Do Firearms Cause Murder...

[rmcrobertson]

Well, I suspect we agree in many ways. My point was that weapons used for hunting are one thing--because they require some actual skill--but that the toys for boys are our problem, in part because they don't require any.

As for, "buying into the hype," I'd argue that it isn't me who has done the buying. But then, I once heard a long conversation between a minister and a SWAT sniper in which the minister was "asking for advice," about getting a gun for home defense--and I use quotations because the cop spent ten minutes or so trying to a) talk him out of getting a gun at all, since he had no experience, b) talk him into getting a plain shotgun, because they're easier to use and much safer, c) talk him into getting an old revolver like a police .38, because the minister didn't like option a or b, d) give up, because the upshot was that the minister brightly announced, "I'm thinking about a Glock, because I heard they're good."

I grew up around hunting. Got no objections--because, with rare exceptions, actual hunters are not even remotely the problem.

 

[Ceicei]

Originally posted by rmcrobertson
It is odd that anyone would avoid giving such details--changing names, of course, to protect people's privacy--when such details would offer such a good argument against what I'm arguing. It makes me suspect that there aren't any such details.

Oh, these situations exist and the details are available...

Your tone of "prove it" for the sake of arguing is what turns me off. I am not obligated to prove anything.

 

[rmcrobertson]

There's no, "tone." I just like to see some sort of documentation, I'm perfectly willing to take your word for it, and I get curious when documentation is constantly avoided--since, as I wrote, about all I could respond with would be: "Oh. Didn't know that."

My suspicion is that it's urban myth. Simplest way to refute that is to offer some evidence.

 

[Rich Parsons]

Originally posted by Technopunk
The Rich Person?

Techno I spell my Name with an 'a' not an 'e'.

Yes this was and is off topic and I meant it to be a point of humor in this serious discussion. I apologize. :asian:

 

[Rich Parsons]

Originally posted by rmcrobertson
Can you actually name anybody who has "defended themselves," with a gun, who was not a cop? Anybody you personally know, whose impressions you trust? What EXACTLY was the situation?

The Cabrini Green projects, famous in part for, "Candyman," were torn down some years ago, if memory serves.

My Grand Father, whois dead now, as in a wheel chair my whole life. He had a CCW for NY. He had a few cases of bad boys in NY and also while traveling out west. In one case, my Grand Mother was in the store, he had choose not to go in his wheel chair as it would take longer to load up then to have my Grand Mother to just go in and come back out.

A bunch of punks started to kick and hit his car. He asked them to stop. They continued. He Obtained his 45, and asked them again to stop. One pulled out a bat and came at him and his window. He just placed the 45 in his hand on the dash, and told them to back off. They did, and he put away the gun.

Yes, it is illegal to brandish a weapon.

Yes you should run away. Although by the time this started his option was to run over one of the bad guys to get away. Not until the bat was obtained and the threat made to him, was force required. Because all other damage was property damage. My Grand mother came, and they called the police, for a damage report to the car. The explain the use of the Weapon, and wait for the police to determine what was to happen. The police checked his CCW permit from NY (* Paper Copy on him *), and they took the report and left him and my Grandmother to continue with their vacation.

And Yes, Robert, given the situation of the wheel chair and being trapped in the car, this is not what you are looking for. Yet, this one data point.

 

[rmcrobertson]

Actually, Mr. Parsons, it seems to me that that was precisely what I was looking for. Among other things, it seems to me that your granddad was right, from what you describe.

It's probably obvious at this point, but of course what I'm arguing is that the situation you're describing is not the one that most folks who think they should have a gun on 'em at all times are talking about.

Thanks.

 

[Cryozombie]

Originally posted by rmcrobertson

Here's my gun control compormise. As of New Year's, all men are prohibited from carrying or owning any and all handguns. All women are required to carry them.

Here's my comprimise. Lets ban all handguns, and then see IF the crime rate increases. If it does not, the ban can stand. If it does, EVERYONE gets carry privliges.

