Any Study Of 'Gun Violence' Should Include How Guns Save Lives

Discussion in 'Gun Control' started by 6Gunner, May 9, 2019.

  1. 6Gunner

    6Gunner Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2010
    Messages:
    5,635
    Likes Received:
    4,052
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Yeah; this kind of information gives the antis the vapors....

    Any Study Of 'Gun Violence' Should Include How Guns Save Lives
    Paul Hsieh

    Contributor


    After the Parkland, Florida shootings, some are calling for more government research into “gun violence.”

    Currently, the federal government’s Centers For Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) is restricted by Congress from using tax money to promote gun control (although not from conducting research into gun-related violence). Some legislators want to remove this funding restriction. Separate from the federal government, the state of California has created a “gun violence research center” and the state of New Jersey is considering establishing a similar program. Similarly, university professors such as David Hemenway of the Harvard Injury Control Research Center, have called for more federal funding of gun violence research.

    Many gun rights advocates are wary of such research, fearing it will be used to fuel a partisan political agenda. Dr. Timothy Wheeler of Doctors for Responsible Gun Ownership has noted that CDC has a track record of anti-gun bias. In the 1990s, one CDC official even stated that his goal was to create a public perception of gun ownership as something “dirty, deadly — and banned.”

    But regardless of whether “gun violence” research is being conducted by the federal government, states, universities, or private organizations, there are three key principles all public health researchers and firearms policy analysts should remember.

    The first principle is:

    * Firearms save lives as well take lives.

    If one imagines that guns in civilian hands are used solely as murder weapons, it makes sense to ban or strictly regulate them.

    But millions of Americans legally carry a firearm every day, and most cite self-defense as their primary reason. The overwhelming majority of the time, those guns are never drawn in anger. But innocent civilians can and do sometimes use their guns in self-defense. Any discussion of firearms policy must acknowledge the lives saved by legal use of guns as well as the lives lost by criminal use.

    The numbers of defensive gun uses (DGUs) each year is controversial. But one study ordered by the CDC and conducted by The National Academies’ Institute of Medicine and National Research Council reported that, “Defensive use of guns by crime victims is a common occurrence”:

    Almost all national survey estimates indicate that defensive gun uses by victims are at least as common as offensive uses by criminals, with estimates of annual uses ranging from about 500,000 to more than 3 million, in the context of about 300,000 violent crimes involving firearms in 2008.

    Another study estimates there are 1,029,615 DGUs per year “for self-protection or for the protection of property at home, work, or elsewhere” excluding “military service, police work, or work as a security guard,” (within the range of the National Academies’ paper), yielding an estimate of 162,000 cases per year where someone “almost certainly would have been killed” if they “had not used a gun for protection.”

    (In comparison, there were 11,208 homicide deaths by firearm in the US in 2012. There were a total of 33,636 deaths due to “injury by firearms,” of which the majority were suicides, 21,175.)

    [​IMG]
    SIG Pro SP2022, one of many pistols suitable for personal defense.

    A second key principle in judging gun violence research:

    * The value of firearms in the hands of law-abiding citizens should be measured in terms of lives saved or crimes prevented, not criminals killed.

    As an example of the latter type of analysis, one recent Washington Poststory reported that, “For every criminal killed in self-defense, 34 innocent people die”:

    In 2012, there were 8,855 criminal gun homicides in the FBI’s homicide database, but only 258 gun killings by private citizens that were deemed justifiable, which the FBI defines as “the killing of a felon, during the commission of a felony, by a private citizen.” That works out to one justifiable gun death for every 34 unjustifiable gun deaths.

    However, this comparison can be misleading. An armed civilian does not have to kill the criminal in order to save an innocent life. As the National Research Council notes, “[E]ffective defensive gun use need not ever lead the perpetrator to be wounded or killed. Rather, to assess the benefits of self-defense, one needs to measure crime and injury averted. The particular outcome of an offender is of little relevance.”

    We don’t judge whether the police are doing a good job by the numbers of criminals they kill each year, but rather by how well they stop crime. The same should be true in judging the effectiveness of civilian DGUs.

    The exact number of DGUs is not precisely known. There are reasons to think the actual number may be higher or lower than the figures cited. For example, some respondents to surveys may consciously or unconsciously exaggerate the degree of peril they were in, which could lead to an overestimate of DGUs.

    On the other hand, gun policy researcher Brian Doherty explains how reported numbers could also be an underestimate. Just as many sexual assault victims don’t report those crimes to the authorities, many law-abiding people who successfully use a gun to deter a crime without firing a shot may similarly choose to avoid reporting these incidents to the police:

    [Y]our possession or use of the weapon might be a matter of greater concern to the cops than whatever the intruder or criminal you were repelling was up to. They’ll doubtless never lay hands on him; you are right there, for any investigation and harassment the cops might want to call forth. Many gun owners or gun users might see little good and much possible bad arising from calling the cops after a DGU incident, and thus many or even most would never make a police blotter, never make a newspaper.

