Are Gun Owners Overconfident About Their Ability to Use a Gun in Self Defense?

We're trying real hard to stop using cell phones while driving. WE voluntarily put up fences around pools. We are trying to train our dogs correctly.
We tend to thin it is easier to handle one thing at a time. After the dogs, we'll start with the socialists..........
Ya know, I think we have enough armed citizens that we can take over Oz and force our Bill of Rights on them.
How's that BB?

 

Physiological reasons? pfffffft.... I have been shooting guns since my father put a .22 revolver in my hands at 5 years old. Ive never had an accident, and have never killed someone I did not intend to. Neither have any of the gun owners I know, which is a very large list. Cars are far more dangerous than guns. You get lulled into a false sense of security, and can kind of zone out driving a car. When that gun is in your hands, you are very attentive to what is going on and where you are pointing it. All it takes is a little education to be a safe gun operator.

 

I am surprised you say this. It is something a person that would be pro girearm, pro self defense, and pro right to carry would say. When seconds count, the police are minutes away. Welcome to the club! You can now join our side. I will buy you a 6 month NRA member, a black jacket for all your patches, and your first complimentary Glack 19 pistol, complete with 50 rounds of ammunition.

 

How many child deaths do you think occur in the US due to guns? Obviously, you have completely missed the point. Even with precautions, many many more children die in drowning accidents each year. We don't make people register their pools though, do we?

What is it that you think would reduce child deaths from guns? Please do tell.

 

eradicate the Bill of Rights and do a total ban on firearms. The rest of the deaths are immaterial. the only ones that matter at all are the deaths of children by guns. THAT is the ONLY thing she cares about. Not the idiots that drive and cell, leave their kids in the hands of perverts and pedophiles, or leave their kids in the hands of liberals schools systems.
only guns...........

 

Does anyone have any data comparing the number of innocent people killed by guns in the United States as compared to the number of lives saved by using a gun in self defense? Seems a pretty straight foreward way to do a cost/benefit analysis to society of private gun ownership.

 

Then you are essentially saying that it is foolish to rely on a group such as the police to provide you with protection?

Is that not the same as saying that a person must exercise individual responsibility for taking care of themselves?

 

According to numerous studies, DGUs are around 500,000 to over 1 million defensive gun uses per year in this country. Is that not good enough for you? If those people who used a gun in self defense had no weapon to use, they could be dead. Maybe you are okay with leaving yourself and your family defenseless, but that is YOUR choice. Nobody else has the right to make such choices for others though.

 

Many DGUs a shot is never fired. Just the presence of a defensive firearm is enough to stop the threat. Many times these instances go unreported. The report by the CDC says there are about as many defensive uses as offensive uses.

 

While interesting that doesn't actually answer my question. But if you actually have access to the studies mentioned please post a link.

 

There is no way to compile how many lives are saved each year due to DGUs. Only an estimate on the DGUs themselves.

 

How does one go about codifying how many lives are saved in a defensive firearm situation? Do we count the number of rounds of ammunition the criminal individual had at their disposal at the time of being stopped, and assume each bullet remaining amounts to one life saved?

 

Actually, while the data base is small, civilian hit rates are higher than "well trained police officers" and seem to do quite well in defending themselves. Most IDPA and IPSC shooters are better trained than the majority of LEO's and practice much more often. LEO's will often join these clubs to really learn how to combat shoot and for realistic training scenarios. Also the threat to LEO's is different than for civilians. Bad guys KNOW the LEO's are armed. For civilian shootings it's a lot more ambiguous. A civilian is not going to make a traffic stop or go into a dark alley.

 

I got mugged in a dark alley that lead to my door of my apartment. I was armed with a licensed SW 9mm. I had my nose broken, one mugger had a 1150 FPS colonoscopy and the other had a catastrophic failure of his sphincter muscles upon seeing what happened to his co-conspirator. The lead detective was pissed at the smell in his car after throwing Mope #2 into the back seat

cops usually choose when they confront violent criminals since violent criminals usually don't initiate attacks against cops but rather counter-attack. Non LEO civilians usually never choose time place or manner of attacks

which is why civilians who are not cops should have the same or better weaponry as civilian cops

we are better shots as well

 

BTW nice shooting. Like I said the threat for civilians is different than LEO's which is a very important point. As I see it, for handguns the first weapon that civilians choose is many times a mistake, especially for women. The second purchase is usually more correct. A high capacity DAO, striker fired weapon in 9mm by S&W, Glock or Springfield is an excellent choice and takes away a lot of the "confusion" that the original poster stipulated. But back to the threat. No one is going to try to carjack a LEO. The average joe's risk IS carjacking, street crime or home invasion/burglary with the latter much more common. Civilians with minimal warning are for the most part able to deal with this, especially with anything remotely resembling a layered defense. The first two are bit more difficult. For the street crime threat, I just love snubs. They're fast, quick and deadly, not to mention concealable and very sneaky. I love the little Ruger LCR, but am intrigued about the S&W 638 2.5 barrel, that is if I can find one. I will usually break my rule regarding holsters and hammerless snubs with pocket carry, though it's usually carried in a Remora ankle holster.

 

This sounds like "Internet warrior" type of declaration

 

Except for the fact that he is right. Some cops only shoot when they have to qualify and perps have a better accuracy record than cops in shootouts.

 

Does not make it untrue.
The police that I've shot against in competition are generally just barely average shooters.

 

You would be quite wrong. Besides you probably dream about guys like me spreading you legs behind your head like bugs bunny and making you see God. And then you'd ask me to do it again. It's a statement of fact and you'll have to explain how my post is from an internet warrior. Please do. I haven't claimed any personal accomplishment or engaged in any form of braggadocio. But like most liberals you engage in a personal attack. Typical and cowardly.

 

actually he is right-and I was a federal LE office for almost a quarter of a century plus I am pretty much the top speed shooter in this area. I shoot a match almost every week, I missed tonight's steel league (shot one on wed) because I was too tired setting up the field for an archery tournament but I still average about 1000 rounds a month from April to october in speed events

 

<Mod Edit>

Detroit Woman Buys Gun After Being Robbed, Uses It To Fight Off 5 Man Home Invasion

After all, gun owners are overconfident about their ability to use a gun in self defense!

 

As the old saying goes, the truth is often stranger than fiction.

http://nation.time.com/2013/09/16/ready-fire-aim-the-science-behind-police-shooting-bystanders/

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/09/weekinreview/09baker.html?pagewanted=all

 

And what is the hit rate of civilians under the same circumstances? I mean it makes sense that civilians - someone who on average might go to a shooting range once in 10 years is far better than someone who gets repeated training at assessing and firing in a shoot out

 

People who jump through all the hoops to get a CCW license generally are shooters. Many get training over and beyond the mandatory proficiency test that's required to get the CCW.

When confronted with a threat, CCW carriers want to be able to defend themselves. From the daily reports of successful self defense uses, I'd say licensed carriers seem to shoot pretty good.

 

Criminals aren't civilians?