Carrying a gun increases risk of getting shot and killed

[Skyrad 0]

study found that people who carried guns were 4.5 times as likely to be shot and 4.2 times as likely to get killed compared with unarmed citizens. When the team looked at shootings in which victims had a chance to defend themselves, their odds of getting shot were even higher.

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn17922-carrying-a-gun-increases-risk-of-getting-shot-and-killed.html

When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy.
Lucius Annaeus Seneca

[nigel99 150]

Quote

study found that people who carried guns were 4.5 times as likely to be shot and 4.2 times as likely to get killed compared with unarmed citizens. When the team looked at shootings in which victims had a chance to defend themselves, their odds of getting shot were even higher.

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn17922-carrying-a-gun-increases-risk-of-getting-shot-and-killed.html

it's a crap biased study as it is based in Philly which as everyone knows is a liberal state. To have any merit it needs to be a study done in Alabama or Texas where "real" men live

Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived.

[Belgian_Draft 0]

A quick guess would be that people who take a stand against an attacker are 4.5 times more likely to get shot and 4.2 times more likely to be killed than those who don't.
Studys such as this one would also find that truck drivers are xx times more likely to die in a trucking accident than non-truckers.

HAMMER:
Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a
kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the
object we are trying to hit.

[StreetScooby 5]

Quote

To have any merit it needs to be a study done in Alabama or Texas where "real" men live

Or, at least some place where people actually know how a gun works.

We are all engines of karma

[TomAiello 25]

Any word on whether the people in question were lawful CCW holders, or were carrying illegally? Or whether any of those people were already felons, who weren't legally allowed to own guns?

-- Tom Aiello

[email protected]
SnakeRiverBASE.com

[Belgian_Draft 0]

Quote

Any word on whether the people in question were lawful CCW holders, or were carrying illegally? Or whether any of those people were already felons, who weren't legally allowed to own guns?

Or how many were criminals shot in self defense?

HAMMER:
Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a
kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the
object we are trying to hit.

[billvon 2,435]

>Studys such as this one would also find that truck drivers are xx times more
>likely to die in a trucking accident than non-truckers.

True. Of course, truckers don't claim that driving a truck _protects_ them from dying in trucking accidents. If they did, we'd probably laugh at them.

[wolfriverjoe 1,353]

Quote

study found that people who carried guns were 4.5 times as likely to be shot and 4.2 times as likely to get killed compared with unarmed citizens. When the team looked at shootings in which victims had a chance to defend themselves, their odds of getting shot were even higher.

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn17922-carrying-a-gun-increases-risk-of-getting-shot-and-killed.html

Ok, how many of those in the study were carryng legally???

How many were using the gun for a criminal purpose?

And the study didn't even consider those who carried guns but weren't shot.
It was a study of shooting victims, not armed individuals.

"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

[downwardspiral 0]

Quote

"We don't have an answer as to whether guns are protective or perilous," Branas says. "This study is a beginning."

www.FourWheelerHB.com

[Andrewwhyte 1]

Nothin in the study indicates causality. Carying a gun coincides with an increased risk of being shot and killed.
I don't carry a gun because I live in Canada and no one else does either. If I lived in Texas I would probably get one.

[BIGUN 1,075]

Thank you. I'll take the risk.

Quote

...analyzed the FBI's crime statistics for all 3,054 American counties from 1977 to 1992. Our findings are dramatic. Our most conservative estimates show that by adopting shall-issue laws, states reduced murders by 8.5%, rapes by 5%, aggravated assaults by 7% and robbery by 3%. If those states that did not permit concealed handguns in 1992 had permitted them back then, citizens might have been spared approximately 1,570 murders, 4,177 rapes, 60,000 aggravated assaults and 12,000 robberies. To put it even more simply Criminals, we found, respond rationally to deterrence threats.

Source: http://www.largo.org/Lott.html

Nobody has time to listen; because they're desperately chasing the need of being heard.

[Belgian_Draft 0]

Quote

>Studys such as this one would also find that truck drivers are xx times more
>likely to die in a trucking accident than non-truckers.

True. Of course, truckers don't claim that driving a truck _protects_ them from dying in trucking accidents. If they did, we'd probably laugh at them.

Yep. Just like the comic who once theorized that carrying a bomb onto an airplane reduced the chances his plane would be blown up. After all, what are the chances of getting on the same plane with two bombs??

HAMMER:
Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a
kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the
object we are trying to hit.

[kbordson 8]

All I can get (through my weak half hearted effort) is the abstract.

If you are currently on hospital grounds with access to the full article, can you attach or link it?

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

study found that people who carried guns were 4.5 times as likely to be shot and 4.2 times as likely to get killed compared with unarmed citizens. When the team looked at shootings in which victims had a chance to defend themselves, their odds of getting shot were even higher.

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn17922-carrying-a-gun-increases-risk-of-getting-shot-and-killed.html

This brought to you by the same class of geniuses that discovered that people who buy a gun are far more likely to commit suicide in the next month.

Well, of course. That's why those people bought the gun! Likewise, people who have reason to fear carry guns for a reason - they have an expectation they might need it. These are not random samples, these are self selecting ones.

This is 'science' for the stupid, to falsely convince them that a gun will hurt them.

[downwardspiral 0]

On the surface it doesn't seem like an honest study to me either. I would be interested to see the study as I supect many of the "victims" were gunned down by police. But I'm not $30 worth of interested.

www.FourWheelerHB.com

[wolfriverjoe 1,353]

Yes, how many shooting victims in the hospital had been carying a gun??

