Another Home Invasion thwarted by gun---held by brave 12 yr old girl

Im about 8" taller and 20 lbs heavier and that puts me at just about exactly the same size / strength disadvantage.

 

then that would support the idea of keeping a unloaded gun for defensive purposes - I think that might be a good idea

but the risk of death by suicide, or non-intentional homicide outweighs any benefit in self-defense that a gun might provide.

 

my point is that cross-cultural comparisons are invalid. So that's the opposite of "moot."

actually, if you look at households with no criminal background, the same holds true. So your explanation doesn't hold up.

 

Actually, Wolverine was correct: There have been no studies that control for criminality that buttress your argument.

 

So in the US its guns, but everywhere else its something other than guns?

How convenient.

The argument is moot.

Nope.

Citation needed.

 

They don't and you have not even proven correlation

What you have done is post some raw data from Nation master and "claimed" victory - there was no analysis of the data, there was no examination of other factors involved. It is the internet equivalent of plonking some raw meat on a table and claiming that it is a three course gourmet meal

In other words this is a furphy from beginning to end

 

No I am telling you to stop believing that you are helpless without a gun. Your greatest weapon is not a gun. or your size or even your hands and feet - it is what is between your ears. You won't always have a gun to hand but hopefully you will always have a working brain

 

http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/research/hicrc/firearms-research/gun-ownership-and-use/index.html

your point is moot (you keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means)

 

If you look at the dates of the stories--with the exception of one--they took place in 2012--three within the last 40 days, one in July of this year. All in my neck of the woods. Home invasions happen much more frequently then gun accidents. I think the important thing is to give law abiding citizens the ability to protect themselves. But from what I gather--- you might trust the intruder more then the law abiding citizen.

 

Why would I need to prove a correlation is I claim there is none?

So a good portion of countries having a higher suicide rate per capita than the US (despite strict gun control)isn't convincing? I posted data that directly and irreconcilably contradicts your claims, the least you could do is concede the point.

Thats cute.

 

Ah, so its only guns in the US but those other countries don't count.

Thats cute.

Correlation =/= causation

Your argument is moot.

 

Hmmmmmm - twisting words again?

The studies are relevant because the factors which made inter country comparisons (something you did not even do) invalid have either been accounted for or they are similar population profiles

Now, if you want to come up with similar studies done across countries that account for causative factors of suicide not gun related as these studies did then by all means please post it.

Meantime just posting raw data that does not support your claims is a sad fail

 

Are you still maintaining the girl was acting unlawfully, immorally, or, heaven forbid, unethically?? Seems to me she excercised the full maximum of her Rights.
Seems to me she waited until she was sure he wasn't going to leave before she shot him.
In cases like this, assume the worst. He was a stranger, acted like a stranger, and treated like a stranger in another person's house.
Lesson learned: Do not go into houses you have no business being in. If you stay out, you wont get shot.
Simple..... No B&E, No bullet holes

 

There are countries with strict gun control that have higher suicide rates than the US.

Your argument is moot.

 

The only argument you have is that countries with more firearms will have more firearms related suicides.

 

Sorry but just saying "your argument is moot" does not "win" a debate

And I have noticed that the goal posts keep shifting as this has been stated and re-stated by yourself. If you want to show there is no correlation I would suggest you address the Harvard studies

 

Ah! but that was not your original claim - your claim was that countries with strict gun control had higher suicide rates

In fact you have failed to show any comparison between guns ownership and suicide whilst I have provided research papers

But please think on this - there is parasuicide and suicide. Suicide is when people succeed and kill themselves. Parasuicide is where people do not succeed. It is more than probable that those countries with strong gun laws or lower gun ownership or, in the case of Australia, mandated securing of firearms, then you will see fewer suicides (successful because guns are more likely to kill you) than parasuicides

 

Yet, in several of the age groups, Australia has a higher suicide rate than the US.

Guns =/= suicide.

Do you have anything constructive to add? Or simply reverting to your silly semantics game?

 

She did exactly the right thing. Violence should be an absolute last resort, but if its necessary one should not hesitate. Smart girl, smart mom.

 

Even if it wasn't she was hiding in a closet, even if she, a twelve year old girl, were able to get a swing in on a grown man she would have done so from a weak position and probably would not have done much damage and would be over-powered. This way the man was scared off because guns can kill, whereas if she were armed with less and tried to defend herself (which it sounds like she no doubt would have given the way she reacted) she could have been easily overpowered and her actions would probably have incited the man to violence.

I really hate when gun control people assume that everyone who wants to own a gun for security reasons is living in some hollywood fantasy land. Please drop the pretentious attitude we are all adults and capable of civil, respectful discourse.