# Stupid Gun news of the day (Part 1) **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [January 29, 2013, 7:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-gun-news-of-the-day-part-1/648729 "2013-01-29T19:01:55Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 171
**Author:** ![Buck\_Godot](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/buck_godot/32/6573_2.png) [@Buck\_Godot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Buck_Godot)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2013, 4:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-gun-news-of-the-day-part-1/648729/3401 "2013-12-05T16:24:21Z")
> [@Kable](#): > > It must suck to live in such fear. Less than it sucks to live in the fear that armed bandits can to bust in at you at any time so need to be always armed. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2013, 4:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-gun-news-of-the-day-part-1/648729/3402 "2013-12-05T16:41:19Z")
And less yet than it must suck to be so mentally ill as to think that’s a more realistic possibility than that of your gun being used to kill you, or one of your family, or an innocent stranger. ---
**Author:** ![DragonAsh](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/db5fbb/32.png) [@DragonAsh](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DragonAsh)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2013, 4:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-gun-news-of-the-day-part-1/648729/3403 "2013-12-05T16:51:22Z")
> [@Kable](#): > > It must suck to live in such fear. And yet I’m not the one so scared I feel like I must carry a gun around for protection. Imagine that. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2013, 4:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-gun-news-of-the-day-part-1/648729/3404 "2013-12-05T16:54:28Z")
In fairness, ISTM the Stranger Danger argument is mainly a rationalization for the pleasure of wearing a strap-on. The purported fear is a result, not a cause. ---
**Author:** ![steronz](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steronz/32/11765_2.png) [@steronz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/steronz)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2013, 5:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-gun-news-of-the-day-part-1/648729/3405 "2013-12-05T17:18:46Z")
This “fear” angle is really something that needs to be addressed, though. We know that the majority of gun deaths are suicides, and the majority of the remainder are gang-related. The CDC says that in LA it’s roughly 65% gang related for the 19-24 crowd. I’m not in that age group, but if you look at things that are likely to kill me based solely on my age, there’s about a .004% chance that I’m going to be murdered with a gun in a given year. That’s only slightly higher than the odds of me dying from coronary heart disease (.003%). That doesn’t take into account accidents or injuries from guns, but it’s safe to say that I don’t stay awake at night worrying about being taken out by an armed attacker. Taking that into account, I’m perfectly content to point and laugh at CCW holders who carry every day thinking that they’re going to be a hero. Statistically they’re wasting their time, and they’d probably be better off carrying some quick clot and a CAT, with maybe a defibrillator in the car. But those same statistics also say that I have nothing to fear from gun owners. If everyone is armed, it’s unlikely to affect me in any way. I think the massive number of guns in this country is a problem for _society_, because of suicides and gang violence, and I think both issues would be improved if there were just fewer guns around. But that’s a rational decision not made out of fear. ---
**Author:** ![YogSothoth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/8edcca/32.png) [@YogSothoth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/YogSothoth)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2013, 5:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-gun-news-of-the-day-part-1/648729/3406 "2013-12-05T17:36:33Z")
I think fear is just a word thrown around for people, mostly gun owners, to feel masculine, as if having no fear makes you more of a man. I fear being shot by my own gun. I also fear being bitten by a dog, or falling into an open pothole, or accidentally putting my hand in a boiling pot. Some of those are rational, some are not, but it does absolutely nothing for anyone’s argument about anything to state that I fear those things. Pro-gun people want to characterize everyone else as cowering chipmunks masturbating into a maxi pad while crying but that doesn’t change the odds of being shot by their gun or anyone else’s (unless someone has something against crying and masturbating chipmunks). Pro-gun people are afraid of being helpless in a situation. Terrified, even, so much that they risk their own lives to carry around dangerous items that is statistically more likely to hurt them than someone else. And anti-gun people are afraid of being shot by those with guns. Its the same fear, just directed towards someone else. We’re all afraid, that’s why there’s a debate to begin with ---
**Author:** ![Truman\_Burbank](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/ecc23a/32.png) [@Truman\_Burbank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Truman_Burbank)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2013, 6:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-gun-news-of-the-day-part-1/648729/3407 "2013-12-05T18:53:22Z")
Good post, **Yog**. I guess a lot of it boils down to the fact that humans are notoriously poor at calculating proabilities. ---
**Author:** ![Kable](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ed655f/32.png) [@Kable](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kable)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2013, 7:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-gun-news-of-the-day-part-1/648729/3408 "2013-12-05T19:04:26Z")
> [@Buck\_Godot](#): > > Less than it sucks to live in the fear that armed bandits can to bust in at you at any time so need to be always armed. Is it? ---
**Author:** ![Kable](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ed655f/32.png) [@Kable](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kable)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2013, 7:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-gun-news-of-the-day-part-1/648729/3409 "2013-12-05T19:05:34Z")
> [@DragonAsh](#): > > And yet I’m not the one so scared I feel like I must carry a gun around for protection. Imagine that. I carry a gun around and I don’t feel scared at all. ---
**Author:** ![Kable](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ed655f/32.png) [@Kable](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kable)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2013, 7:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-gun-news-of-the-day-part-1/648729/3410 "2013-12-05T19:12:37Z")
> [@YogSosoth](#): > > I think fear is just a word thrown around for people, mostly gun owners, to feel masculine, as if having no fear makes you more of a man. Mostly anti-gunners in this thread throwing the word around. [http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=16903081&postcount=3389](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=16903081&postcount=3389) Hentor projecting again, I guess. ---
**Author:** ![DragonAsh](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/db5fbb/32.png) [@DragonAsh](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DragonAsh)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2013, 7:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-gun-news-of-the-day-part-1/648729/3411 "2013-12-05T19:17:17Z")
> [@Kable](#): > > I carry a gun around and I don’t feel scared at all. Thanks for making my point for me. ---
**Author:** ![Kable](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ed655f/32.png) [@Kable](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kable)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2013, 7:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-gun-news-of-the-day-part-1/648729/3412 "2013-12-05T19:54:56Z")
> [@DragonAsh](#): > > Thanks for making my point for me. Your point is? ---
**Author:** ![YogSothoth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/8edcca/32.png) [@YogSothoth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/YogSothoth)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2013, 7:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-gun-news-of-the-day-part-1/648729/3413 "2013-12-05T19:58:17Z")
> [@Kable](#): > > Mostly anti-gunners in this thread throwing the word around. > > [http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=16903081&postcount=3389](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=16903081&postcount=3389) > > Hentor projecting again, I guess. I should say that I meant when fear is used by pro-gun people, I think those are its intentions. When the same word is used by anti-gun people, we have different intentions. The common caricature of a gun establishing or saving manhood is not unintentional. Guns are a penis substitute for a lot of male gun owners and the gun manufacturers know that and market to it. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2013, 8:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-gun-news-of-the-day-part-1/648729/3414 "2013-12-05T20:06:22Z")
> [@Zeriel](#): > > Look, I’ll say it again–I’m pro-gun-rights Your position on strict liability and the death penalty for negligent storage/handling accidents with guns seems a bit anti-gun… [http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=16799229&postcount=3231](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=16799229&postcount=3231) But I believe that you consider yourself a supporter of gun rights and would protect basic gun rights > [@](#): > > every defensive gun use study I’ve ever seen, including every one you’ve linked here, has suffered from SEVERE methodological flaws. Including the DoJ estimates. > > I’ll continue to go on record as believing it is not possible, in this political climate, to do a defensive gun use study using any data-gathering methodology short of, say, attaching always-on gunsight cameras to a representative sample of gun owners who are prepared to consider defensive gun use an option. I’ll add that we will never have the sort of evidence in this area that