Americans and Guns (post pics of your armory !)

[Harmonium]

Originally Posted by Alawen [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

My point was extremely straightforward. All evidence suggests that the presence of more guns results in more gun violence.

Stalin
Hitler
Pol Pot
Mao Tse Tung
Mussolini
Castro
All of these people required that their citizens relinquish their fire arms for the safety of all.(these are just the ones that come off the top my head for the 20th century.)

These men all salute you sir.

[Harmonium]

According to the National Self Defense Survey conducted by Florida State University criminologists in 1994, the rate of Defensive Gun Uses can be projected nationwide to approximately 2.5 million per year -- one Defensive Gun Use every 13 seconds.

Among 15.7% of gun defenders interviewed nationwide during The National Self Defense Survey, the defender believed that someone "almost certainly" would have died had the gun not been used for protection -- a life saved by a privately held gun about once every 1.3 minutes. (In another 14.2% cases, the defender believed someone "probably" would have died if the gun hadn't been used in defense.)

In 83.5% of these successful gun defenses, the attacker either threatened or used force first -- disproving the myth that having a gun available for defense wouldn't make any difference.

In 91.7% of these incidents the defensive use of a gun did not wound or kill the criminal attacker (and the gun defense wouldn't be called "newsworthy" by newspaper or TV news editors). In 64.2% of these gun-defense cases, the police learned of the defense, which means that the media could also find out and report on them if they chose to.

In 73.4% of these gun-defense incidents, the attacker was a stranger to the intended victim. (Defenses against a family member or intimate were rare -- well under 10%.) This disproves the myth that a gun kept for defense will most likely be used against a family member or someone you love.

In over half of these gun defense incidents, the defender was facing two or more attackers -- and three or more attackers in over a quarter of these cases. (No means of defense other than a firearm -- martial arts, pepper spray, or stun guns -- gives a potential victim a decent chance of getting away uninjured when facing multiple attackers.)

In 79.7% of these gun defenses, the defender used a concealable handgun. A quarter of the gun defenses occured in places away from the defender's home.


Source: "Armed Resistance to Crime: The Prevalence and Nature of Self-Defense with a Gun," by Gary Kleck and Marc Gertz, in The Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology, Northwestern University School of Law, Volume 86, Number 1, Fall, 1995

-----------------

Relationship between type of gun owned and
percent committing street, drug and gun crimes.
Illegal gun:
Street crimes = 74%
Drug use = 41%
Gun crimes = 21%

No gun:
Street crimes = 24%
Drug use = 15%
Gun crimes = 1%

Legal Gun:
Street crimes = 14%
Drug use = 13%
Gun crimes = 0%

Source: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, NCJ-143454, "Urban Delinquency and Substance Abuse," August 1995.

-----------------

Making it legally possible for civilians to carry concealed weapons does not make society more violent or result in shootouts at traffic accidents.
The rate of criminal misuse of firearms by the hundreds of thousands of persons licensed to carry concealed firearms in Florida is so low as to be statistically zero. In fact, homicide, assault, rape, and robbery are dramatically lower in areas of the United States where the public is allowed easy access to carrying concealed firearms in public.


Sources: Florida Department of State, Concealed Weapons/ Firearms License Statistical Report and "Crime, Deterrence, and Right-to-Carry Concealed Handguns," by John R. Lott, Olin Fellow in Law and Economics at the University of Chicago Law School and David B. Mustard, graduate student, Department of Economics, Journal of Legal Studies, January 1997.

---------------

Making guns less available does not reduce suicide but merely causes the person seeking death to use another means.
While gun-related suicides were reduced by Canada's gun control legislation of 1978, the overall suicide rate did not go down at all: the gun-related suicides were replaced 100% by an increase in other types of suicide -- mostly jumping off bridges.
"The authors describe suicide rates in Toronto and Ontario and methods used for suicide in Toronto for 5 years before and after enactment of Canadian gun control legislation in 1978. They also present data from San Diego, Calif., where state laws attempt to limit access to guns by certain psychiatric patients. Both sets of data indicate that gun control legislation may have led to decreased use of guns by suicidal men, but the difference was apparently offset by an increase in suicide by leaping. In the case of men using guns for suicide, these data support a hypothesis of substitution of suicide method."


Source: "Guns and suicide: possible effects of some specific legislation," Rich, Young, Fowler, Wagner, and Black, The American Journal of Psychiatry March, 1990

[Bodeanicus]

Originally Posted by Harmonium [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

According to the National Self Defense Survey conducted by Florida State University criminologists in 1994, the rate of Defensive Gun Uses can be projected nationwide to approximately 2.5 million per year -- one Defensive Gun Use every 13 seconds.

