RE: WHY DOES THE U.S NEED GUNS ?

RE: WHY DOES THE U.S NEED GUNS ? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

Lucylastic -> RE: WHY DOES THE U.S NEED GUNS ? (7/19/2016 9:04:32 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1 Yes, they can be found; but they are sooo few in number compared to the downside of tens of thousands on the other side of the fence. And you know this how? Defensive use of guns by crime victims is a common occurrence, although the exact number remains disputed (Cook and Ludwig, 1996; Kleck, 2001a). Almost all national survey estimates indicate that defensive gun uses by victims are at least as common as offensive uses by criminals, with estimates of annual uses ranging from about 500,000 to more than 3 million (Kleck, 2001a), in the context of about 300,000 violent crimes involving firearms in 2008 (BJS, 2010). On the other hand, some scholars point to a radically lower estimate of only 108,000 annual defensive uses based on the National Crime Victimization Survey (Cook et al., 1997). The variation in these numbers remains a controversy in the field. The estimate of 3 million defensive uses per year is based on an extrapolation from a small number of responses taken from more than 19 national surveys. The former estimate of 108,000 is difficult to interpret because respondents were not asked specifically about defensive gun use. A different issue is whether defensive uses of guns, however numerous or rare they may be, are effective in preventing injury to the gun-wielding crime victim. Studies that directly assessed the effect of actual defensive uses of guns (i.e., incidents in which a gun was "used" by the crime victim in the sense of attacking or threatening an offender) have found consistently lower injury rates among gun-using crime victims compared with victims who used other self-protective strategies (Kleck, 1988; Kleck and DeLone, 1993; Southwick, 2000; Tark and Kleck, 2004). Source: National Research Council K. i came and looked and ..here you go...btw why are you still relying on a 23 yr old five thousand person survey (of which there were only 63 actual responses in the positive, that they "extrapolate the figures. Why isnt there a more recent, deeper, bigger study with reliable methodology.????? The fact that you keep throwing up this shit is just another bunch of drivel. http://www.armedwithreason.com/debunking-the-defensive-gun-use-myth/

bondageerone -> RE: WHY DOES THE U.S NEED GUNS ? (7/19/2016 9:20:47 AM)
WD what it means is that as we watch they just carry on hurting themselves, why just because they can. x

Kirata -> RE: WHY DOES THE U.S NEED GUNS ? (7/19/2016 9:27:41 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1 Yes, they can be found; but they are sooo few in number compared to the downside of tens of thousands on the other side of the fence. And you know this how? Defensive use of guns by crime victims is a common occurrence, although the exact number remains disputed (Cook and Ludwig, 1996; Kleck, 2001a). Almost all national survey estimates indicate that defensive gun uses by victims are at least as common as offensive uses by criminals, with estimates of annual uses ranging from about 500,000 to more than 3 million (Kleck, 2001a), in the context of about 300,000 violent crimes involving firearms in 2008 (BJS, 2010). On the other hand, some scholars point to a radically lower estimate of only 108,000 annual defensive uses based on the National Crime Victimization Survey (Cook et al., 1997). The variation in these numbers remains a controversy in the field. The estimate of 3 million defensive uses per year is based on an extrapolation from a small number of responses taken from more than 19 national surveys. The former estimate of 108,000 is difficult to interpret because respondents were not asked specifically about defensive gun use. A different issue is whether defensive uses of guns, however numerous or rare they may be, are effective in preventing injury to the gun-wielding crime victim. Studies that directly assessed the effect of actual defensive uses of guns (i.e., incidents in which a gun was "used" by the crime victim in the sense of attacking or threatening an offender) have found consistently lower injury rates among gun-using crime victims compared with victims who used other self-protective strategies (Kleck, 1988; Kleck and DeLone, 1993; Southwick, 2000; Tark and Kleck, 2004). Source: National Research Council why are you still relying on a 23 yr old five thousand person survey (of which there were only 63 actual responses in the positive, that they "extrapolate the figures. It would seem to me that there are a number of studies referenced pertaining to defensive gun use, the latest two being from 2000 and 2004. Is this another case of someone being robbed by their ESL teacher? K.