people like hentor demand before he considers it persuasive. Not because we demand this level of certainty in other areas of public policy but because he looks for every excuse to ignore the data that we do have. > [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](#): > > The isssue with defensive gun uses isn’t a statistical technicality. All you have done is come back to me with reasons why the studies are not conclusive proof of my position (and I accept that) but ALL the evidence points to large numbers of defensive gun use. You have presented NO evidence that the number of defensive gun use is small or trivial compared to the number of gun murders by legal gun owners. > [@](#): > > The problem is that you aren’t rationally motivated about your position to begin with :dubious: So I’m a gun owner that supports licensing and registration while you support an Assault Weapons Ban even after its retardness is explained to you and youthink I’m being irrational about guns?:rolleyes: Here’s the thing. Putting aside the constitution, I would reconsider my position if you could provide credible evidence that legal gun owners commit more crime and violence with guns than they prevent with guns. It would be more compelling if you limited the universe to registered gun owners with carry permits. What would it take for you to reconsider your position? Would it even make a difference to you if I proved beyond a reasonable doubt that legal gun owners prevented more crime and violence than they committed? > [@](#): > > so facts and evidence can’t really change anything for you. Really? Aside from the statistics on gun deaths, what facts have you presented? Here are some of the facts that you seem to be incapable of working into your analysis. You ignore the fact that the majority of gun crimes are committed by a very small subset of the population; you ignore the fact that defensive gun use vastly exceeds gun crime by legal gun owners; you ignore the fact that the Assault Weapons Ban has no effect on gun violence; you ignore the fact that getting rid of guns doesn’t mean that you would reduce the murder count by the number of gun murders in prior years, even those by legal gun owners. > [@](#): > > You feel vulnerable and scared, and guns make you feel more in control. I feel pretty safe. I live in a good neighborhood and I don’t think I will ever need a gun for self defense from other human beings or overthrowing tyranny. > [@](#): > > No study can touch that emotional connection, just like one cannot simply give someone with OCD facts that make their compulsions go away. I no longer have any interest in trying and I came to see that all the time I was spending trying pointlessly to help you understand science was getting in the way of my actually publishing my own. So, show me a study that supports your position already. All you have is criticism for the studies that are already out there. > [@](#): > > Terry McAuliffe won the governors race in Virginia, despite supporting gun control and having endorsed the AWB. I know you’re convinced that opposing gun control makes Democrats stupid losers, but you never have produced evidence to support that. I live in Virginia and I followed his race fairly closely. I voted for Terry McAulliffe because guns are not important enough for me to not vote against somebody like Cuccinelli but there are people that will vote for Cuccinelli because of the gun issue. He mumbled his way through every question about gun control until the government shutdown gave him a double digit lead in the polls. He specifically avoided answering questions about the assault weapons ban until he was up by double digits. He deflected questions about gun control with statements about supporting the second amendment (he might say something about supporting background checks at gun shows) but he didn’t confirm his position on stupid shit like the Assault Weapons Ban until he thought he had the election in the bag and even then he ended up winning by a fairly slim margin. If you think that the McAullife race is an affirmation that gun control is a winning issue for Democrats then you either don’t know all the pertinent information or you’re just crazy. > [@DragonAsh](#): > > \*\*Damuri Ajashi: \*\*The number of gun deaths has been rising slowly but steadily each year since 1999. Over 400,000 people have died from firearms in that time frame. Look at that number again: _400,000 people._ > **[File:Ushomicidesbyweapon.svg](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ushomicidesbyweapon.svg)** > > Original file (SVG file, nominally 846 × 625 pixels, file size: 601 KB) > Click on a date/time to view the file as it appeared at that time. > You cannot overwrite this file. There are no pages that use this file. Its been relatively flat since 1999. It is down a SHITLOAD since 1993. > [@](#): > > Do you seriously believe that guns \*saved \*more than 400,000 lives in that time span? That more than 80 times a day, someone is using a firearm to successfully defend themselves from attack I think that a good comparison should compare the number of gun deaths caused by accidents and gun murders by people legally allowed to possess a gun to the number of lives saved by guns. And I think