Source needed for self-defense with firearm stats

Status
Not open for further replies.

DirksterG30

Member
Joined
Apr 19, 2005
Messages
625
Location
Pittsburgh, PA
A local newspaper printed a pro-gun editorial yesterday, and I wanted to write a letter to the editor expanding on the value of firearms for self-defense. Can anyone point me to a study related to the effectiveness of using a gun for self-defense? I remember reading that people who defend themselves with firearms when attacked are less likely to be injured than someone who uses another means of self-defense such as pepper spray, but I can't find the source (I believe it was an FBI or DOJ document).

Here's the opinion piece I'm responding to: http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/opinion/archive/s_519551.html
 
try fbi.gov and look for the Uniform Crime Reports. Try the dept. of justice doj.gov? and look for the NCVS (Nat. crime victimization survey). The CDC (Center for disease control) can provide accidental death stats for firearms as well as all other sources for comparison.

You probably wont find a specific study of firearm self defense from a govt (supposedly non-biased) source. Those are in works by criminologists like John Lott which would be considered biased by antis...

The FBI UCR and NCVS are good sources for the raw data though. I believe the NCVS includes data on the effectiveness of resistance by various methods copmared to compliance and the resultant injury rates to victims when each method is employed.
 
You probably wont find a specific study of firearm self defense from a govt (supposedly non-biased) source. Those are in works by criminologists like John Lott which would be considered biased by antis...

Lott is a bad source because others have not been able to reproduce the same results with his data.

As to non biased sources, there's a very good study done by the National Academy of Sciences, "Firearms and Violence". Specifically, check out the table on page 115 pulled from a study by Gary Kleck.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top