Gun owners not likely to use firearms for self-defense, study claims

[DanTex]

49. This has been examined at length in the peer reviewed literature.

The big lie pushed by the NRA is that a "defensive gun use" reported in surveys like the one you are talking about are truly defensive and socially beneficial acts. Yes, there are a lot of people who claim to have used a gun defensively in the last year. That doesn't resolve the important questions, for example, whether the DGUs were actually "defensive", whether it improved the safety of the person claiming it, and whether the situation wouldn't have turned out better if the person had chosen to respond in a different way.

The answer to these questions is for the most part, no. Outcome based studies, where people look at whether owning or carrying a gun makes someone more or less likely to be harmed, mostly find that guns make people less safe and more vulnerable. Analysis of crime incidents find that people who claimed to have used a gun in self defense are no less likely to be harmed than people who didn't, or who responded by other means (i.e. run away, call the police).

For a stark example, the Trayvon Martin shooting would show up as DGU and a self-defense shooting even though it was anything but. And a lot of them are escalating incidents where both people claim the "other guy started it". And also, a lot of people who use guns to defend themselves are themselves criminals (i.e. one drug dealer defending himself from another).

If you are actually interested in the in-depth research, as opposed to just repeating NRA talking points, the Harvard School of Public Health has some good citations as a starting point.
http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/hicrc/firearms-research/gun-threats-and-self-defense-gun-use-2/