HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Topics » Justice & Public Safety » Gun Control & RKBA (Group) » Defensive use of firearms...

Wed May 4, 2016, 11:11 PM

Defensive use of firearms, using the VPC's numbers...

I stumbled over a recent article that made this graph, using the Violence Policy Center's numbers (which have the smallest number of defensive gun uses than most other studies) You know run by the same Josh Sugarman that likes to make up new terms, specifically to cause confusion...

http://www.vpc.org/studies/justifiable.pdf



...Imagine that....

34 replies, 3174 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 34 replies Author Time Post
Reply Defensive use of firearms, using the VPC's numbers... (Original post)
virginia mountainman May 2016 OP
discntnt_irny_srcsm May 2016 #1
virginia mountainman May 2016 #2
beevul May 2016 #3
virginia mountainman May 2016 #4
scscholar Jul 2016 #29
discntnt_irny_srcsm Jul 2016 #30
beevul May 2016 #5
flamin lib May 2016 #6
friendly_iconoclast May 2016 #7
Kang Colby May 2016 #8
beevul May 2016 #9
beevul Jul 2016 #10
Eleanors38 Jul 2016 #11
DonP Jul 2016 #12
Nuclear Unicorn Jul 2016 #13
SCantiGOP Jul 2016 #17
friendly_iconoclast Jul 2016 #19
SCantiGOP Jul 2016 #24
Nuclear Unicorn Jul 2016 #28
friendly_iconoclast Jul 2016 #33
Nuclear Unicorn Jul 2016 #25
SCantiGOP Jul 2016 #26
Nuclear Unicorn Jul 2016 #27
friendly_iconoclast Jul 2016 #14
struggle4progress Jul 2016 #15
beevul Jul 2016 #16
discntnt_irny_srcsm Jul 2016 #18
friendly_iconoclast Jul 2016 #20
discntnt_irny_srcsm Jul 2016 #22
beevul Jul 2016 #21
discntnt_irny_srcsm Jul 2016 #23
Kaleva Jul 2016 #31
virginia mountainman Jul 2016 #32
jimmy the one Jul 2016 #34


Response to discntnt_irny_srcsm (Reply #1)

Thu May 5, 2016, 12:42 AM

2. He really does not care one iota about his hypocrisy..

For him, and folks like him, the end result is all that matters. Even if it means lying, misleading, and cheating.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to virginia mountainman (Original post)

Thu May 5, 2016, 02:14 PM

3. MORE DEFENSIVE USES THAN GUN DEATHS.

 

Like we have always said.

Start getting the crow ready, and I'll wash up a bunch of plates and set the table for the ammophobes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to beevul (Reply #3)

Thu May 5, 2016, 07:10 PM

4. yea....and...

Those, are the VPC's numbers...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to beevul (Reply #3)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 11:31 PM

29. Except this study is baised so we know it isn't true

 

They are offensive weapons. You can't stop a bullet with a bullet.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to scscholar (Reply #29)

Sun Jul 10, 2016, 09:03 AM

30. The idea is to stop the aggressor and they don't always use bullets

Last edited Sun Jul 10, 2016, 10:39 AM - Edit history (1)

When they do, they don't always get off the first shot.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to virginia mountainman (Original post)

Sun May 15, 2016, 02:16 PM

5. Kickety kick. N/T

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to virginia mountainman (Original post)

Sun May 15, 2016, 03:57 PM

6. Where did you find this graph? It's not at your link.

I did find a table that showed that .08% of violent crime was averted by DGU while 43.8% were resolved by offering no resistance, 22.1% were resolved by threatening without a weapon and 22.2% were resolved by non-confrontation methods.

So, from your own posted source 88.1% were resolved without a gun or to be more blunt 1100 times more people resolved a violent confrontation without a gun than with one.

Lie much?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to flamin lib (Reply #6)

Sun May 15, 2016, 04:59 PM

7. "Lie much?" A lie like endorsing something you haven't tested?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1172&pid=192266

That kind of lie? Or the one that counts only "threatening or attacks with a firearm" as
a defensive gun use? (Page six of the linked document).

Even if the 0.8% by the restricted definition were true, that's still 235,700
defensive gun uses (page 8)



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to virginia mountainman (Original post)

Sun May 15, 2016, 10:21 PM

8. K&R!

Even with massive DGU understatement from DGU, it's quite clear that guns save lives.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to virginia mountainman (Original post)

Mon May 16, 2016, 02:31 PM

9. K&R. N/T

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to virginia mountainman (Original post)

Thu Jul 7, 2016, 06:05 PM

10. Kickety kick. N/t

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to virginia mountainman (Original post)

Thu Jul 7, 2016, 06:15 PM

11. The stuff controllers don't like, and will deny even exists.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eleanors38 (Reply #11)

Thu Jul 7, 2016, 06:29 PM

12. Hell, they can totally ignore the 2013 CDC study and the results

 

So they can pretty much "overlook" anything that doesn't make them feel all warm and fuzzy or match the bumper stickers they draw their "philosophy" from.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eleanors38 (Reply #11)

Thu Jul 7, 2016, 09:28 PM

13. Even if the numbers were 1 DGU to 9,000 criminal homicides that 1 is still justified.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Reply #13)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 06:45 PM