And how many shooting victims had been involved in a gunfight??

Without a control of unshot people who carry a gun.

Without any reference to how many were committing a criminal act.
FWIW, a significant percentage of shooting victims are involved in criminal activity of some sort.

Interestingly, THIS came from Philadelphia too.

"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

[rhys 0]

Of course these new scientist hippies are wrong, who would ever think that the possession a tool that is designed to kill or injure would ever kill or injure something? and to think that they believe that taking the tool out of the equation would lessen the likelihood of the death or injury at all...

What a bunch of idiots, and they call themseleves scientists.

Morons.

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, then the world will see peace." - 'Jimi' Hendrix

[rwieder 0]

Quote

Carrying a gun increases risk of getting shot and killed

I totally agree. That's the reason you need to carry at least three guns on you at all times. I've carried guns all of my life, i've only had to "throw down" one time. Be aware of your situation at all times. Do not put yourself in the position of having one of your weapons taken from you. There are tactics where if this does happen and it's the only weapon you have on you to keep them from pulling the trigger, get a finger behind the trigger and trigger guard. Always carry mace with you if you are going somewhere that's questionable. There's a dozen ways to keep this from happening. Personally if someone threatens me and i concieve it as an immenent danger to my life, property or someone else's property or life, i'll shoot to kill from a distance to where my primary cannot be taken from me and answer questions later. Thus the old adage: "I'd rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6"

-Richard-
"You're Holding The Rope And I'm Taking The Fall"

[kbordson 8]

Quote

Of course these new scientist hippies are wrong, who would ever think that the possession a tool that is designed to kill or injure would ever kill or injure something? and to think that they believe that taking the tool out of the equation would lessen the likelihood of the death or injury at all...

What a bunch of idiots, and they call themselves scientists.

Morons.

Are you seriously unwilling to look at the research itself to examine it's validity?

As noted above, what if, in that cohort, x% of the patients were taken to prison after medical treatment? Were those "victims" truly innocent bystanders that just HAPPENED to be walking around Phili with a legally owned CCW OR were these illegally owned and used in illegal acts. Those are two COMPLETELY different populations. I don't know if it would be mentioned, but I would like to see the study first. Examine it for the confounding variables and see what limitations they themselves had identified.

THEN, we can answer whether this was this a flawed study and the only "real" link is "crime kills" (although I think that referring to those scientist as "a bunch of idiots" and "morons" is a bit harsh) or is Skyrad posting something valid?

[captain1976 0]

Remember most of the stats are from neighborhoods with mostly minorities and killing each other like they do greatly adds to the stats of gun violence. I keep one with me at all time (except while jumping) and would rather put someone in the ground than give him my watch. There is no room in this world for this dysfunctional garbage. I already pay enough in taxes for this vermin.

You live more in the few minutes of skydiving than many people live in their lifetime

[kallend 1,651]

Quote

Remember most of the stats are from neighborhoods with mostly minorities and killing each other like they do greatly adds to the stats of gun violence. I keep one with me at all time (except while jumping) and would rather put someone in the ground than give him my watch. There is no room in this world for this dysfunctional garbage. I already pay enough in taxes for this vermin.

I guess you (and a bunch of others) just knee jerked rather than reading.

"So Charles Branas's team at the University of Pennsylvania analysed 677 shootings over two-and-a-half years to discover whether victims were carrying at the time, and compared them to other Philly residents of similar age, sex and ethnicity. The team also accounted for other potentially confounding differences, such as the socioeconomic status of their neighbourhood."

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[billvon 2,435]

> and would rather put someone in the ground than give him my watch.

An excellent example of a case where a gun is more likely to get the carrier killed. Looks like you're supporting the conclusions of that research.

[wolfriverjoe 1,353]

Quote

Quote

Remember most of the stats are from neighborhoods with mostly minorities and killing each other like they do greatly adds to the stats of gun violence. I keep one with me at all time (except while jumping) and would rather put someone in the ground than give him my watch. There is no room in this world for this dysfunctional garbage. I already pay enough in taxes for this vermin.

I guess you (and a bunch of others) just knee jerked rather than reading.

"So Charles Branas's team at the University of Pennsylvania analysed 677 shootings over two-and-a-half years to discover whether victims were carrying at the time, and compared them to other Philly residents of similar age, sex and ethnicity. The team also accounted for other potentially confounding differences, such as the socioeconomic status of their neighbourhood."

No, I read it carefully.

They were looking to see if shooting victims were armed, not if armed citizens were victims of shootings.

They may have compared similar non-victims to victims, but I see no comparison to the general public or to non-injured gun owning public.

And as the article I linked noted (and it was from the same city) shooting victims tended to have prior criminal histories.

"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

[Skyrad 0]

Quote

Quote

study found that people who carried guns were 4.5 times as likely to be shot and 4.2 times as likely to get killed compared with unarmed citizens. When the team looked at shootings in which victims had a chance to defend themselves, their odds of getting shot were even higher.

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn17922-carrying-a-gun-increases-risk-of-getting-shot-and-killed.html

it's a crap biased study as it is based in Philly which as everyone knows is a liberal state. To have any merit it needs to be a study done in Alabama or Texas where "real" men live

LOL...

When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy.
Lucius Annaeus Seneca

[downwardspiral 0]

looks like your post quoting the entire article was binned. Karen was asking for the study NOT the article however.

www.FourWheelerHB.com