stef -> RE: WHY DOES THE U.S NEED GUNS ? (7/19/2016 10:27:58 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1 Yes, they can be found; but they are sooo few in number compared to the downside of tens of thousands on the other side of the fence. If the American media was as supportive of the 2nd as we are lead to believe, why aren't these events splashed across every media outlet in the country?? I'll tell you why: they are so few and far between that those stats are as rare as rocking horse shit. Not nearly the level of horse shit as your claims of prowess with an air rifle, Arnie Oakley. The majority of defensive firearm uses don't result in pulling a trigger, much less killing someone. Such events generally aren't newsworthy.

freedomdwarf1 -> RE: WHY DOES THE U.S NEED GUNS ? (7/19/2016 10:43:19 AM)
My eyesight isn't as good as it was in those days but it was something I did with regularity. If you don't believe it, that's on you. Spout all the crap you like about trajectory and I can prove (as scientists have done many times) that bees can't fly. If defense using firearms aren't newsworthy, that's a problem with your media. They certainly seem to highlight the bad news plenty enough. And of course, the stats are showing that bad gun users outnumber the good ones by many an order of magnitude. That's a fact that you can't argue. There's waay too many deaths by guns in the US and there's waay too many irresponsible gun owners that shouldn't have one. Until you sort that out, we'll continue to see deaths by guns caused by stupid people (some police included) on an almost daily basis that doesn't happen on such a scale anywhere else in the civilized world.

stef -> RE: WHY DOES THE U.S NEED GUNS ? (7/19/2016 10:53:13 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1 My eyesight isn't as good as it was in those days but it was something I did with regularity. Bullshit. You can't even SEE a 1cm object at 400 yards. Claiming to regularly hit one with a pellet gun at that range is ludicrous. quote: If defense using firearms aren't newsworthy, that's a problem with your media. News media has been broken for a very, very long time. This is not, no pun intended, news.

freedomdwarf1 -> RE: WHY DOES THE U.S NEED GUNS ? (7/19/2016 11:03:51 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: stef quote: ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1 My eyesight isn't as good as it was in those days but it was something I did with regularity. Bullshit. You can't even SEE a 1cm object at 400 yards. Claiming to regularly hit one with a pellet gun at that range is ludicrous. Maybe you can't - but I could. And until the last 15 years I still could.

SunDominant -> RE: WHY DOES THE U.S NEED GUNS ? (7/19/2016 11:06:51 AM)
The natural right to defend one's self predates government. The U.S. Constitution does not grant rights, it recognizes the responsibility that a government of a free people has to protect those rights. The culling of a right through law is only done in extreme circumstances. The lack of respect that relatively few people have in responsibly exercising their right does not, in my mind, justify the suspension of that right for hundreds of millions of their fellow citizens.

KYsissy -> RE: WHY DOES THE U.S NEED GUNS ? (7/19/2016 11:08:26 AM)
Google "burglar shot"

CreativeDominant -> RE: WHY DOES THE U.S NEED GUNS ? (7/19/2016 11:11:28 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Nthrall Why do we never hear about people who have successfully defended themselves with their guns? It doesn't fit the narrative: guns are bad

stef -> RE: WHY DOES THE U.S NEED GUNS ? (7/19/2016 11:12:33 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1 quote: ORIGINAL: stef quote: ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1 My eyesight isn't as good as it was in those days but it was something I did with regularity. Bullshit. You can't even SEE a 1cm object at 400 yards. Claiming to regularly hit one with a pellet gun at that range is ludicrous. Maybe you can't - but I could. And until the last 15 years I still could. Bullshit. You should have told a more believable lie, like you were a door gunner on the Space Shuttle.

Nnanji -> RE: WHY DOES THE U.S NEED GUNS ? (7/19/2016 11:26:24 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Nthrall Why do we never hear about people who have successfully defended themselves with their guns? Here you go. Obama's study from the CDC. You should be aware of things like this. Most anti-gunners know this but since its contrary to the koolaide they quaff they ignore it. http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/cdc-study-use-firearms-self-defense-important-crime-deterrent The Institute of Medicine and the National Research Council released the results of their research through the CDC last month. Researchers compiled data from previous studies in order to guide future research on gun violence, noting that “almost all national survey estimates indicate that defensive gun uses by victims are at least as common as offensive uses by criminals, with estimates of annual uses ranging from about 500,000 to more than 3 million per year.”

