107 replies to this topic 1 votes

[DocM]

Studies by researchers and the FBI show that each year in the US between 1,5 and 2.5 million crimes are stopped by an armed citizen, either in their home or in the public square. Calculate that out.

BTW: I've been there, multiple times and once had to fire to save my dad so no TV jockey here. I agree it's nothing like fiction, it's a helluva thing but not having a weapon would have been far, far worse.

[Aethec]

DocM, on 28 April 2012 - 09:26, said:

Studies by researchers and the FBI show that each year in the US between 1,5 and 2.5 million crimes are stopped by an armed citizen, either in their home or in the public square. Calculate that out.

BTW: I've been there, multiple times and once had to fire to save my dad so no TV jockey here. I agree it's nothing like fiction, it's a helluva thing but not having a weapon would have been far, far worse.

Doesn't change the fact that the U.S. have a higher crime rate, rape rate, gun crime rate, than most developed countries who have much more restrictive gun policies.

[excalpius]

Marshall, on 27 April 2012 - 19:13, said:

Here's one for the anti-gunners. How many people would have been injured/killed if this man didn't choose to carry a concealed weapon and more importantly, have the bravery to engage this psycho. Kudos to this man.

And this extremely rare lucky moment when the gunman doesn't accidentally shoot himself, bystanders, his family, innocents, or have the weapon taken away from him (thus creating an even bigger threat to the public) is supposed to make up for the thousands killed every year by poorly educated men who feel massively inadequate about their penis size and/or social status? Riiiight.

Note that in ANY grocery store, there are plenty of other potential weapons on hand. Not to mention people like myself who could have disarmed the man with our bare hands without danger to ourselves or others.

You know, the way the entire rest of the civilized world handles these things?

The ONLY solution to such problems is to keep guns out of the hands of the mentally ill period...and to keeping military grade weapons out of the hands of EVERYBODY, since none of those are appropriate or necessary for home or personal defense.

BTW, I'm a well and properly trained marksman and I think the NRA is an organization made up of complete whackos.

[excalpius]

DocM, on 28 April 2012 - 09:26, said:

Studies by researchers and the FBI show that each year in the US between 1,5 and 2.5 million crimes are stopped by an armed citizen, either in their home or in the public square. Calculate that out.

Cite a source or I'm calling Fox News-grade propaganda bull****.

[Krome]

lol 1.5 to 2.5 million crimes stopped by arm citizen... this is the first news I hear about a gun citizen stopped a crime like ever...

[DocM]

excalpius, on 28 April 2012 - 10:05, said:

Cite a source or I'm calling Fox News-grade propaganda bull****.

Point Blank: Guns and Violence in America by Dr. Gary Kleck, professor School of Criminology and Criminal Justice Florida State University, a frequently referenced source in law enforcement, put the number at up to 2.5 million in 1991 when far fewer people were armed. The laws started to be changed in 1992 to allow easier concealed carry permitting. The FBI Uniform Crime Report stats have shown a steep decline in major crimes since - they're now at the lowest levels in the last 40 years in spite of a huge increase in gun ownership and carrying.

The Department of Justice's National Institute of Justice 1994 study Guns in America: National Survey on Private Ownership and Use of Firearms, estimated that 1.5 million to 4.7 million defensive uses of a firearm every year depending on how tight the constraints on the data were.

More recent estimates put it at 1.5 million, probably lower because of the general reduction in violent crime.

[sopharine]

DocM, on 28 April 2012 - 11:07, said:

Point Blank: Guns and Violence in America by Dr. Gary Kleck, professor School of Criminology and Criminal Justice Florida State University, a frequently referenced source in law enforcement, put the number at up to 2.5 million in 1991 when far fewer people were armed. The laws started to be changed in 1992 to allow easier concealed carry permitting. The FBI Uniform Crime Report stats have shown a steep decline in major crimes since - they're now at the lowest levels in the last 40 years in spite of a huge increase in gun ownership and carrying.

The Department of Justice's National Institute of Justice 1994 study Guns in America: National Survey on Private Ownership and Use of Firearms, estimated that 1.5 million to 4.7 million defensive uses of a firearm every year depending on how tight the constraints on the data were.

More recent estimates put it at 1.5 million, probably lower because of the general reduction in violent crime.

According to “Comparing the Incidence of Self-Defense Gun Use and Criminal Gun Use” Harvard Injury Control Research Center, 2009, the first report is based on a survey that count preemptive strike etc. as "self-defense gun use". The appropriate way is to ask only those who first report that someone tried to commit a crime against them (rape, robbery etc.). If the later approach is used the number of self-defense gun use per year is only about 80,000.
Regarding the FBI report, you are not implying the crime level dropped because of increasing gun ownership, are you?

[Davo]

KingCracker, on 28 April 2012 - 03:51, said:

Where I live my home is my "castle" and its legal to use deadly force if necessary to protect it.

In your home, in Tennessee. Beyond that, it's not the Wild West.

I'm glad there's finallly a story on here that's not bleeding heart or gun-nut.

[excalpius]

sopharine, on 28 April 2012 - 12:39, said:

Regarding the FBI report, you are not implying the crime level dropped because of increasing gun ownership, are you?

