Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Latest Breaking News
In reply to the discussion: Bill to allow state workers to bring guns to workplace passes through committee [View all]slackmaster
(60,567 posts)128. I'll answer very briefly because I am swamped today
Granted, I have no figures on the percentage of instances where someone uses a gun and it doesn't result in a death that are ultimately found to be lawful uses of deadly force....
...I think one of the reasons that statistics on nonlethal use of guns are harder to come by is that many will go unreported and, even when they are reported, they may go uninvestigated, because nobody got hurt. In the absence of any outside investigation, how is one ever to know whether those uses of a gun were, in fact, necessary?
I have accepted the fact that those numbers are unknown and probably unknowable. I trust MOST people to behave responsibly.
...So we come back to my original statistic of 300-400 lawful interventions out of 30,000 occurrences where the gun use resulted in a fatality and was investigated. It may not be a perfect reflection of what the results of investigation might be in nonfatal gun uses, but I perceive no reason to anticipate that it would be radically different. Do you? Why?
I don't believe that body count in any way serves as a valid proxy measure of non-lethal DGUs because the intensity of the situations and the outcomes are so radically different. Because most adults do understand the severe consequences that are likely to occur if they shoot someone or even shoot at someone, I believe gun owners (and I know this about myself with certainty) are very hesitant to shoot. I own a house that I intend to keep for the rest of my life, I have responsibilities for animals and even a few people, and I really, really don't want to go to prison.
I think a small minority of our members here who are strongly opposed to people carrying weapons for self-defense have a mistaken idea that anyone who carries a gun is itching to shoot someone with it. The truth is that a desire to shoot someone is one of the best possible reasons NOT to carry a gun, or even to own one.
Sorry I haven't been able to address the nuances of all of your thoughtful questions here. Let's keep a dialogue open and maybe we can teach each other a few things.
...I think one of the reasons that statistics on nonlethal use of guns are harder to come by is that many will go unreported and, even when they are reported, they may go uninvestigated, because nobody got hurt. In the absence of any outside investigation, how is one ever to know whether those uses of a gun were, in fact, necessary?
I have accepted the fact that those numbers are unknown and probably unknowable. I trust MOST people to behave responsibly.
...So we come back to my original statistic of 300-400 lawful interventions out of 30,000 occurrences where the gun use resulted in a fatality and was investigated. It may not be a perfect reflection of what the results of investigation might be in nonfatal gun uses, but I perceive no reason to anticipate that it would be radically different. Do you? Why?
I don't believe that body count in any way serves as a valid proxy measure of non-lethal DGUs because the intensity of the situations and the outcomes are so radically different. Because most adults do understand the severe consequences that are likely to occur if they shoot someone or even shoot at someone, I believe gun owners (and I know this about myself with certainty) are very hesitant to shoot. I own a house that I intend to keep for the rest of my life, I have responsibilities for animals and even a few people, and I really, really don't want to go to prison.
I think a small minority of our members here who are strongly opposed to people carrying weapons for self-defense have a mistaken idea that anyone who carries a gun is itching to shoot someone with it. The truth is that a desire to shoot someone is one of the best possible reasons NOT to carry a gun, or even to own one.
Sorry I haven't been able to address the nuances of all of your thoughtful questions here. Let's keep a dialogue open and maybe we can teach each other a few things.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
131 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Bill to allow state workers to bring guns to workplace passes through committee [View all]
Maine-ah
Feb 2012
OP
It's very heart warming that you think a law makes a difference one way or another in that scenario.
AtheistCrusader
Feb 2012
#22
provided they have a concealed weapons permit and keep the firearm locked in their vehicle ...
AlbertCat
Feb 2012
#7
Women are a growing percentage of gun owners, and that includes CCW holders
ProgressiveProfessor
Feb 2012
#38
Exactly. You might need to kill a deer or shoot some idiot who still has the turn signal blinking...
Moonwalk
Feb 2012
#16
So, for all the folks who *did* care about a $500 fine, they won't have a gun available?
boppers
Feb 2012
#88
More GOP/NRA douchebaggery - a Maine GOP lawmaker was arrested last year for brandishing a gun
jpak
Feb 2012
#29
Do all NRA members fall under your wide douchebag net, or is it just some of them?
Skwid
Feb 2012
#35
Yea, you are right -- the NRA's Wayne LaPierre is just a lovable ole right winger.
Hoyt
Feb 2012
#42
Right? About what? I simply asked a question. Do I need to repeat it? To the same person?
Skwid
Feb 2012
#43
Sure. No bad guy would ever violate a law that says he can't take a gun...anywhere, right?
Skwid
Feb 2012
#47
Couldn't you have stuffed a couple MORE insults in that one post? I don't really care about all
Skwid
Feb 2012
#53
Just FYI, hotshot, I've been gay since long before you were a gleam in the milkman's eye
Skwid
Feb 2012
#67
Only a tiny minority of successful self-defense by gun end up with any shots being fired....
PavePusher
Feb 2012
#80
And MA's laws against guns in cars impeded him not a whit. So what's your point?
friendly_iconoclast
Feb 2012
#60
"More than one person like you didn't bother to shoot up their workplace." Charming,
friendly_iconoclast
Feb 2012
#78
Or maybe a gruntled one will stop a mass murderer and make them happy they did pass it.
Skwid
Feb 2012
#51
Toter's dream -- I'm going to save everyone with my gun. Please, we don't need your protection.
Hoyt
Feb 2012
#55
As much as I regret it, I am obligated to "protect" you if possible. My gun is part of my uniform.
Skwid
Feb 2012
#57
Wish you could have talked to my policeman father-in-law. He'd have straighten out the cowboys
Hoyt
Feb 2012
#64
No, but this is what our teabagger State government thinks is important NM
high density
Feb 2012
#115
Whole country is turning into AZ. Legislature can't/won't do anything about real problems,
Doctor_J
Feb 2012
#70
It's refreshing to see so much bigotry and misinformation on parade in the responses to this thread
slackmaster
Feb 2012
#101
Who will be courageous enough to stand up for the right of high school students to bring guns to
Douglas Carpenter
Feb 2012
#130