Among 15.7% of gun defenders interviewed nationwide during The National Self Defense Survey, the defender believed that someone "almost certainly" would have died had the gun not been used for protection -- a life saved by a privately held gun about once every 1.3 minutes. (In another 14.2% cases, the defender believed someone "probably" would have died if the gun hadn't been used in defense.)

In 83.5% of these successful gun defenses, the attacker either threatened or used force first -- disproving the myth that having a gun available for defense wouldn't make any difference.

In 91.7% of these incidents the defensive use of a gun did not wound or kill the criminal attacker (and the gun defense wouldn't be called "newsworthy" by newspaper or TV news editors). In 64.2% of these gun-defense cases, the police learned of the defense, which means that the media could also find out and report on them if they chose to.

In 73.4% of these gun-defense incidents, the attacker was a stranger to the intended victim. (Defenses against a family member or intimate were rare -- well under 10%.) This disproves the myth that a gun kept for defense will most likely be used against a family member or someone you love.

In over half of these gun defense incidents, the defender was facing two or more attackers -- and three or more attackers in over a quarter of these cases. (No means of defense other than a firearm -- martial arts, pepper spray, or stun guns -- gives a potential victim a decent chance of getting away uninjured when facing multiple attackers.)

In 79.7% of these gun defenses, the defender used a concealable handgun. A quarter of the gun defenses occured in places away from the defender's home.


Source: "Armed Resistance to Crime: The Prevalence and Nature of Self-Defense with a Gun," by Gary Kleck and Marc Gertz, in The Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology, Northwestern University School of Law, Volume 86, Number 1, Fall, 1995

-----------------

Relationship between type of gun owned and
percent committing street, drug and gun crimes.
Illegal gun:
Street crimes = 74%
Drug use = 41%
Gun crimes = 21%

No gun:
Street crimes = 24%
Drug use = 15%
Gun crimes = 1%

Legal Gun:
Street crimes = 14%
Drug use = 13%
Gun crimes = 0%

Source: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, NCJ-143454, "Urban Delinquency and Substance Abuse," August 1995.

-----------------

Making it legally possible for civilians to carry concealed weapons does not make society more violent or result in shootouts at traffic accidents.
The rate of criminal misuse of firearms by the hundreds of thousands of persons licensed to carry concealed firearms in Florida is so low as to be statistically zero. In fact, homicide, assault, rape, and robbery are dramatically lower in areas of the United States where the public is allowed easy access to carrying concealed firearms in public.


Sources: Florida Department of State, Concealed Weapons/ Firearms License Statistical Report and "Crime, Deterrence, and Right-to-Carry Concealed Handguns," by John R. Lott, Olin Fellow in Law and Economics at the University of Chicago Law School and David B. Mustard, graduate student, Department of Economics, Journal of Legal Studies, January 1997.

---------------

Making guns less available does not reduce suicide but merely causes the person seeking death to use another means.
While gun-related suicides were reduced by Canada's gun control legislation of 1978, the overall suicide rate did not go down at all: the gun-related suicides were replaced 100% by an increase in other types of suicide -- mostly jumping off bridges.
"The authors describe suicide rates in Toronto and Ontario and methods used for suicide in Toronto for 5 years before and after enactment of Canadian gun control legislation in 1978. They also present data from San Diego, Calif., where state laws attempt to limit access to guns by certain psychiatric patients. Both sets of data indicate that gun control legislation may have led to decreased use of guns by suicidal men, but the difference was apparently offset by an increase in suicide by leaping. In the case of men using guns for suicide, these data support a hypothesis of substitution of suicide method."


Source: "Guns and suicide: possible effects of some specific legislation," Rich, Young, Fowler, Wagner, and Black, The American Journal of Psychiatry March, 1990

How much does the NRA pay you for the privilege of sucking their collective dicks? Or are you stupid enough to do it for free?

[Ephirith]

Originally Posted by Harmonium [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Stalin
Hitler
Pol Pot
Mao Tse Tung
Mussolini
Castro
All of these people required that their citizens relinquish their fire arms for the safety of all.(these are just the ones that come off the top my head for the 20th century.)

These men all salute you sir.

All of those people were men, I suppose everything about men is wrong as well? I suppose they all also wore shoes. That makes about as much sense as your shitty analogy, and it does nothing to speak of the facts and statistics behind gun violence.