17. Want to make sure I understand you

If defensive gun uses saved 100
lives a year, but caused 900,000 (or almost a million) 'criminal homicides,' you would consider that 'justified'?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SCantiGOP (Reply #17)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 07:22 PM

19. How can defensive gun use *cause* criminal homicides (i.e. murder or manslaughter)?

If it's found to be murder or manslaughter, it's by definition not defensive.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to friendly_iconoclast (Reply #19)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 08:50 PM

24. I'm pretty sure you understood

Insert the word "guns" in my post between the words "but" and "caused": so question is whether poster is actually saying that he/she would trade 100 lives saved by defensive gun uses for 900,000 gun-related criminal homicides.
Secondary question: does it mean anything if some of those 900,000 were the children of Newtown, Conn?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SCantiGOP (Reply #24)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 10:04 PM

28. If 900,000 murders are occurring

a person would be better off owning a gun.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SCantiGOP (Reply #24)

Sun Jul 10, 2016, 06:04 PM

33. In the real world, there are more defensive gun uses than there are murders/manslaughters

Even the decidedly antigun VPC concedes this

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SCantiGOP (Reply #17)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 09:08 PM

25. How many innocent people are protected by the 4th Amendment versus criminals

who escape an otherwise justified conviction?

How many more criminals could we get off the street if only we just abolish the 4th Amendment?

Would it be worth the occasional innocent person being enduing warrantless search and seizure?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Reply #25)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 09:14 PM

26. I understand

You don't care to answer my direct question.

Let's just put each other on Ignore and move on.
Good bye.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SCantiGOP (Reply #26)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 10:03 PM

27. I answered your question. You just refuse to consider the fact that innocent people have rights.

And those rights should not be disposed of in the name of security.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to virginia mountainman (Original post)

Fri Jul 8, 2016, 06:37 PM

14. Kicking- because the doctrinaire find it inconvenient

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to virginia mountainman (Original post)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 02:43 PM

15. From your VPC link:

Introduction

Guns are rarely used to kill criminals or stop crimes.

In 2010, across the nation there were only 230 justifiable homicides involving a private citizen using a firearm reported to the Federal Bureau of Investigationís Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program as detailed in its Supplementary Homicide Report (SHR). That same year, there were 8,275 criminal gun homicides tallied in the SHR. In 2010, for every justifiable homicide in the United States involving a gun, guns were used in 36 criminal homicides. And this ratio, of course, does not take into account the thousands of lives ended in gun suicides (19,392) or unintentional shootings (606) that year.

This report analyzes, on both the national and state levels, the use of firearms in justifiable homicides ...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to struggle4progress (Reply #15)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 02:54 PM

16. So you should be happy then...

 

That most defensive gun uses don't involve actual gun violence.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to beevul (Reply #16)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 07:10 PM

18. Since "guns are designed to kill"...

...any incident involving a gun that doesn't result in a death, means that the gun wasn't used. Or at least what I infer from many pro-control comments.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to discntnt_irny_srcsm (Reply #18)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 07:23 PM

20. You do realize that you weren't supposed to notice that?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to friendly_iconoclast (Reply #20)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 07:28 PM

22. Oops........sorry

my mistake

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to discntnt_irny_srcsm (Reply #18)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 07:28 PM

21. Wait, those bloodshirsty gunners aren't actually...bloodthirsty?

 

*snort*

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to beevul (Reply #21)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 07:30 PM

23. Bloody Mary is about as far as I go

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to struggle4progress (Reply #15)

Sun Jul 10, 2016, 03:52 PM

31. A gun that holds just a few rounds is adequate then.

The odds that a gun owner will someday have to kill in self defense is incredibly slim.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kaleva (Reply #31)

Sun Jul 10, 2016, 04:00 PM

32. A few dozen rounds atleast..

Just to be certain I have enough...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to virginia mountainman (Original post)

Mon Jul 11, 2016, 03:46 PM

34. sloppy OP + bum link = 2ndAmendment Mythology

va mtn man: I stumbled over a recent article that made this graph, using the Violence Policy Center's numbers (which have the smallest number of defensive gun uses than most other studies) You know run by the same Josh Sugarman that likes to make up new terms, specifically to cause confusion...

There appear to be approx 8 times more dgus (defensive gun uses) than murders (presumably gun murders), for one particular unidentified year. What was the year, mtn man?
Since you didn't bother to make any point, but from further progun discourse downthread, it seems you all are thinking that this somehow justifies guns as saving more lives than they cause(??correct me if wrong).

Disabuse yourselves from that absurd thought, for, for that to be true, all of those approx 68,000 dgus would have to have saved a life. That is an impossibility. You're lucky to get away with a couple hundred lives saved due to dgus, in that graph, maybe 10 times higher, or more.
Then you would also need tack on approx 800 firearm accidental deaths for a more valid contrast, as well as make a separate graph which would include gun suicides.
What was the total figure for violent crimes committed with firearms for that year mtn man? & firearms used in property crimes for that year mtn man? Imagine the blue 'murder' bar going about 3 or 4 times higher than the dgu bar.

Your second amendment mythology is so stupid sometimes, yet it is almost always astonishing to see how much support downthread the mythology seems to get.

Fix your link, sloppy mtn man, it is to justifiable homicides vs. non fatal dgus.

SCantiGOP & struggle for progress posters were on the right track, exposing mtn man & his back slapping psycho-fants for their misconceptions.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread