I need some pro-gun statistics to show to an anti

[Golden Hound]

I was having a debate with a young woman about whether or not CC should be allowed on college campuses. I told her that the places with the highest legal CC rates and gun ownership rates in general tend to be much safer and have less crime than areas with very strict gun laws, and that the murder and armed robbery rates have gone up in various countries (Australia, UK) since they've enacted more gun "control." But I can't remember where I'd read this information. She wanted me to send her statistical evidence of my claims. Do any of you have good statistics to share, or links to it?

 

[daniel1113]

I do not have any statistics off hand, but I'm sure a quick Google search would bring them up.

Having said that, my advice is to avoid the use of statistics altogether, even if they do support your stance. There are many more powerful arguments for CC, such as the right to self defense, that are more likely to sway an anti. At the end of the day, statistics can be found to support any side of an argument.

 

[Beatnik]

My favorite isn't about CC, but about safety in the home.
It's John Lott's observation that children under age 10 are statistically three times more likely to drown in a five gallon pail than die from a firearms accident. And of the 10 accidental child firearms death from the year he studied, most of them were accidentally shot by adults.
It can be found in his book, and is freely available from CDC.

 

[tmajors]

www.gunfacts.info

ebook PDF here free

Pretty sure has a nice section in there for what you're looking for. Cited, notated, and footnoted.

 

[raz-0]

http://guncite.com/ has all sorts of good references.

 

[weedypigeon]

I live in Far North Qld. Australia. Here's an argument to put to the young lady regarding gun control. Is she about public safety or is she just anti-gun ?? Because if she's about public safety maybe she should spend 30 seconds and check the death and injury figures from road trauma. All the statistics charts records, whatever mean nothing to people who are anti gun. We had an anti-gun Prime Minister who spent 750 million dollars on gun control which is now a beaurocratic nightmare and the criminals STILL have guns. Being anti-gun means being anti-gunowner because responsible gun owners become the whipping boy of the warm and fuzzy pink fluffy cloud brigade.

 

[matt87]

Same here in the Old Country mate. Our politicoes have decided it's vote-winning to quash us, and there's so little pro-gun or even neutral exposure to guns in this country that anti-gun is the default condition. Therefore the general public do not sympathyse with us and our plight is ours alone.

 

[lonegunman]

http://http://www.pulpless.com/gunclock/kleck2.html


In disarmed societies crime typically rises even when the murder rate does not. Go admire the stats for the Brits. They are in the process of banning softair toys, BB guns, replicas, dewated military guns that have been owned for decades, pointed kitchen knives and axes. They have banned every firearm and currently even their Olympic team has to train outside of their own country. The crime rates are through the roof.

They have articles and news stories on how to grovel and beg when criminals attack, the dangers of resisting rapists and things of that nature. I cannot find the article at the moment but they tried to fire(and criminally prosecute) an off duty police woman for using her issued baton to strike her rapist during a home invasion attack. I think it was last summer when they charged an elderly woman with assault after she poked a teenage thug with her finger and asked him to move from her stoop and let her go home. The goons beat her silly and the cops came and arrested her for bothering goons.

The gutless brits have lowered themselves to crawling for thugs. With a half a million security cameras and thousands of cops all they do is arrest people for defending themselves anymore.

Watching those losers from the british navy rubbing the iranians feet last summer was sickening. How pathetic can you get when you take a free suit and fake Rolex from the iranian government to make an ass of yourself on TV?

Looking at England and you can see Obama's dream land. Business and industry destroyed, criminals supported by liberals running the streets, everyone taxed til their balls fall off and millions of immigrants from the third world running wild. Socialized medicine and public works crumbling, no meaningful military. You do not have to imagine an unarmed/disarmed gutless society at the mercy of thugs, you can fly their and see one for real.

 

[Mannlicher]

those opposed to guns don't give a hoot about your statistics. I don't even bother to discuss my views with them.

So many times, we engage in these pointless discussions. With a good faith approach, we feel that with cold, irrefutable logic, we can change their minds. You should disabuse yourself of that thought.

 

[42]

Self defense whats that?
If I fight back at college whilst being attacked I get a suspension as well or in tthe case of my training partner becoause he has a blackbelt in taekwondoe hes violent he got suspnded bully got a weeks detention. As for firearms well remember Tonny martin gets more police protection now than when he reported multiple burgularies and h's been sued for injuring a robber with a 12 guage. He is watched 24/7 in case he finished the job.

Gah police protection yeah right They just wait and arrest the victim and giivwe the BG a lift home.

 

[mike101]

Here's one I like to use on them. The FBI Uniform Crime Report.

http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/

From 1960 to 2006, crime per 100,000 US inhabitants has increased 313%. So, it's hard for them to argue that 40 years of gun control has done anything to reduce crime. Talk to someone who was around in the 1960's, and ask them if they didn't feel safer, before gun control. Keep in mind that there were crazy people and convicted felons back then, too.

These stats are also available on the FBI's website, but it's laid out much more conveniently on Disastercenter.

Don't let them wear you down. That's what they rely on.

Oh, and Gun-Free Zones are only gun-free, until somebody brings a gun.

 

[Joe Cool]

Dealing with Antis is always a challenge. I have found it best to listen to them first, as hard as it is, and then lead them with questions to help point the way. There's an old saying that questions lead, and answers follow.

Usually the antis start off with the precept that 'guns are dangerous'. The questions to ask depend on the person you are dealing with, but some comeback questions are: "well isn't gasoline?" or some other 'dangerous thing'. The logic flows well from there - well gasoline has other uses other than killing and it's well controlled. Then you can proceed to discuss how firearms are used every day for self defense, target shooting and hunting. The defensive uses are estimated at over 2 million times per year. Another comeback question might be along the lines of "how do you keep something dangerous in the home?" You can then educate about responsible gun ownership and gun safety. You can also discuss the laws that are already in place to keep all the law-abiding citizens in line that criminals ignore daily. It helps to have some recent info on murders and violent crime in the local areas. The FBI uniform crime report is a source for total view, you can Google that or your local state (PA?) and armed robbery, home invasion, etc... I find once I point out that there are plenty of home invasions, with armed intruders in multiple incidents, people wake up pretty quick to the risk.

Sometimes it goes like - "well we need to keep them out of the hands of criminals". The questions then should be along the lines of "are criminals allowed to have them?" And you can drive it further that they are already law breakers and will kill or attack with an axe if they can't get a gun. If you want to really make a dent in crime - look at the CCW stats, where violent crime goes down uniformly whenever CCW is passed, because the criminals don't know who is armed. Same argument about why criminals are often long term offenders that get let back onto the streets too quickly and too easily. The point being made that the antis and us should have in common is anti-crime, not anti-guns.

Well not a comprehensive answer but I hope that helps get you started. As others have said, John Lott's books are a good starting point for stats and logical arguments.

 

[Shadow1198]

First I think it should be important to listen to their point of view and realize that the average anti-gun/liberal person has likely taken that position purely because they are afraid, uneducated about firearms, and it's easy to hate what you don't understand. With a little education and actual facts, hopefully they will be logical enough to realize they should be even more afraid that they don't have a gun.