RancidSumo
Member
I have been hearing a lot of people say lately that a gun in the home is far more likely to be used against you then to be used in self defence. Anyone have a link to this statistic or preferably one debunking it?
Gun in Home
- Thread starter RancidSumo
- Start date
- Status
Beatnik
Member
Nobody has a link because it's a gratuitous assertion.
I think I remember reading that the whole idea springs from numbers on abuse situations where the wife defends herself.
We certainly don't want that happening, I guess....
I think I remember reading that the whole idea springs from numbers on abuse situations where the wife defends herself.
We certainly don't want that happening, I guess....
Ala Dan
Member in memoriam
Probably depends a lot, on whose home its in~! 
Properly trained
civilians, former members of the armed forces, law enforcement
retirees, and such aren't likely to be victims of crime in their
respective home IMHO.
The types that are more likely to get hurt with their own firearm,
are the ones that have one in the home; but know absolutely
nothing a'bout when and how too use it~! 
Properly trainedcivilians, former members of the armed forces, law enforcement
retirees, and such aren't likely to be victims of crime in their
respective home IMHO.
The types that are more likely to get hurt with their own firearm,
are the ones that have one in the home; but know absolutely
nothing a'bout when and how too use it~!
Gordon Fink
Member
cambeul41
Member
par0thead151
Member
- Joined
- Feb 20, 2008
- Messages
- 78
only if it is not secured or very well hidden.
none of mine will ever be used against me as they would take considerable effort to get access to.
none of mine will ever be used against me as they would take considerable effort to get access to.
Guitargod1985
Member
http://guncite.com/gun-control-kellermann-3times.html
Check this one as well.
Kellerman is one of the least intellectually honest people in the academic world.
This just goes to show that statistical analysis can yield completely different interpretations based on how the statistics are presented.
Check this one as well.
Kellerman is one of the least intellectually honest people in the academic world.
This just goes to show that statistical analysis can yield completely different interpretations based on how the statistics are presented.
Art Eatman
Moderator In Memoriam
Kellerman compared intra-family homicides and "dope deals gone bad" homicides--all within residences--with the number of dead burglars.
First off, intra-family homicides generally occur after a buildup over time, with prior police responses to complaints. Typically, the firearm had been legally acquired some lengthy period prior to the homicide.
Next problem is defining the success of burglary deterrence by the number of dead burglars. He didn't take into account the far larger numbers of times that burglars had been scared away by a resident's threat of shooting, nor did he take into account those burglars who were held by an armed resident until the police arrived.
SFAIK, the "taking away" of one's firearm by an intruder is a rather rare event. I've yet to read of it, anywhere...
First off, intra-family homicides generally occur after a buildup over time, with prior police responses to complaints. Typically, the firearm had been legally acquired some lengthy period prior to the homicide.
Next problem is defining the success of burglary deterrence by the number of dead burglars. He didn't take into account the far larger numbers of times that burglars had been scared away by a resident's threat of shooting, nor did he take into account those burglars who were held by an armed resident until the police arrived.
SFAIK, the "taking away" of one's firearm by an intruder is a rather rare event. I've yet to read of it, anywhere...
woad_yurt
Member
The only people that can get hurt by their own gun in their own home are those with their own gun in their own home. If one doesn't have a gun in one's home, one can't get hurt by a gun in one's home. This stupid thing is the same as saying that people who drive their own cars are more likely to to be hurt in their own cars than people who do not drive. It's meaningless.
In other words: If you don't have a gun, you won't get shot by your own gun. Thus you are safer without a gun. Holy crap!!!
In other words: If you don't have a gun, you won't get shot by your own gun. Thus you are safer without a gun. Holy crap!!!
Last edited:
the qoute youve heard is incorrectly stated to you. the qoute should read
a gun in the home is far more likely to be used against you then to be used in self defence, unless you have the will power to use against an attacker.
If you have a tool, like a gun or wratchet set, but refuse to get the knowledge and skills required to use it, and never get the ambition to use it when you need it. A gun, and a ratchet wrench are NOT going to help.
a gun in the home is far more likely to be used against you then to be used in self defence, unless you have the will power to use against an attacker.
If you have a tool, like a gun or wratchet set, but refuse to get the knowledge and skills required to use it, and never get the ambition to use it when you need it. A gun, and a ratchet wrench are NOT going to help.
thebaldguy
Member
I that quote about guns in the home is quite funny. It ranks right up there with "if you drive a car, you have a greater chance of being involved in a car crash".
Compare it to the old claim that every year, on Super Bowl Sunday, emergency rooms across the U.S. are overwhelmed by vast numbers of women who have been horribly beaten by their football-crazed husbands and boyfriends. They may still be telling that to impressionable kids in Women's Studies classes.
The Big Lie, endlessly repeated, becomes the automatic response of the well-indoctrinated parrot.
The Big Lie, endlessly repeated, becomes the automatic response of the well-indoctrinated parrot.
The Lone Haranguer
Member
I live alone. Does this make me 43 times as likely to shoot myself?
Rob G
Member
Yes but your odds of being a homicide victim are reduced by about 90% since you don't have a wife to p*** off.
Timthinker
Member
- Joined
- Sep 3, 2006
- Messages
- 815
Whenever threads such as this emerge, I remind our readers to examine the writings of criminologist Gary Kleck who has examined the relationship between gun control and violent crime. His findings definitely deserve serious study for those interested in the "gun debate".
Taking a loaded gun or knife away from a determined person is easier said than done. One experiment conducted by some knife instructors supports this assertion. Give one student a marker and tell him to use it like a knife. Next, have the "armed" student confront another student, one wearing a white shirt, whose purpose is to disarm the "knifer". The results are obvious for all to see. My point is that disarming a determined individual is no easy task. I am sure we can start a thread about this topic, but some probably exist already. I hope my comments prove useful.
Timthinker
Taking a loaded gun or knife away from a determined person is easier said than done. One experiment conducted by some knife instructors supports this assertion. Give one student a marker and tell him to use it like a knife. Next, have the "armed" student confront another student, one wearing a white shirt, whose purpose is to disarm the "knifer". The results are obvious for all to see. My point is that disarming a determined individual is no easy task. I am sure we can start a thread about this topic, but some probably exist already. I hope my comments prove useful.
Timthinker
- Status
Similar threads