OR...

Lets bad all handguns, but give me the right to own Armor and protective gear equivalent to or better than the new special stuff the military has, and allow me to carry any other weapon I choose. (i.e. Sword, club, shotgun, etc.)

Oh yeah, and in either case, free medical treatment for any gunshot wounds recieved, or funeral and death benifits for my family if I am killed by a criminal with an illegal firearm, since banning them prevents crime.

(Only fair when keeping in mind that it didnt stop the guy in chicago that recently killed 8 of his former co-workers with an illegal handgun. )

 

[angrywhitepajamas]

As some one with no gun experience, I would have to admitt my opinion is to leave the firearms for law enforcement and hunting. But that does not solve the fact that where there is a will there is a way, and eventually someone will use those firearms improperly. Possibly with fatal results. Having an arsenal of "nonleathal" options does not help either as most can be lethal, (with the notable exception of skunk stench). But as for neighborhood violence, you just have to choose which type that you would prefer and or equipped to deal with.

 

[Phil Elmore]

As luck would have it, I'll be addressing the concepts of firearms, "gun control," and the woeful lack of martial competence in martial artists who support firearms prohibition in a coming issue of MartialTalk Magazine.

 

[Cryozombie]

Monday Night in a Chicago Suburb, an assailant broke into a home and threated the family therein. The owner of the home fired and struck the intruder twice with his handgun, and saved his family.

It was all over the news tuesday, Im sure I can find an article on line about it. When I do I will post the link.

 

[Cryozombie]

And on a Side note...

As I stated before, Chicago has a Ban on Firearms, and now they are the murder capital of the United States.

Are the two items related? No Idea. But I find it coincidental and Ironic.

 

[Ceicei]

I read an interesting article yesterday on the Fox News website. Here is the link for it. It discusses the media bias of printing certain types of gun stories (death or criminal use of guns) over other stories (defensive use of guns). Any opinions about it?

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,107274,00.html

- Ceicei

 

[MisterMike]

I think it was a good article. I think the author is correct, you won't read about most gun defenses in the mainstream media. But I hope there was a lot more mention in the local papers where the events happened.

It's just not what sells a paper anymore, nor does it further the larger media's 'unspoken' political favorite.

Too bad I guess.

 

[rmcrobertson]

Just let me see if I understand this correctly. We're being asked to take the unbiased viewpoint of Fox news, owned by Rupert Murdoch, as a corrective to the usual bias of the leftist media?

 

[Phil Elmore]

Yeah, I mean, that guy must spend all day on the phone telling his reporters what to think.

 

[rmcrobertson]

Ah. So Rupert Murdoch--who, by the way, I seem to recollect has a very long-standing history of dictating editorial policy for the increasing number of news outlets he has come to control over the last thirty years--doesn't interfere with the news, but the Liberal media is all run from some central office.

Makes perfect sense.

 

[MisterMike]

I think this piece was only offered up as an example of 1 larger media outlet not afraid of showing the other side of the gun issue.

Not as a "See? Liberal media is always biased" jab. There's a difference between Op/Ed and News. Just as there are differences in editorial policies, just look at Jayson Blair's work.

 

[rmcrobertson]

Ah. So the argument is that Fox News, unlike say CBS, is, "not afraid," that Fox News, unlike say the "New York Times," is always honest because they would never hire the likes of Jayson Blair, that Fox News, unlike say the "Washington Post," never confuses editorial and news policy.

I see. Remarkable that Fox News would be taken as an exemplification of news division independence, journalistic integrity, and objectivity, but I see what you're driving at.

What were the figures on self-defense with guns again, and their source? And those many particular examples of individuals defending themselves with guns...when can I see those? So far, I've only seen one here.

Thanks.

 

[lvwhitebir]

I am not an advocate of gun ownership, but here are some statistics. They're a little dated (about 10 years old).

