kallend 1,623 #1 February 24, 2014 Apparently not, and especially not for females.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sfzombie13 307 #2 February 24, 2014 i'm not too familiar with the scientific method used here. don't the studies need a control group to be valid?_________________________________________ Si hoc legere scis nimium eruditionis habes Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BIGUN 1,053 #3 February 24, 2014 sfzombie13i'm not too familiar with the scientific method used here. don't the studies need a control group to be valid? It was not so much a study as it was a research project.Nobody has time to listen; because they're desperately chasing the need of being heard. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
regulator 0 #4 February 24, 2014 Ah yes...the first gun control survey you run across and now it's a proven fact. If someone buys a gun with the purpose for defense and it sits in a drawer until the time comes...then it won't be nearly as effective. However if the owner is proficient with their weapon and practices often then they have much better chances at defending themselves. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,623 #5 February 24, 2014 regulatorAh yes...the first gun control survey you run across and now it's a proven fact. A statement that shows anyone who read the journal that you DIDN'T read it.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BIGUN 1,053 #6 February 24, 2014 You didn't even read it; did you.Nobody has time to listen; because they're desperately chasing the need of being heard. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,623 #7 February 24, 2014 sfzombie13i'm not too familiar with the scientific method used here. don't the studies need a control group to be valid? Did YOU read it?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BIGUN 1,053 #8 February 24, 2014 Hey, Professor - He's on my side of the fence. Let me do my own housecleaning, would ya? Nobody has time to listen; because they're desperately chasing the need of being heard. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sfzombie13 307 #9 February 25, 2014 i read all of it. i don't disagree with it, it makes sense. especially the part about impulse suicides. of course if you have an unlocked, loaded gun in the corner it would be easier. kind of hard to change your mind after you pull the trigger. and i also can't say that i've never sat with a 12 gauge in my mouth before either. it was a depressing time in my life, and i am extremely glad i didn't sneeze. apparently i made an error in thinking earlier._________________________________________ Si hoc legere scis nimium eruditionis habes Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PiLFy 0 #10 February 25, 2014 More BS from the Anties... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billeisele 122 #11 February 25, 2014 so we have a member of the PhD club (Piled High and Deep) take a study and twist the data to come up with a thread title and statement that is purposefully intended to irritate the pro-gun crowd, when the article itself is aimed in a different direction having read the article, in the beginning it states, "Research suggests that access to firearms in the home increases the risk for violent death." The assumption in that statement is that violent death wouldn't occur if the firearm wasn't present. No doubt that some deaths are impulse actions and the absence of the gun would eliminate those statistics. But it's silly to suggest that all or probably the majority wouldn't occur by some other means. It then goes on to state that 51.8% of suicides are firearm related and 66.5% of homicides are firearm related. What this seems to infer is that if a loaded gun isn't present the suicides and homicides wouldn't occur. It then states that the US has the highest rate of firearm ownership and concludes that the annual rate of suicide and homicide via firearm is higher in the US. WOW - that's simply an earthshaking conclusion. Finally stating, "Results from ecological studies suggest that state restrictions on firearm ownership are associated with decreases in firearm-related suicides and homicides." Another earthshaking conclusion. Is the PhD community so desperate to publish that this type of drivel is actually authored? Maybe because about the only peeps that read this stuff are PhDs and for these types that keep there head buried in academia it may seem like reality. How about a study that looks at the survivability/outcome of an in-home attack on an armed homeowner vs an unarmed homeowner. I'll take my chances by having firearms handy.Give one city to the thugs so they can all live together. I vote for Chicago where they have strict gun laws. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
regulator 0 #12 February 25, 2014 I'll take violent freedom over peaceful slavery any day. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Stumpy 256 #13 February 25, 2014 You know those aren't the only two options don't you?Never try to eat more than you can lift Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 3 #14 February 25, 2014 StumpyYou know those aren't the only two options don't you? The more extreme a person is, left or right, the less likely they are to recognize a grey area that sits between the extremes.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
