Other than Kleck and Gertz’ highly-contested findings, what evidence is available that guns are safe and effective for home and personal protection? I have to admit that I’m skeptical of any statistic coming from the NRA, for two reasons. First, they misrepresented facts about Australia’s gun laws. Second, they take money from firearm manufacturers.
There are statistics available, for example, that show that hunting with firearms or sport shooting are safe activities, and hunting, at least, has positive effects. The use of firearms for home or personal protection, on the other hand, suggest that guns are more of a danger than a protection.
I cant stand the NRA, and wouldn’t believe them if they said the sky was blue.
There are no statistics on how guns are used in self defense, because no data has been collected on it. I really don’t see how it can be. Anecdotal evidence only goes so far, but it’s all we have.
It suggests nothing of the sort. It only says we don’t really know.
When I was a small child my father took me out in the woods and we shot a .22. We had a shotgun in the closet growing up, my parents told me to come get them if I ever wanted to look at it and they would show it to me, make sure it was unloaded, and let me handle it. There was no mystery, it was just another dangerous tool like dads axe, or his chainsaw.
I did the same with my kid. If he had a friend over, I made sure all guns were secure, and unloaded.
personally, I think kids should be given basic gun safety in elementary school. It would do more to save lives than anything else we could do.
No, there’s quite a bit around, it’s just a bit old as the NRA has successfully lobbied against further studies. The reason, of course, is that reality is other than they would like it to be.
On the contrary:
“Based on a review of the available scientific data, Dr. Lippmann and co-authors conclude that the dangers of having a gun at home far outweigh the safety benefits. Research shows that access to guns greatly increases the risk of death and firearm-related violence. A gun in the home is twelve times more likely to result in the death of a household member or visitor than an intruder.”
“For 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.”
“In a first-of its-kind study, epidemiologists at the University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine found that, on average, guns did not protect those who possessed them from being shot in an assault. The study estimated that people with a gun were 4.5 times more likely to be shot in an assault than those not possessing a gun.”
Again, those studies don’t include cases where the gun was not fired, and that is nearly every case of self defense with a firearm that I’ve ever seen. No records are kept on those cases, so there is no data.
Pretty easy to extrapolate from “you’re 12 times more likely to die violently with a gun in the home” to “guns get do fired and are apt to kill somebody.” Anyway, the NRA made a similar complaint about Kellerman’s work, and somebody kindly put together a response already:
Apologies for the long quote, but believe me, it’s only a tiny bit of the entire article. And of course, it’s just common sense-- if a gun was good for protection, people living in homes with guns would be, y’know, protected, not more likely to be homicide victims. A gun in the home increases personal safety
So, in the absence of data, you decide to believe it anyway. OK with me, so long as you recognize that fact.
Gotta wonder, how many times that people who go about armed have unwarranted suspicions. Like our well known community protector Mr Zimmerman. Now, let say that all the ended up happening is he scared the beejesus out of that kid. Lost track of him, whatever.
Does that count? If he tells someone who is of similar mindset that he used the gun defensively and prevented a crime by someone he was pretty sure was high and casing houses…how often is he believed? No data. Anecdote in abundance. But no data.
We don’t have stats on the homes with guns that didn’t experience violent deaths. Most of the data we have about weather or not a gun was in the house comes from police reports written up after a violent act. When I stopped a guy from breaking into my house with a gun, the report didn’t even mention the gun. When my roommate chased a guy out of the house with a gun, there was no report even filed. Nothing in official records reports that we had guns in our house, and so we would be counted as one of those safe houses with no guns. Your report cant say what they claim to say because they did not have that data. it doesn’t exist.
and It also depends on how that data they are using is collected, who they are counting. Are they counting drug dealers and gang members who have guns in their home? Are they counting rival drug dealers who know each other as friends (as was done in one study), are they counting people who live in the same apartment building as family members (that was also done). Yes, gang members are more likely to die a violent death.
And it’s not just violent death a gun can prevent, but also robberies, rapes etc. we just do not know and there is no way we can.
So, the reasoning is that we should accept lethal weapons as a commonplace of our society, the most ordinary thing. And we accept the accidental deaths, and the deaths that result from stupid arguments that escalate. An insult that otherwise would rate a busted lip gets somebody dead. And we should put up with this, accept this, shrug it off because maybe, just maybe, it also does some good.
Certainly not an argument I would make. If we can make the world a safer place with reasonable gun laws, I’m all for it. But Lets not pretend we know things we don’t. An honest discussion from both sides would be nice.
But while we are on the subject of accidental deaths and such, about 8 times the number of people die from misuse of alcohol as do from guns. Why do we spend so much time on guns? There are constructive use of guns (we may not know how much) but I cant think of many for say, beer. Lots of recreational things kill people.
Somewhere here there was a link that showed that IIRC burglars in the US really don’t like burgling occupied houses for fear of happening upon armed occupants. How do we count that?
Given that, do we count burglaries stopped by a voice in the darkness with “Who’s there? I have a gun.” only if there actually was a gun in hand?
If the mere claim of being armed is enough to send a burglar running does it count as a crime prevented by a gun?
If the burglar left after the “Who’s” because burgling occupied houses in orders of magnitude more difficult;
“Shit, they’ve got a gun!”
“If I stay, I’ve now got lots more to deal with.”
“If they’ve already called the police staying isn’t a smart option.”
“Killing them is a great way to turn a short stay in prison into a much longer one.”
“If I don’t kill them, keeping them from calling the police is orders of magnitude harder than the good ol’ days when I only had to deal with was cutting a phone line.”
“Having stolen goods on my person or in my car makes getting past a BOLO much harder.”
how do we count that?
Unless the occupants actually physically confronted the burglar with a visible firearm or we ask the burglar why they ran it’s impossible to determine whether it was an actual gun stopped the burglary or something else.
In one case for me it was yelling “Stop” While I pointed the gun at him through the window in the door. He stopped trying to pry the door open, but stood there yelling at me until the police showed up and hauled him off. he was intoxicated and/or crazy. I was never called to testify, I have no idea what the outcome was.
For my roommate, she heard someone in the house after me and her boyfriend left for work. She came out of the back room to see what it was, but was worried enough to grab her gun. She found a man standing in the living room who started towards her until she pointed the gun at him – at which point he turned around and ran. She didn’t call the police.
Another case, for me, my neighbor’s ex husband was trying to smash in her door with a large knife. There were a bunch of people telling him to stop (from a distance) but when he saw me show up with a gun he ran. and the police caught him down the street.
I can relate a few more like that, from either myself or other people I know. it was one of the hazard of living in a high crime area. most of them it was pretty obvious that having a gun in those situations was a good thing. How often this happens nationwide nobody can say, but I have personal knowledge quite a few.
I find it confusing that you read the link but missed that Kellerman’s study controlled for drug use. The limitations of the study were acknowledged and questions like yours were addressed. In no demographic split did the researchers find that keeping a gun in the home was effective for protection, but instead increased the risk of being a victim of firearm homicide.