U.S. Department of Justice
Office of Justice Programs
Bureau of Justice Statistics

Bureau of Justice Statistics Crime Data Brief

Guns and Crime: Handgun Victimization, Firearm Self-Defense, and
Firearm Theft

April 1994, NCJ-147003

Revised 9/24/02 th

Full text with tables available from:
Bureau of Justice Statistics Clearinghouse
800-732-3277 (fax number for report orders and mail list signup
only: 410-792-4358)
Box 6000
Annapolis Junction, MD. 20701-0179

By Michael R. Rand, BJS Statistician

In 1992 offenders armed with handguns committed a record 931,000 violent crimes. Handgun crimes accounted for about 13% of all violent crimes. As measured by the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), the rate of nonfatal handgun victimizations in 1992--4.5 crimes per 1,000 people age 12 or older--supplanted the record of 4.0 per 1,000 in 1982.

On average in 1987-92 about 83,000 crime victims per year used a firearm to defend themselves or their property. Three-fourths of
the victims who used a firearm for defense did so during a violent
crime; a fourth, during a theft, household burglary, or motor
vehicle theft.

...

Males, blacks, and the young had the highest rates of handgun crime victimization, 1987-92

...

*Males were twice as likely as females to be victims of handgun
crimes, and blacks 3 times as likely as whites.

*Young black males continued to be the population subgroup most
vulnerable to handgun crime victimization.

For males age 16-19--
The rate for blacks (40 per 1,000 persons)
was 4 times that of whites (10 per 1,000).
For males age 20-24--
The rate for blacks (29 per 1,000)
was 3 times that of whites (9 per 1,000).


...

*Offenders fired their weapon in 17% of all nonfatal handgun crimes
(or about 2% of all violent crimes). In 3% of all handgun crimes,
the victim was wounded. The offender shot at but missed the victim
in 14% of all handgun crimes. Victims did not report if offenders
had tried to hit the victim or missed intentionally.

Self-defense with firearms

*38% of the victims defending themselves with a firearm attacked
the offender, and the others threatened the offender with the
weapon.

*A fifth of the victims defending themselves with a firearm
suffered an injury, compared to almost half of those who defended
themselves with weapons other than a firearm or who had no weapon.
Care should be used in interpreting these data because many aspects
of crimes--including victim and offender characteristics, crime
circumstances, and offender intent--contribute to the victims'
injury outcomes.


About three-fourths of the victims who used firearms for
self-defense did so during a crime of violence, 1987-92

...

*In most cases victims who used firearms to defend themselves or their property were confronted by offenders who were either unarmed or armed with weapons other than firearms. On average between 1987 and 1992, about 35% (or 22,000 per year) of the violent crime victims defending themselves with a firearm faced an offender who also had a firearm. (Because the NCVS collects victimization data on police officers, its estimates of the use of firearms for self-defense are likely to include police use of firearms. Questionnaire revisions introduced in January 1993 will permit separate consideration of police and civilian firearm cases.)

Offenders shot at victims in 17% of handgun crimes, 1987-92


WhiteBirch

 

[Cryozombie]

Originally posted by rmcrobertson
And those many particular examples of individuals defending themselves with guns...when can I see those? So far, I've only seen one here.

Thanks.

Funny... I have seen two in this thread.

But Ok, my man, here ya go... Ignore em if you choose.

Mother Defends Children Against Robbers
http://www.10tv.com/news/archive/010204local6746.php?story=010204local6746

Homeowner shoots burglar in the face
http://www.rochesterdandc.com/news/0104LS2R1FR_news.shtml

Admittedly, this guy used a .22 caliber rifle, but that is a "self defense with a gun" that isn't a shotgun.

Clerk shoots would-be robber
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/tribune-review/pittsburgh/s_172999.html

Oh, and the one I posted earlier in this thread, I could only find the follow up story to...

Wilmette Homeowner Won't Be charged For Violating Gun Ban (IL)
http://www.nbc5.com/news/2736699/detail.html?z=dp&dpswid=2265994&dppid=65172

I can come up with a larger list if you like, or are you willing to believe it happens now?