toolbox 0 #15 February 25, 2014 Yes! It makes me feel a lot safer to have access to an equalizer in case of home invasion. Kinda like the georgia mother of young twins who used her .38 revolver against the guy who chased them into an upstairs crawlspace. The mother tried to retreat with her children to hide but the crowbar wielding thug cornered them and she shot him five times in the face.He discontinued his attack. How about the security camera footage of the mother alone with her children who used her firearm to fend off three armed home invaders in detroit. It is silly to imply that a gun for the majority of citizens will increase their risk of suicide over the benefit of the protection afforded by the possession of a gun. First off most people do not want to commit suicide, otherwise we would not have over population. If someone wants to kill themselves then a gun can be very effective in getting the job done,but I can't see how a gun will increase your chances of feeling like killing yourself. So you think it's a bad idea for lawful citizens to have guns for protecting the lives of themselves and their loved ones because a small minority of suicidal people might kill themselves with guns? Now there is always the risk of irresponsible gun owners allowing guns to be accessed by those who should not have access to them,but I feel the numbers of those hurt by accidental shootings are far less than the numbers of people who have been protected from harm by defensive use of guns. You asked the question. This is my answer from my own life experience. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 3 #16 February 25, 2014 toolboxYes! It makes me feel a lot safer ... You do realize that wasn't the question; yes? It's not about "feelings." It's about facts. Not apocryphal anecdotes, but facts taken as a whole.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
toolbox 0 #17 February 25, 2014 The question was"Does having a gun in the home make you safer?" This is just one study,and seems to be very slanted towards anti gun agendas. From my 51 years of personal experience,I've known 5 people who were victims of accidental shootings,and none were fatal,all but one were self inflicted,the 4 others were LE officers of which three were using glocks. I've known a lot of people who have committed suicide but only one who used a gun to do it. I am from Washington state,and 95% of the people I have known own guns. In fact most of the people I've known who killed themselves owned guns,yet all but one used methods other than gunshot to kill themselves. I have known several people who have protected themselves from threats,both human and animal,many without actually hitting the threat or even firing a shot as far as that go's. So this study smells like a pile to me. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jtiflyer 0 #18 February 25, 2014 It's a fact my wife and I feel safer and in deed are safer in our home with our firearms at the ready. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 3 #19 February 25, 2014 jtiflyerIt's a fact my wife and I feel safer... /facepalmquade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skypuppy 1 #20 February 25, 2014 and in deed are safer you missed this part...If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead. Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 3 #21 February 25, 2014 skypuppyand in deed are safer you missed this part... Indeed, I did not.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
champu 1 #22 February 25, 2014 Your linked article basically says, "There are many unresolved issues with essentially every study that has been conducted on firearm ownership and rates of homicide and suicide, and while there is some merit to them their conclusions are overstated." And, as per usual, "restrictions on firearm ownership" is talked about like it's some homogenous substance that oozes out of the pores of gun control lobbyists and politicians, and if we spread it on the country it will help. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Stumpy 256 #23 February 25, 2014 toolbox This is just one study,and seems to be very slanted towards anti gun agendas. Thats because you don't like the conclusion based on your tiny personal sample of anecdotal evidence. Fortunately, there are people out there who do objective studies. I thought the research study was pretty good in that they were very clear about the limitations, assumptions, the method and the implicit and explicit further questions posed by the results. The results themselves are what they are - factual, within those constraints that the authors laid out. Do they lead to a conclusion one way or the other? Nothing you could really lean on. The only "anti" conclusion they really came up with would be that suicides were more likely to be successful if there was a gun readily available - I don't think thats too much of a stretch for anyone to go with.Never try to eat more than you can lift Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Boomerdog 0 #24 February 25, 2014 ...and your point is? If you're trying to protect me from myself, thank you but no thank you. You don't need to waste your time as that job has been filled. We can agree on one point; murder and suicide are horrible. Sadly, both have been with us since Cain killed Abel thousands of years ago and for those who accept another view of how the world and people came about, well...murder and suicide through the millennia are in those narratives as well. The difference of course is the means and technology, affords us these days, the ability to collect and measure data and make some conclusions about the data. This does not mean to say the conclusions are right, it just means those who did the research have a talent for making their argument for the data presented. Here's some data...100 - 200 million people murdered in the 20th century. The dead were hanged, shot, electrocuted, beheaded, crushed, burned, starved etc. etc. by governments who considered them enemies and the dead had little to no access to defend themselves against the likes of Hitler, Stalin, Lenin, Mao, Pol Pot, Che and the rest of the usual suspects. Add to that the two bit dirtbag who just likes to do and take from people whatever they like by putting the lives of others at risk using a firearm illegally obtained. I could take all of the numbers of victims who died at the hands of governments and criminals and make the numbers that research paper you so nobly cite so small in proportional comparison, it would be tantamount to one person taking a piss in Lake Michigan in the misguided belief they'd make an environmental impact. Sorry, I too wish life were perfect and risk free; but that is a wish that I accept will not be realized. Self defense IS the first human right and many of us just aren't going to budge on that principle...no matter the risk. You are free to decide your course of action but please leave me the hell alone!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RonD1120 58 #25 February 25, 2014 YesLook for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