the number of lives saved is greater. I think the number of lives saved most probably exceeds the number of all gun murders. > [@Lumpy](#): > > Change “more” to “less”, and that statement fits the majority of anti-gunners. When people complain they feel “intimidated” and “threatened” because a person who’s been law-abiding and responsible enough to get a permit open carries a holstered firearm, for example. No amount of logic or evidence seems to change a hoplophobe’s unshakable conviction that only a delusional yahoo would ever _want_ to carry a gun, and that _ipso facto_ gun carriers are an existential threat. That this is an incredibly arrogant slap in the face to permit holders seems to get overlooked too. Its not their fault. A lot of them have been raised with a deep seated fear of guns and it has been reinforced by the media and those around them to the point it haas become an article of faith and a bit of a tribal marker. > [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > A. Where? and B. If you have it, why the fuck do you keep \*asking \*for it? Because, despite providing the links to the studies, you seem to keep forgetting that defensive gun use exists when you make statements that only present one side of the argument. > [@](#): > > Wrong. YOU fail to understand the difference between data and handwaving. There is a reason why the only gun thread left on this board is in the pit and not great debates. You are applying unreasonable standards to defensive gun use studies before you will admit them into evidence. And when these studies are admitted into evidence, the policy rationale for banning guns becomes very weak. When you add the theory that a bun ban will not be observed by the criminals and you add the fact that most gun murders (and probably an even greater percentage of gun crimes) are committed by criminals, the policy rationale for a gun ban virtually evaporates. The only thing you have left is your visceral reaction to guns and you undying faith that banning guns would be good for us. > [@](#): > > And still account for a damn large number of killings, don’t they? Yet you insist on not considering that little problem. :rolleyes: THIS is why I keep asking about defensive gun use. You look at the number of gun deaths caused by allowing law abiding citizens to own guns and stop there. You do not compare the number of gun murders committed by legal gun owners against the number of defensive gun uses. > [@](#): > > Show us the data. Show us that DGU’s exist in numbers greater than, or even comparable to, the murder rate. Or else you could STFU, yanno. /sigh > **[Defensive gun use](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defensive_gun_use)** > > Defensive gun use (DGU) is the use or presentation of a firearm for self-defense, defense of others or, in some cases, protecting property. The frequency of incidents involving DGU and their effectiveness in providing safety and reducing crime are controversial issues in gun politics and criminology, chiefly in the United States.: 64  Different authors and studies employ different criteria for what constitutes a defensive gun use which leads to controversy in comparing statistical results. Per Es... “[Hemenway] finds the NCVS figures more reliable, yielding estimates of around 100,000 defensive gun uses per year. Applying different adjustments, other social scientists suggest that between 250,000 and 370,000 incidences per year.” NOW will you stfu and stop embarrassing everyone on your side of the argument? > [@](#): > > Then where was that in the bill? Show us. Or admit you’re hallucinating, and as such should not be allowed to touch a gun yourself. Do you seriously want me to cite back to news stories during that time period when your side was pushing for an Assault Weapons ban? THIS is the sort of thing that makes people on your side of the argument cringe. You not only erode your credibility, you erode theirs. Perhaps you have blocked that embarrassing period out of your mind. When the gun nuts explained that the Assault Weapons Ban was effectively banning largely cosmetic features on a gun and the tide turned against the gun grabbers. IIRC fewer people favored and more people opposed the weapons ban 6 months after Newtown than 6 months before Newtown, largely due to better information about what an AWB meant. They didn’t put the AWB in the manchin/toomey bill if thats what you mean but Feinstein had her own bill. > **[Assault Weapons Ban of 2013 (2013 - S. 150)](https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/113/s150)** > > A bill to regulate assault weapons, to ensure that the right to keep and bear arms is not unlimited, and for other purposes. It failed by a vote of 60 to 40 in a Democratically controlled Senate. > [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > Is that an excuse for not facing the problem of the data and conclusions not being what you wish they were? Almost exactly the opposite. All the studies have numbers that the gun grabbers think are too high and provide some support for the position that gun ownership by law abiding citizens is a net benefit to society. > [@steronz](#): > > And I’ve gone on record saying that counting defensive gun uses is and always