Nnanji -> RE: WHY DOES THE U.S NEED GUNS ? (7/19/2016 11:30:00 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1 quote: ORIGINAL: MasterBrentC Libs constantly piss and moan about Americans having guns. Guns are used for personal protection. The police a get there AFTER a crime has already been committed, not while the crime is in progress. So when you are staring down the barrel of a gun and only have seconds to live, the police are minutes away. The point that you and other gun nuts can't seem to grasp is that if, in general, the populace don't have guns, your assailant is also not likely to have guns either. In other words, you wouldn't be staring down the barrel of a gun in most situations. quote: ORIGINAL: MasterBrentC But in the wake of the past few weeks events, when is the leftists going to start a movement on "truck" control? Are we going to need background checks before we can drive one? Don't you have that already?? [8\|] Aren't you supposed to have had proper training and obtained a license to drive before you are allowed on the road? Or do you also get your licenses from the local Chinese fortune cookies? quote: ORIGINAL: MasterBrentC How many lives could have been saved if ONE person with a gun could have shot out a tire or two? And how many times do we see this argument put forward as a reason for having guns? And where the fuck are they when this sort of thing goes down?? Fucking nowhere! Not a decent law-abiding gun-owning citizen to be seen. It's a farcical and useless argument. quote: ORIGINAL: MasterBrentC And now I hear that in Germany a man killed people with a knife. Are we going to have "knife control?" In most civilized countries that have decent gun laws also have knife laws too. Don't you have them?? [:-] quote: ORIGINAL: MasterBrentC My point is clear. The world is full of bad people who do bad things. Having a gun gives you a fighting chance to protect yourself from the bad guys. It's just that simple. The point is clear; if you didn't have guns in public places, people wouldn't get shot. That's pretty simple to understand. No? Tell that to France and the people on the German train.

ThatDizzyChick -> RE: WHY DOES THE U.S NEED GUNS ? (7/19/2016 11:33:25 AM)
quote: Tell that to France and the people on the German train. Well to be honest here, the truck driver guy did have a gun, and nobody was shot on the German train except the guy with the axe.

Nnanji -> RE: WHY DOES THE U.S NEED GUNS ? (7/19/2016 11:34:25 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML quote: ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1 quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML quote: ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1 quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML Convening a convention runs the risk of changing the whole freakin government. Given the current state of affairs in the US, is that such a bad thing?? [8\|] What would you envision as a replacement? Another party not scared of radical change - for better or worse. Let's face it, it can't get any worse than a 2-horse race where both parties aren't really wanted with the same-old rhetoric across the board. Well, pshew man, you do not need a constitutional convention for that. There are four or five parties vying for the current presidential prize. For probably the first, and possibly the last, time we agree. Here's to ya.

Nnanji -> RE: WHY DOES THE U.S NEED GUNS ? (7/19/2016 11:36:15 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1 quote: ORIGINAL: bounty44 quote: ORIGINAL: Nthrall Why do we never hear about people who have successfully defended themselves with their guns? ive posted some of those, and so have others. if you go looking online, you will indeed find them. if your question is indeed genuine as opposed to hidden sarcasm---"why indeed" is a good question. Yes, they can be found; but they are sooo few in number compared to the downside of tens of thousands on the other side of the fence. If the American media was as supportive of the 2nd as we are lead to believe, why aren't these events splashed across every media outlet in the country?? I'll tell you why: they are so few and far between that those stats are as rare as rocking horse shit. Actually, and showing you're blowing smoke as usual, the study Obama commissioned through the CSC estimate 500,000 to 3,000,000 per year. See the link above.

