Don't know where this comes from, probably from some stupid movie. But I like it, so I'm postin' it... So there.
Posted on 05/10/2013 6:51:56 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 31,672 people died by guns in 2010 (the most recent year for which U.S. figures are available), a staggering number that is orders of magnitude higher than that of comparable Western democracies. What can we do about it? National Rifle Association executive vice president Wayne LaPierre believes he knows: “The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.” If LaPierre means professionally trained police and military who routinely practice shooting at ranges, this observation would at least be partially true. If he means armed private citizens with little to no training, he could not be more wrong.
Consider a 1998 study in the Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery that found that “every time a gun in the home was used in a self-defense or legally justifiable shooting, there were four unintentional shootings, seven criminal assaults or homicides, and 11 attempted or completed suicides.” Pistol owners' fantasy of blowing away home-invading bad guys or street toughs holding up liquor stores is a myth debunked by the data showing that a gun is 22 times more likely to be used in a criminal assault, an accidental death or injury, a suicide attempt or a homicide than it is for self-defense. I harbored this belief for the 20 years I owned a Ruger .357 Magnum with hollow-point bullets designed to shred the body of anyone who dared to break into my home, but when I learned about these statistics, I got rid of the gun.
More insights can be found in a 2013 book from Johns Hopkins University Press entitled Reducing Gun Violence in America: Informing Policy with Evidence and Analysis, edited by Daniel W. Webster and Jon S. Vernick.....
(Excerpt) Read more at scientificamerican.com ...
Police: All Empire State shooting victims were wounded by officers
http://www.cnn.com/2012/08/25/justice/new-york-empire-state-shooting
there used to be something called crime AND punishment
Most guns used in self defense are NEVER fired.
Japan has a near complete gun ban but yet has a much higher suicide rate than America
Mexico has a near complete gun ban yet has a crime rate much higher than America
You want to get rid of your gun? Go ahead. Your choice. But why do you want to take guns away from everyone else?
Consider a 1998 study in the Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery that found that “every time a gun in the home was used in a self-defense or legally justifiable shooting, there were four unintentional shootings, seven criminal assaults or homicides, and 11 attempted or completed suicides.” Pistol owners' fantasy of blowing away home-invading bad guys or street toughs holding up liquor stores is a myth debunked by the data showing that a gun is 22 times more likely to be used in a criminal assault, an accidental death or injury, a suicide attempt or a homicide than it is for self-defense. I harbored this belief for the 20 years I owned a Ruger .357 Magnum with hollow-point bullets designed to shred the body of anyone who dared to break into my home, but when I learned about these statistics, I got rid of the gun.
“I harbored this belief for the 20 years I owned a Ruger .357 Magnum with hollow-point bullets designed to shred the body of anyone who dared to break into my home, but when I learned about these statistics, I got rid of the gun.”
I call BS. So this libtard owned a gun (supposedly) for 20 years, reads a stat sheet, and gets rid of his firearm? Seriously. I’ve read a lot of scripts here in Hollywood and this is one creative bullcrap.
Scientific American used to be both. Now they’re neither.
Do we have another Western democracy with 13% of its population descended from African slaves? Do we have another where almost as many are descended from a background of mostly American Indians?
Pound for pound, and ethnicity to ethnicity, Americans of whatever derivation are, in general healthier, live longer, and have many more firearms than the ol'boys back in the Old World wherever that might be!
Scientific American becme a joke years ago.
It should be renamed “Liberal Amerinan”.
Thank you for admitting you’re no longer armed. I’m sure someone will take advantage of that fact.
Moron.
“every time a gun in the home was used in a self-defense or legally justifiable shooting, there were four unintentional shootings, seven criminal assaults or homicides, and 11 attempted or completed suicides.”
Well, the simple fact is, the police intentionally don’t keep data on the number of times a gun is presented to prevent a crime.
They may take a report if the weapon is fired, but they aren’t real interested in compiling data in that regard.
Bump!
Just the first half dozen responses on that link that I read are ripping this guy a new one, so even those who subscribe the Scientific American see right through this BS.
Eh? It’s the original point-and-click interface!
The author is a dumb fark!
To summarize: For every incident where an armed citizen used a gun in self defense, there were four unintentional shootings (a completely undefined category), seven criminals using a weapon in the commission of their crimes, and 11 suicides attempted (some of which were successful, but not all of which are identified as using a firearm).
His conclusion: Disarm the citizens who defend themselves!
Just because others do the wrong thing doesn’t mean that I should be prevented from protecting myself, dumba$$ (the author)!
There is a large supply of junk science generated by the anti-gun types. The statistics which supposedly show that houses which have guns in them are more likely to have a crime happen where the gun is used to commit the crime as opposed to stopping the crime rely on a population of criminals who, needless to say, keep their guns at home.
The studies I have read tout the correlation of gun ownership with violence in households, but ignore a stronger correlation from their own data between renting and violence in households. By the logic of the studies you could dramatically increase your safety by buying a house instead of renting one. But that defies logic, suggesting the underlying study methodology is incorrect.
One study I read claimed a correlation between gun ownership rates and suicides, but neglected to point out that they generated their estimates of gun ownership rates from the firearm suicide rate. That kind of circular statistical manipulation is not a valid scientific method.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention,
Now just reading the name of their organization would indicate that they are outside their realm of expertise and are vocalizing political correctness out of their anal orifices (loosely translated to common language - they don’t know sh!t and are talking out their a$$es).
I know the author (not well, but I was at his wedding, and there when he was served divorce papers) and his old one had already taken over his personality. He doesn't need a new one, ripped or otherwise.
Don't know where this comes from, probably from some stupid movie. But I like it, so I'm postin' it... So there.
How many of these are in the hood?
“but when I learned about these statistics, I got rid of the gun. “
I call “BULL”!
Anybody who would accept such garbage data at face value, likely didn’t have any serious training in the use of a firearm, or lacks the critical thinking skills necessary to process those claims.
I don’t believe the author ever went any further than owning a weapon, sitting on a shelf, or in a safe somewhere.
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.