    It’s relatively easy to measure the number of lives lost due to criminal gun violence. It’s harder to measure the number of lives saved by legal defensive gun use. Murders that didn’t happen don’t show up on crime statistics. This is just another example of Bastiat’s classic principle of “the seen vs. the unseen.”

    Finally, a third principle to remember in analyzing public health gun violence research:

    * The right to self-defense does not depend on statistics and numbers.

    Doherty makes an important point about the ultimate relevance of any such research studies: “However large the number of DGUs, or how small; and however large the number of accidents or tragedies caused by guns, or how small, the right and ability to choose for yourself how to defend yourself and your family — at home or away from it — remains, and that numerical debate should have no particular bearing on it.”

    One of my friends had to use his legal concealed handgun to protect himself when attacked by two knife-wielding criminals. I’ve written about his story here.

    For those who wonder whether AR-15-style rifles have a legitimate self-defense use, took a look at this story where someone used an AR-15 to protect himself during a home invasion against 3 black-clad intruders, and another story where a man used his AR-15 to stop a knife attack against others.

    It is our inalienable right to self-defense that makes me a proud supporter of responsible gun ownership and of the Second Amendment. Guns can be used for good as well as evil purposes.

    We would consider it irresponsible for a public health researcher to study only the negative effects of, say, caffeine consumption without also considering the positive effects. If public health researchers wish to have credibility with the millions of gun rights supporters such as myself, they should endeavour to quantify the very real benefits of legal gun ownership in addition to the genuine harms caused by illegal gun use. Studies that discuss only the latter without the former are incomplete at best — and dishonest at worst.

    I support good public policy based on objective research, informed by a proper understanding of individual rights — including the right to self-defense. If we’re going to engage in gun violence research, let’s do it right — by recognizing both the positive and negative aspects of civilian firearm ownership.

    [​IMG]
    Paul Hsieh

    Contributor
    I am a physician with long-standing interests in health policy, medical ethics and free-market economics. I am the co-founder of Freedom and Individual Rights in Medicin...

    any-study-of-gun-violence-should-include-how-guns-save-lives
     
    Turtledude and Ddyad like this.
  2. TOG 6

    TOG 6 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2015
    Messages:
    30,450
    Likes Received:
    8,850
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The anti-gun left does not care about any positive benefits of firearms in society - they know the state cannot have a monopoly ion force so long as the people remain armed.
     
    Turtledude, Ddyad and Well Bonded like this.
  3. Xenamnes

    Xenamnes Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2015
    Messages:
    19,041
    Likes Received:
    5,416
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Even MSNBC has acknowledged such in its covering of the situation in the nation of Venezuela.
     
    Ddyad likes this.
  4. kazenatsu

    kazenatsu Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2017
    Messages:
    11,484
    Likes Received:
    3,173
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yes, much of this "gun violence" includes thugs shooting thugs, street conflicts between rival gangs, women shooting their would-be rapist, attempted robberies that are thwarted, etc.
    Just what percent of this gun violence involves an innocent victim??
     
    Last edited: May 10, 2019
  5. dagosa

    dagosa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2010
    Messages:
    9,122
    Likes Received:
    1,541
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yawn. The more guns, the greater the. chance of gun violence. While the NRA is the criminal's best friend, their supporters seeml oblivious to their sippprt of anyone with money.
     
    Galileo, flogger and Bowerbird like this.
  6. 6Gunner

    6Gunner Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2010
    Messages:
    5,635
    Likes Received:
    4,052
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    "Yawn" is right. Your propaganda and nonsensical assertions are boring in the extreme. Spare me "the NRA is the criminal's best friend"; YOU are the one trying to give criminals a safer work environment.
     
  7. Xenamnes

    Xenamnes Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2015
    Messages:
    19,041
    Likes Received:
    5,416
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Except for the fact that such cannot actually be proven. Either on the part of yourself, or those that employ yourself for the purpose of spreading a specific message.

    Yet another claim that cannot actually be prove on the part of yourself.
     
    6Gunner and Well Bonded like this.
  8. dagosa

    dagosa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2010
    Messages:
    9,122
    Likes Received:
    1,541
    Trophy Points:
    113
    We’ve gone through this before. There are no statistics that show otherwise. Please stop fainting you’re really that unaware. Your embarrassing yourself....... Again.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...her-developed-country/?utm_term=.c5b3de386ef1
     
    Last edited: May 11, 2019
    Galileo and Bowerbird like this.
  9. An Taibhse

    An Taibhse Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2016
    Messages:
    5,339
    Likes Received:
    3,534
    Trophy Points:
    113
    6Gunner likes this.
  10. Galileo

    Galileo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2015
    Messages:
    2,042
    Likes Received:
    281
    Trophy Points:
    83
    LOL, in other words people were asked to guess what would have happened if they had not been armed. Unfortunately for anti gun-safety activists, this survey is contradicted by studies which show a higher risk of homicide in homes where guns are kept.
     