mnottertail -> RE: WHY DOES THE U.S NEED GUNS ? (7/19/2016 11:39:05 AM)
since it does not quote the report or get you a readable copy, but is a nutsucker slobberblog, with no citations credible or otherwise............ They also said, that the data you quoted as being the definitive peroration which is actually typical out of context clipped nutsucker felch. * According to the FBI Uniform Crime Reporting Program, between 2007 and 2011, over 600,000 people reported facing an assailant armed with a gun. * According to the FBI, 3% of firearm assaults known to police result in a death. * According to a Pew Survey, “the vast majority of gun owners say that having a gun makes them feel safer. And far more today than in 1999 cite protection – rather than hunting and other activities – as the main reason for why they own guns” (Pew Research Center, 2013) * Four studies have been done showing that crime victims who actively used a gun to defend themselves had lower rates of injury than crime victims who did not use guns to defend themselves - Kleck 1988; Kleck and DeLone 1993; Tark and Kleck 2004; and Southwick 2000. * Defensive gun use is a fact but it is difficult to count accurately. * The National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) has estimated that there are between 60,000 and 105,000 DGUs per year. Between the years 1992 and 1994, the NCVS reported there were in total 116,000 DGUs. * Kleck and Gertz (1995) estimated the annual occurrence of DGUs to be around 2.5 million per year. * The CDC report made no effort to reconcile the differing estimates of DGUs, except to note that the estimate provided by the Kleck group was larger by an order of magnitude than the estimate arising from the NCVS. The CDC report noted that the estimate of DGU provided by the Kleck group is twice again as large as the estimate of the Dept. of Justice that there are 1.3 million crimes committed with a gun in the USA every year. Here is a quote from the actual CDC report. * According to the CDC report: “The 2005 National Research Council study found no persuasive evidence from available studies that passage of right to carry laws decrease or increase violent crime. ” The take-home message by the CDC report on gun violence is that DGU does occur, and there are very large discrepancies in the available estimates. And sadly, the CDC report contains no suggestions for future research to better or more accurately assess DGU. Nowhere near what the nutsuckers are felching.

Nnanji -> RE: WHY DOES THE U.S NEED GUNS ? (7/19/2016 11:45:49 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1 Yes, they can be found; but they are sooo few in number compared to the downside of tens of thousands on the other side of the fence. And you know this how? Defensive use of guns by crime victims is a common occurrence, although the exact number remains disputed (Cook and Ludwig, 1996; Kleck, 2001a). Almost all national survey estimates indicate that defensive gun uses by victims are at least as common as offensive uses by criminals, with estimates of annual uses ranging from about 500,000 to more than 3 million (Kleck, 2001a), in the context of about 300,000 violent crimes involving firearms in 2008 (BJS, 2010). On the other hand, some scholars point to a radically lower estimate of only 108,000 annual defensive uses based on the National Crime Victimization Survey (Cook et al., 1997). The variation in these numbers remains a controversy in the field. The estimate of 3 million defensive uses per year is based on an extrapolation from a small number of responses taken from more than 19 national surveys. The former estimate of 108,000 is difficult to interpret because respondents were not asked specifically about defensive gun use. A different issue is whether defensive uses of guns, however numerous or rare they may be, are effective in preventing injury to the gun-wielding crime victim. Studies that directly assessed the effect of actual defensive uses of guns (i.e., incidents in which a gun was "used" by the crime victim in the sense of attacking or threatening an offender) have found consistently lower injury rates among gun-using crime victims compared with victims who used other self-protective strategies (Kleck, 1988; Kleck and DeLone, 1993; Southwick, 2000; Tark and Kleck, 2004). Source: National Research Council K. i came and looked and ..here you go...btw why are you still relying on a 23 yr old five thousand person survey (of which there were only 63 actual responses in the positive, that they "extrapolate the figures. Why isnt there a more recent, deeper, bigger study with reliable methodology.????? The fact that you keep throwing up this shit is just another bunch of drivel. http://www.armedwithreason.com/debunking-the-defensive-gun-use-myth/ Well, that study kirata showed was performed by the CDC through an Obama executive order and your link is from an advocacy group with unnamed sources or protocol.

MasterBrentC -> RE: WHY DOES THE U.S NEED GUNS ? (7/19/2016 11:45:54 AM)
FREEDOMDWARF1: The point that you and other gun nuts can't seem to grasp is that if, in general, the populace don't have guns, your assailant is also not likely to have guns either. In other words, you wouldn't be staring down the barrel of a gun in most situations. France is a "gun-free" country, is it not? And yet a bad guy with a gun killed how many innocent people in Paris? A criminal doesn't care if it's against the law to have a gun. The gunman was out to murder people. Do you really think gun control laws would have changed his mind? Really?

mnottertail -> RE: WHY DOES THE U.S NEED GUNS ? (7/19/2016 11:48:18 AM)
nope, France is not a "gun-free" country. So, with factless premises the peroration is also worthless.

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625