has been a distraction, because it’s a pointless statistic. All you want to know is if guns make people safer, right? So take two populations controlled for all factors, except one population is armed and the other population isn’t armed. Which one suffers more deaths and injuries over a period of time? Problem solved, no reason to count defensive gun uses or attach cameras to anything. Controlling for all other factors is tricky business. You might as well control for all other factors in the study itself. What Zeriel’s statement about attaching a dashboard cam to guns points out is how ridiculous the level of proof the gun grabbers are going to demand before they consider the evidence. > [@DragonAsh](#): > > We don’t feel ‘intimidated’ or ‘threatened’ simply because someone is carrying a holstered firearm. We feel threatened because there is an awful lot of evidence that suggests introducing guns into just about any scenario imaginable not only rarely improves the situation for the parties involved, it increases the danger for everyone around you. If \*you \*were the only one in danger from your penis extension, nobody would give a rat’s ass. > > Incidents of armed, non-LEO people stopping/killing armed criminals in the act of a felony are rare and wonderous events - and even then you need luck on your side. You see, the thing is that the NCVS an ongoing study by the Department of Justice, says that armed citizens engage in defensive gun use 100,000 per year. Other estimates range from 250,00 to millions per year. How many times do you think legal gun owners commit crimes (including murder) with guns? You might believe that you have a sense of whats going on but you disregard data in favor of anecdote. > [@](#): > > You’re correct in one sense tho: given the tremendous damage guns cause vs the miniscule ‘benefit’ :rolleyes: they offer even under the most generous of assumptions The most generous assumptions would give some weight to Kleck’s studies that place defensive gun use at around 2.5 million times per year. With defense of life accounting for 15-30% of those dgu’s. So under the most generous assumptions, guns save 300,000 to 700,000 lives every year while there are only about 12,000 gun murders every year right now. now I’m not saying these are the actual numbers but you have this incorrect assumption that the numbers are so overwhelmingly in your favor that you don’t even have to take a look at them. Its kind of a foregone conclusion in your mind. > [@](#): > > and given the rarity that you would ever both need and be able to defend yourself from death or bodily harm with your gun, only a delusional yahoo would want to carry around a gun for ‘protection’. Only a delusional yahoo should want a gun in the house for ‘defense purposes’; not when there are far more effective, cheap, and perfectly safe means of intruder-proofing your home. I never have to worry about my security alarm system accidentally shooting my son in the head. And a criminal never has to worry about an alarm shooting them in the dead either. So how is an alarm cheaper and more effective than a gun and a dog? As far as I can tell, unless you pay a monthly subscription (and fee for a land line which can be cut or a cellular connection which costs more), an alarm is about as useful in detecting burglars as a dog and while the dog requires more maintenance, they provide all sorts of other benefits (and burdens). The average response time from crime to police showing up at your door is very variable but is generally measured in minutes. Response times of 45 minutes used to be commonplace (at my family’s warehouse the response times were sometimes measured in hours), with modern techniques and best practices, 5-20 minutes seems to be more common. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2013, 8:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-gun-news-of-the-day-part-1/648729/3415 "2013-12-05T20:07:43Z")
**Yog** : Not just males, either. 😉 They market to the fearful, those who think they need an Equalizer because they fear they’re inadequate to facing life situations without one. Some people get their courage from a bottle instead. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/the_other_waldo_pepper/32/12370_2.png) [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Other_Waldo_Pepper)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2013, 8:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-gun-news-of-the-day-part-1/648729/3416 "2013-12-05T20:11:59Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > They market to the fearful, those who think they need an Equalizer because they fear they’re inadequate to facing life situations without one. What, like cops and soldiers? ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2013, 8:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-gun-news-of-the-day-part-1/648729/3417 "2013-12-05T20:25:33Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > I’ll add that we will never have the sort of evidence in this area that people like hentor demand before he considers it persuasive. Not because we demand this level of certainty in other areas of public policy but because he looks for every excuse to ignore the data that we do have. Is that what you call it? “Data”? > [@](#): > > you ignore the fact that the Assault Weapons Ban has no effect on gun violence; We’ve never even \*tried \*a real one. > [@](#): > > I feel pretty safe. I live in a good neighborhood and I don’t think I will ever need a gun for self defense from other human beings or overthrowing tyranny. What do your neighbors think, though? They have a gun owner with symptoms of mental illness living near them. Are they safe from you? Or does that not matter? > [@](#): > > So, show me a study that supports your position already. All you have is criticism for the studies that are already out there. [Read](http://www.dailykos.com/news/GunFail). > [@](#): > > I think that a good comparison should compare the number of gun deaths caused by accidents and gun murders by people legally allowed to possess a gun to the number of lives saved by guns. And I think the number of lives saved is greater. I think the number of lives saved most probably exceeds the number of all gun murders. If only we had more than what a crazy man “thinks” to go by on that … > [@](#): > > A lot of them have been raised with a deep seated fear of guns and it has been reinforced by the media and those around them to the point it haas become an article of faith and a bit of a tribal marker. A sane man, by comparison to you, has a very real and reasonable fear of getting killed. > [@](#): > > Because, despite providing the links to the studies, you seem to keep forgetting that defensive gun use exists when you make statements that only present one side of the argument. Another of your insane lies. I acknowledge it every fucking time, Rain Man. > [@](#): > > You are applying unreasonable standards to defensive gun use studies before you will admit them into evidence. Asking them to reflect reality is “unreasonable”? A delusional person’s definition of that term is worth a laugh, but no more. > [@](#): > > most gun murders (and probably an even greater percentage of gun crimes) are committed by criminals OK, you do have some connection with reality, even if it’s as tenuous as that one. 😉 > [@](#): > > You do not compare the number of gun murders committed by legal gun owners against the number of defensive gun uses. No, as already stated, I ask that every single fucking time. You have no response except to claim that DGU’s do exist, therefore shut up. [quote Do you seriously want me to cite back to news stories during that time period when your side was pushing for an Assault Weapons ban? [/quote] The topic was Manchin-Toomey. It did \*not \*include one. Your obsessive compulsion on that point is more evidence of your mental illness. > [@](#): > > All the studies have numbers that the gun grabbers think are too high and provide some support for the position that gun ownership by law abiding citizens is a net benefit to society. All of them? Really? 😃 > [@](#): > > Controlling for all other factors is tricky business. Yet that’s what honest researchers _do_. > [@](#): > > So how is an alarm cheaper and more effective than a gun and a dog? Alarms don’t kill anybody unintentionally. Dogs can, but not nearly as much as firearms. You’re a sick, sick person. Get help. And turn in your license. You’re a menace to society. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2013, 8:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-gun-news-of-the-day-part-1/648729/3418 "2013-12-05T20:27:21Z")
> [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](#): > > What, like cops and soldiers? Marketing is different to the community of trained, (normally) responsible professionals. We’re talking about “law-abiding citizens” here. Try to keep up. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/the_other_waldo_pepper/32/12370_2.png) [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Other_Waldo_Pepper)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2013, 8:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-gun-news-of-the-day-part-1/648729/3419 "2013-12-05T20:41:28Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > Marketing is different to the community of trained, (normally) responsible professionals. > > We’re talking about “law-abiding citizens” here. Try to keep up. Golly, and here I am all being a law-abiding citizen who got training as a responsible professional in the armed forces. However shall they market to me? I wanted to have a weapon ready then, and by coincidence I of course still want that now – and for the same reason both times, the one you just summed up as needing an equalizer because I feel I might be inadequate to facing life situations without one. Please, relay the pitch I would’ve loved then and would presumably still love now. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2013, 9:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-gun-news-of-the-day-part-1/648729/3420 "2013-12-05T21:00:10Z")
Were you assigned to a procurement office in the Pentagon at contract time? Then you wouldn’t have been marketed to. Why does that need to be explained to you? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-gun-news-of-the-day-part-1/648729.md?page=170) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-gun-news-of-the-day-part-1/648729.md?page=172)