Gun control explained

[brenthutch 390]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=84ptFVq22PY

[jclalor 12]

You are more likely to kill yourself than an intruder.

I own a gun, but the facts are the facts.


http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp0805923

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

You are more likely to kill yourself than an intruder.

I own a gun, but the facts are the facts.


http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp0805923

Fiction, based on the oft-debunked Kellerman 'study'.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[jclalor 12]

Quote

Quote

Quote

You are more likely to kill yourself than an intruder.

I own a gun, but the facts are the facts.


http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp0805923

Fiction, based on the oft-debunked Kellerman 'study'.

Are you saying more intruders are shot and killed by gun owners than suicides by gun owners?

This was from the New England Journal of Medicine and you claim it's fiction?

[wolfriverjoe 1,371]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

You are more likely to kill yourself than an intruder.

I own a gun, but the facts are the facts.


http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp0805923

Fiction, based on the oft-debunked Kellerman 'study'.

Are you saying more intruders are shot and killed by gun owners than suicides by gun owners?

This was from the New England Journal of Medicine and you claim it's fiction?

I'm not going to dispute the statistic.

I'm going to dispute it's validity.

Suicide by gun is nearly 100% successful.

Intruders are very rarely killed by an armed homeowner.
They are either scared off and run away or held at gunpoint for the police in the vast majority of the cases. And in the very small percentage (like less than one percent) that the homeowner shoots the perpetrator, the fatality rate is still low.

http://www.nraila.org/media/misc/fables.html#FABLE I:

Yes, the gun is more likely to be used to kill yourself than to kill an intruder.

But it is far, far, far more likely to be used by the homeowner to defend himself non-fatally than fatally.

"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

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

You are more likely to kill yourself than an intruder.

I own a gun, but the facts are the facts.


http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp0805923

Fiction, based on the oft-debunked Kellerman 'study'.

Are you saying more intruders are shot and killed by gun owners than suicides by gun owners?

This was from the New England Journal of Medicine and you claim it's fiction?

I'm claiming that guns are used far more for rebuffing an attack than they are for suicide.

This is nothing more than the usual 'blame the tool for the acts of the user'.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[StreetScooby 5]

LOL... That was good.

We are all engines of karma

[billeisele 123]

guess this doesn't count because the guy was not at home

Police: Robber killed in SC Waffle House shooting

Saturday, Jan. 21, 2012

SPARTANBURGG, S.C. The Spartanburg County Sheriff's Office says a man attempting to rob a local Waffle House at gunpoint was shot and killed by a customer carrying a concealed weapon.

Give one city to the thugs so they can all live together. I vote for Chicago where they have strict gun laws.

[Bertt 0]

That article doesn't talk about home protection, just about suicide. Executive summary is that a gun in the home is a risk factor for successful suicide. Based on the article referenced, no comparison to gun use for home defense can be made.
Carry on.

You don't have to outrun the bear.

[DaVinci 0]

Quote

Are you saying more intruders are shot and killed by gun owners than suicides by gun owners?

And if you want to talk about suicides.... Canada's rate of gun suicide did go down with strict gun control laws... But the RATE of suicides didn't. Other methods went up.

Studies have show that suicides are not actually reduced by gun laws. Only suicide by gun.

And removing suicide the number of gun deaths drops in half.

[devildog 0]

Quote

Quote

Are you saying more intruders are shot and killed by gun owners than suicides by gun owners?

And if you want to talk about suicides.... Canada's rate of gun suicide did go down with strict gun control laws... But the RATE of suicides didn't. Other methods went up.

Studies have show that suicides are not actually reduced by gun laws. Only suicide by gun.

And removing suicide the number of gun deaths drops in half.

That's because people that really want to die, will. The world is a dangerous place, and with a little google-fu, you can find much more lethal and painless ways to die than blasting your head off (which does fail at times)

You stop breathing for a few minutes and everyone jumps to conclusions.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

That's because people that really want to die, will. The world is a dangerous place, and with a little google-fu, you can find much more lethal and painless ways to die than blasting your head off (which does fail at times)

yes, for the most part, with a vague maybe not.

Shrinks talk a bit about impulse suicides. The Golden Gate Bridge needs a net because people may impulsively decide to jump. If they're thwarted, then they don't do it and later they're fine. They say that same with guns. If one isn't around when they have this impulse, then it doesn't happen.

Two immediate problems with this
1) quite often it isn't an impulse at all. A lot of people buy guns and then shortly after use them to kill themselves. GC advocates have translated this to be - people get suicidal after buying a gun, when really it's they bought a gun because they were suicidal.

Many of the people who jump off the bridge plan it well ahead of an impulse, with last letters or long drives/walks to get there.

2) if they are prevented from acting on this impulse because of the net or the lack of a gun, will they just take the next opportunity? Or find an alternate method? Certainly we know that in other countries with few guns, people substitute. So it's not going to be 100% effective, and i suspect far close to 0 than 100. But you've have saved some of them, or at least a few.

But unless you go by the approach of "if one life were saved, it was worth it, regardless of cost," that's probably not enough. A fence that prevents me from looking out at the bay from the bridge is a loss. Depressing really - might make me want to use my gun on myself. And taking away the gun will certainly result in some people dying from a lack of self defense means.