[Harmonium]

Originally Posted by Ephirith [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

and it does nothing to speak of the facts and statistics behind gun violence.

Please refer to my previous post for some statistics behind gun violence.

[Ephirith]

Originally Posted by Harmonium [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Please refer to my previous post for some statistics behind gun violence.

Originally Posted by Harmonium [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

In fact, homicide, assault, rape, and robbery are dramatically lower in areas of the United States where the public is allowed easy access to carrying concealed firearms in public.

That's because the types of places that start adopting concealed carry laws and gun restrictions are also the types of places that have high rates of homicide, assault, rape, and robbery.

And you are using statistics from a self-report survey, the National Self Defense Survey? You know how many biases are tainting that data? You may not be aware of this, but the field of Criminology has a relatively low level scientific integrity compared to other fields. You have to be very careful about your sources in this area.

[Harmonium]

Originally Posted by Ephirith [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

That's because the types of places that start adopting concealed carry laws and gun restrictions are also the types of places that have high rates of homicide, assault, rape, and robbery.

So.. your saying that places with high rates of homicide, assault, rape, and robbery that allow their law abiding citizens to conceal carry see a drastic reduction in said crimes? This is a good thing, no?

Originally Posted by Ephirith [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

And you are using statistics from a self-report survey, the National Self Defense Survey? You know how many biases are tainting that data? You may not be aware of this, but the field of Criminology has a relatively low level scientific integrity compared to other fields. You have to be very careful about your sources in this area.

Previous statistic sources (posted again for your pleasure)

Source: U.S. Department of Justice
Source: Northwestern University School of Law
Source: University of Chicago Law School
Source: The American Journal of Psychiatry March
------------------------------
Gun control activists were unhappy with the National Self Defense Survey's results, which show that "Every 13 seconds an American gun owner uses a firearm in defense against a criminal."

In a 1994 TV news taping, Handgun Control, Inc.’s, spokesman, Sandy Cooney, called the National Self Defense Survey “obscene” and threw ad hominem slurs at its lead researcher, professor of criminology, Dr. Gary Kleck. Since Kleck is an impartial social scientist with no links to gun advocates or manufacturers — in fact he’s a liberal Democrat — it appears that Kleck’s only sin was doing research which produced results that challenged the gun-control agenda of Handgun Control, Inc., the "Million" Moms, and similar organizations.

So, to refute the results of the National Self Defense Survey, two pro-gun-control researchers, Philip Cook and Jens Ludwig, were given funding by the Clinton administration's Department of Justice to do their own survey of Defensive Gun Uses, to attempt to prove that the National Self Defense Survey's estimate was too high.

Unfortunately for advocates of gun control, the Cook-Ludwig survey produced results about the same as the National Self Defense Survey and -- in one remarkable paragraph -- suggested that their methodology was too conservative and that the Defensive Gun Use figure could even be doubled:

"Because respondents were asked to describe only their most recent defensive gun use, our comparisons are conservative, as they assume only one defensive gun use per defender. ...Inclusion of multiple DGUs reported by half of the 19 NSPOF respondents increases the estimate to 4.7 million DGUs."

Source: The National Institute of Justice, in its survey Guns in America: National Survey on Private Ownership and Use of Firearms by Philip J. Cook and Jens Ludwig.

[Harmonium]

Originally Posted by Ephirith [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

All of those people were men, I suppose everything about men is wrong as well?

Yes those were men. That's not my point however. It's the ideology those men shared with gun control nuts. That is the correlating point. Nice straw man though!

[Kraftwerk]

Originally Posted by Ephirith [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

All of those people were men, I suppose everything about men is wrong as well? I suppose they all also wore shoes. That makes about as much sense as your shitty analogy, and it does nothing to speak of the facts and statistics behind gun violence.

I would call you out for straw manning it, but you even failed at that. You just sound like an idiot. Refute his point head on (Despots demanding relinquish guns prior to atrocities committed) not make a stupid analogy about wearing shoes.

[Ephirith]

Originally Posted by Kraftwerk [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I would call you out for straw manning it, but you even failed at that. You just sound like an idiot. Refute his point head on (Despots demanding relinquish guns prior to atrocities committed) not make a stupid analogy about wearing shoes.

Aw shit I got called out for strawmanning a stupid analogy for quoting...... a strawmanned stupid analogy.

Are you seriously implying our current political culture has ANY relevance to those authoritarian regimes? The argument at hand is: "Constitutional Republic with a cultural heritage of respect for the common law tradition placing restrictions on gun ownership", it's not some link in a chain leading to to a police state you fucking survivalist moron.