the bed which woke her up. They got there in about 10 minutes or so.
They said they think it was a guy that had been targeting women he thought were single and raping them at knife point. He had probably followed my wife from somewhere and thought he was single. He especially looked for the sliding glass door as they were easy to get in most of the time. The stick in the bottom does little to slow him down. They took the report and looked around but other then some tracks didn't find much. They did some finger printing and such but didn't find any not accounted for.
He went on to attack and rape a couple more women before he was caught.
So by not shooting more women were attacked and had to deal with the aftermath of the experience and the damage.
If anyone breaks into my home I will not make that mistake again. The law supports me with castle doctrine.
I did it in the good ole days when you could challenge the exam. My early 20's dumbass with moderate knowledge of firearms was sufficient to challenge for my non-restricted and restricted.
The problem here is the studies you site are no more reliable then the ones I site.
People chose to believe what validates the point the want to prove.
As far as my personal story of the one incident I have told it hear before and I guess I can once more.
This will be a little long.
When I was younger I traveled for work alot. My wife at the time stayed home when I traveled. We live in an upstairs apartment, 2nd floor in a nice but not super expensive area with lots of young couples. Since I was a way alot I tried the make sure she was in a safe area. I have had guns all my life and received training with them. My wife however did not want anything in to do with learning. I was home this night thank whoever for that. Very early in the morning I heard a noise not sure exactly what it was but I knew it was not right. I grabbed my pistol and moved to the bedroom door which was open and took a knee at the frame for concealment. I saw a figure coming down the hall with what looked like a large knife. There was moon light coming through the open sliding glass door. I guess wee saw each other about the same time as a was getting ready to fire. This is when he screamed, I swear it sounded like a little girl screaming. I stopped and hesitated. He turned and ran jumping off the patio. By thr time I got there he was limping at high speed into a Grove of trees. I called the police. The wife did actually because I had shoved her to the floor behind the bed which woke her up. They got there in about 10 minutes or so.
They said they think it was a guy that had been targeting women he thought were single and raping them at knife point. He had probably followed my wife from somewhere and thought he was single. He especially looked for the sliding glass door as they were easy to get in most of the time. The stick in the bottom does little to slow him down. They took the report and looked around but other then some tracks didn't find much. They did some finger printing and such but didn't find any not accounted for.
He went on to attack and rape a couple more women before he was caught.
So by not shooting more women were attacked and had to deal with the aftermath of the experience and the damage.
If anyone breaks into my home I will not make that mistake again. The law supports me with castle doctrine.
Thanks for sharing your story and I'm glad that it ended well (although it would have been better if he got caught that night). Guns certainly can be and are used for good, or neutral ends. You said you were already into guns but it's understandable that when something like that happens or you hear about it happening you might feel safer owning a firearm. However for every time something like that happens there are several times when the gun is used for ill. This is common sense and has been proven, including by multiple large scale studies by the best university in the world, like I quoted.
On the face of it people can make up any figure they want about how many times they or others 'prevented a crime' with their gun. There is usually no evidence, and assuming they are telling the truth, they still don't know what would have happened without it. As I mentioned above, owning a gun is also linked to causing and escalating confrontation, ie using it to bully people. Academics and government studies have specifically debunked the implausibly large claimed DGU figures. Also making guns easily available means the criminals now have them. Still it's up to you to believe the stats or not, if you don't that's your prerogative.
Violence/Genocide: Do not condone violence or genocide on a person or group of people. You are free to attack a person or groups ideas but you are crossing the line when calling for violence. This will be heavily enforced in threads with breaking news involving victims.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