Apparently in both cases that is exactly what he is asserting. Which, of course, is RIDICULOUS, since there appears to be no causal connection between the increased paranoia of gun owners and the drop in violent crime.

In truth, the violent crime rate dropped for completely unrelated reasons to gun ownership - and indeed predates the current rush of purchasing (post Obama election) by 10-20 years as the real drop in violent crime rates happened under Clinton's presidency. I know, I was there and I remember those news reports.

Meanwhile, gun ownership increased because of targeted MARKETING by gun manufacturers because they were worried sales would slide as people felt safer. The NRA was a party to this scam (and still are), because they would be negatively affected as well, for obvious reasons.

So the quotes you use, DocM, are wholly unrelated and make no claims whatsoever related to what YOU said they did. Shame on you for such a transparent piece of propagandizing.

[ILikeTobacco]

excalpius, on 28 April 2012 - 14:13, said:

So the quotes you use, DocM, are wholly unrelated and make no claims whatsoever related to what YOU said they did. Shame on you for such a transparent piece of propagandizing.

Even if they are not related, rates still went down while gun ownership went up. According to you, less guns = less crimes which also means more guns = more crimes. Are you now changing your stance and saying guns have absolutely no effect on crime rates? If not, DocM has proven you wrong, period.

Your only other choice is saying statistics don't matter, in which case you have no proof for your own claims, making you as credible in your own opinions as a religious nut.

[KingCracker]

MiukuMac, on 28 April 2012 - 08:38, said:

Here's one for you; how many homicides with firearms were committed during the day this guy used his gun for something useful, in the USA? The answer is approximately 80.

And here's another comment; once you've been aimed in the head with a gun while trying to help someone, your perspective on how wonderful they are might change. But I don't really expect most of you to understand, you're just children that haven't seen real life outside TV anyway.

BTW Russia has the highest murder rate of any developed country. Also I've had a gun pointed at me, that's why I choose to own a gun I refuse to become a statistic for you and other anti gunners to use.

Fact of the matter is if the guy didn't have a gun the nut case would of continued to stab people. Owning a gun doesn't make you a lunatic, doesn't make you clumsy, doesn't make you irresponsible. There are far more gun owners out there than bad news stories about gun about them.

[xendrome]

A gun is no different then your fists... You can kill someone with them if the situation calls for it to defend yourself.

Maybe we should outlaw our hands, and any other item that could be considered a deadly weapon (which is any item by law)

I can't say that I have seen a law anywhere in any country that says "You are not allowed to defend yourself if someone is attacking you, you must lay down and take it until you are dead". A gun is just another way of protecting yourself, if you don't like them, invest in a baseball bat, or some nun chucks...

[KingCracker]

xendrome, on 28 April 2012 - 15:22, said:

A gun is no different then your fists... You can kill someone with them if the situation calls for it to defend yourself.

Maybe we should outlaw our hands, and any other item that could be considered a deadly weapon (which is any item by law)

I can't say that I have seen a law anywhere in any country that says "You are not allowed to defend yourself if someone is attacking you, you must lay down and take it until you are dead". A gun is just another way of protecting yourself, if you don't like them, invest in a baseball bat, or some nun chucks...

Its all about scary and dangerous things, they see a gun as "dangerous" so they automatically want to ban them. Guns kill people! You could kill someone with that! Ban them! Well here's a thought for you why don't we start teaching people to be responsible, why don't we teach our kids to how use and respect dangerous things such as guns. Instead of saying they're bad don't touch! How about people start teaching kids how to handle, teach them the safety rules and teach them how to shoot. If we teach them that they shouldn't touch dangerous things like a gun then excuse my language but they'll grow up to be wusses and god forbid they find them in a situation where they'd actually need to use a gun to save their life, they wouldn't know what to do with it because all their life they've been told to stay away from it because its bad!

If we ban guns because they're dangerous objects then what are we going to ban next? Swimming pools? Thousands of kids drown every year in swimming pools. Are we going to ban sports cars? Cars shouldn't go over the speed limit so lets limit every car to 75mph anything faster than that is dangerous!!

Here's another thought, instead of blaming the community blame the person. I am not responsible for what some idiot did so don't punish me punish him for his actions,should I think that all computers should be banned because hackers could shut down websites and bring our economy down and even worse? Are people not responsible for their actions, since when is a community of 84 million responsible for the actions of 1 person?

Davo, on 28 April 2012 - 12:48, said:

In your home, in Tennessee. Beyond that, it's not the Wild West.

I'm glad there's finallly a story on here that's not bleeding heart or gun-nut.

Of course its not the wild west but TN law also says I can protect my life outside of my home too.

[Hum]

dang Mormons

[Marshall]

MiukuMac, on 28 April 2012 - 08:38, said:

Here's one for you; how many homicides with firearms were committed during the day this guy used his gun for something useful, in the USA? The answer is approximately 80.

And here's another comment; once you've been aimed in the head with a gun while trying to help someone, your perspective on how wonderful they are might change. But I don't really expect most of you to understand, you're just children that haven't seen real life outside TV anyway.

And out of those 80 homicides, how many were done by law abiding, concealed carry holders? Your point (or lack thereof) is at best, moot.