    Last edited: May 11, 2019
    dagosa and Bowerbird like this.
  11. Bowerbird

    Bowerbird Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 13, 2009
    Messages:
    49,382
    Likes Received:
    27,251
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    As opposed to using blogs and NRA AstroTurf? That is when I can actually see any validation of any point from the right
     
    Galileo and dagosa like this.
  12. flogger

    flogger Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2013
    Messages:
    3,474
    Likes Received:
    134
    Trophy Points:
    63
    1.5 million needless violent deaths in the last 50 years tells you all you need to know. They can't count and whats worse they seem to like it that way :(
     
    Galileo and Bowerbird like this.
  13. dagosa

    dagosa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2010
    Messages:
    9,122
    Likes Received:
    1,541
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You show NOTHING but woo woo .
     
    Galileo and Bowerbird like this.
  14. dagosa

    dagosa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2010
    Messages:
    9,122
    Likes Received:
    1,541
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The positive benefits ? Like arming criminals and terrorists which the nra promotes.
     
    Last edited: May 12, 2019
    flogger, Galileo and Bowerbird like this.
  15. Xenamnes

    Xenamnes Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2015
    Messages:
    19,041
    Likes Received:
    5,416
    Trophy Points:
    113
    As the member Bowerbird is so fond of claiming, causation is not the same thing as correlation. An absence of statistics dedicated to showing defensive firearms use, does not mean such does not exist or otherwise is not occurring.
     
  16. Xenamnes

    Xenamnes Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2015
    Messages:
    19,041
    Likes Received:
    5,416
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Once again, cite precisely where the NRA has promoted arming criminal and terrorists. Prove that the claim is legitimate, rather than made up nonsense on the part of yourself.
     
    6Gunner likes this.
  17. Xenamnes

    Xenamnes Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2015
    Messages:
    19,041
    Likes Received:
    5,416
    Trophy Points:
    113
    How exactly do the deaths count as being "needless" in this regard? Explain such.
     
  18. dagosa

    dagosa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2010
    Messages:
    9,122
    Likes Received:
    1,541
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You’re an avid nra supporter and you don’t even know their agenda ? Ha ha funny.
     
    Bowerbird and Galileo like this.
  19. dagosa

    dagosa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2010
    Messages:
    9,122
    Likes Received:
    1,541
    Trophy Points:
    113
    This trilogy....longer then Star Wars, supports the idea that guns should only be in the hands of qualified individuals. That’s not the POV of the nra or its gunaholic supporters. They feel like every walking humanoid should be born with a gun in their hand. They DONT BELIEVE IN GUN REGULATION.
     
    Bowerbird and Galileo like this.
  20. dagosa

    dagosa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2010
    Messages:
    9,122
    Likes Received:
    1,541
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gunaholics DONT support any regulation. Criminals get guns as fast as gun makers can make them much to the joy of the nra. If guns saved lives, we wouldn’t lead the civilized world in gun deaths. This entire exercise is bogus. We have more gun deaths then any civilized country and more guns per capita then any industrialized nations. We have the guns. WTF good are they ? What gunaholics of the nra do support, is arming everyone......
     
    Last edited: May 12, 2019
    Bowerbird and Galileo like this.
  21. Xenamnes

    Xenamnes Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2015
    Messages:
    19,041
    Likes Received:
    5,416
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Once again. Cite precisely where the NRA has promoted arming criminal and terrorists. Prove that the claim is legitimate, rather than made up nonsense on the part of yourself.

    Repeating the same baseless claims over and over is not evidence. Either cite the actual proof, or recant the erroneous statement. It literally is that easy.
     
  22. Dispondent

    Dispondent Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2009
    Messages:
    30,489
    Likes Received:
    4,220
    Trophy Points:
    113
    So according to your logic, the most likely killers would be the workers in gun manufactories or gun stores, those folks are exposed to guns more than anyone...
     
  23. An Taibhse

    An Taibhse Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2016
    Messages:
    5,339
    Likes Received:
    3,534
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Another baseless assertion, one that relative to you, I have provided a library of references compared to your comic books imbued with vaporous Leftist dogma and myth.
     
    6Gunner likes this.
  24. dagosa

    dagosa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2010
    Messages:
    9,122
    Likes Received:
    1,541
    Trophy Points:
    113
    It’s called, a correlation. If it were one or two states, or one or two countries, then your point might be worth listening to. But, we have fifty states and many industrialized countries and except for the occasional outliers, it’s spot on. More guns, more gun crimes. Anyone with any thought process would get that opportunity to access guns creates higher instances if gun use, both for good and bad. The idea of gun regulation is to encourage legal ownership and discourage illegal ownership. That’s what regulation is about. Gunaholics want to make it a binary choice because the criminal nra promotes it. No one has to prove they are a legal buyer in private sales NOW. Criminals luv it.
     
    Last edited: May 12, 2019
    flogger likes this.
  25. dagosa

    dagosa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2010
    Messages:
    9,122
    Likes Received:
    1,541
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I guess you don’t know the difference between a state and a manufacturing plant do you.
     

Share This Page