Via Newsmax. 
Posted on 07/21/2013 7:26:46 AM PDT by KeyLargo
Newsmax
CDC: Armed Victims Less Likely to be Harmed by Attackers Saturday, July 20, 2013 10:24 PM
By: Greg Richter
A $10 million government report on gun violence ordered by President Barack Obama has concluded that people who are armed are less likely to be harmed by their attackers.
President Barack Obama issued an executive order in January calling for the report by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
"Recent, highly publicized, tragic mass shootings in Newtown, Conn.; Aurora, Colo..; Oak Creek, Wisc. and Tucson, Ariz., have sharpened the American public's interest in protecting our children and communities from the harmful effects of firearm violence," according to the report.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsmax.com ...
“How would an attacker know you were armed unless you pulled your weapon? In some states that would considered “brandishing” a weapon and the perceived attacker could stop and call the cops on you for doing that. Then you’d be the one arrested. I guess you have to be actually attacked first (i.e. Zimmerman) before you could “brandish” your weapon. Anyway, just saying.”
Two ways. In Arizona we passed a “Defensive Display” law that says you can display your firearm to let a potential attacker know that you are armed, and you cannot be charged with a crime for that. We pushed for it because criminals who were thwarted in their attacks were calling the police and claiming that they were the one’s assaulted.
The second way is to openly carry a firearm. It is legal in some way or another in 44 states, I believe. Arkansas has a new law that decriminalizes open carry, but it is just going into effect, and Democrats are fighting it.
http://my.opencarry.org/?page_id=103
Read your state laws.
If a person is in fear of “great bodily harm” from an attacker they are justified in using deadly force to prevent that. Most state statues read such as this example:
“Great bodily harm” means bodily injury which creates a probability of death, or which causes significant serious permanent disfigurement, or which causes a significant permanent loss or impairment of the function of any bodily part or organ;
Great Bodily Harm”
“The term `great bodily harm’ as used in statute stating when an assault and battery becomes aggravated, is not susceptible of precise definition, but implies an injury of a graver and more serious character than ordinary battery. Herrington v. State, 352 P.2d 931, 933 (Okla. Cir.).”(15)
“Great bodily harm” means bodily injury which creates a substantial risk of death, or which causes serious permanent disfigurement, or which causes a permanent or protracted loss or impairment of the function of any bodily member or organ or other serious bodily injury.”(16)
See:
http://www.cnn.com/interactive/2012/04/us/table.selfdefense.laws/
My protection of myself and my loved ones is paramount to the survival of my way of life. Low life bottom feeders who threaten and terrify deserve to be shot.
Travon’s testimony in the Zimmerman case was exactly as persuasive as it should have been.
Down the memory hole it goes never to be heard from again.
Maybe some of these Chicago murder victims should have read Obama’s report.
“A $10 million government report on gun violence ordered by President Barack Obama has concluded that people who are armed are less likely to be harmed by their attackers.”
4 dead, 9 wounded in Chicago city shootings
By Peter Nickeas and Liam Ford Tribune reporters
8:26 a.m. CDT, July 21, 2013
Shootings left at least four men dead and 9 other people wounded across the Saturday night and Sunday morning.
The violence was largely confined to the South and West Sides and three of the incidents had more than one victim, according to authorities.
Ping for reference
Ask any cop and you will be told that when you are in imminent danger you have to defend yourself. Calling 911 is for after the fact.
Update of Obama’s ‘Murder Town’ numbers this weekend:
6 dead, 17 wounded in shootings since Friday night
9:43AM Sunday
July 21, 2013
It was up to the cops who arrested him to know their state laws on displaying/brandishing a weapon.
Amen to that!
initially I was skeptical of the concept of the CDC doing applying epidemiology to gun ownership.
Now it all makes sense
I guess from the CDCs perspective, one can conclude that carrying a firearm is analogous to being vaccinated.
The main difference is carrying a gun protects you from plague of a different sort.
Via Newsmax.
Stand your ground: Who benefits most? The answer might surprise you.
July 21, 2013
Marissa Alexander.
(Daily Caller) – African Americans benefit from Florida’s “Stand Your Ground” self-defense law at a rate far out of proportion to their presence in the state’s population, despite an assertion by Attorney General Eric Holder that repealing “Stand Your Ground” would help African Americans.
Black Floridians have made about a third of the state’s total “Stand Your Ground” claims in homicide cases, a rate nearly double the black percentage of Florida’s population. The majority of those claims have been successful, a success rate that exceeds that for Florida whites.
But that doesn’t stop the race baiters, bigots, black supremacists and other idiots from self-identifying with their ignorant remarks:
Nonetheless, prominent African Americans including Holder and “Ebony and Ivory” singer Stevie Wonder, who has vowed not to perform in the Sunshine State until the law is revoked, have made “Stand Your Ground” a central part of the Trayvon Martin controversy.
http://www.gunssavelife.com/?p=8456
One does not need a weapon to be a threat. Concealed carry laws aren’t just for us to defend ourselves against gun-toting bad guys. Look at St. Skittles. His hands were deadly weapons. Then there’s always this: I’d rather be judged by 12 then carried by six.
Arm everyone, even nutcases and felons and I guarantee you
in one generation this will be a very polite society.
I’m surprised they released the results.
Can I get a Duh!
“If it saves even one life” Right?
I would have only charged the government $5 million to tell them this. The tax payers would have saved $5 million. -:)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.