Reply #27: Negative logic is illogical and doesn't mean it didn't happen!

[InanimateObject]

Summer, June 1983, several months after my leaving the Marines. My mother, 5'1" 100 lb, normally home by herself asked me to pick up some groceries and drop them off during lunch time break. As I walk in the door of my parents house, I hear my mother, ya know dynamite comes in small packages raising hell with someone. As I turn the corner, I see a 6'3" 300 plus lb monster just break the latch on the sliding glass door in the back. I walk toward him telling him to get the hell off the property and he replies FU. In a second, he has a 4" S&W Model 29 ,44 magnum planted in his face, he turns white as a sheet, craps himself running of the back porch.

Dont know why I didn't pull the trigger, could I have physically taken him, maybe, but with my mother in question, you get the point. Because of the laws of that time, to follow or further pursue the incident beyond the perp leaving would have invited MY prosecution, so the incident wasn't "officially reported" as what could he have been prosecuted for, misdemeanor mischief or trespass? Being that I did have personal contacts in the police department, I was able to review the mug shots and pull up his rap sheet, quite impressive that long list of violent assaults he had.

Now fast forward to 1995Professor Kleck & Gertz DGU study http://www.saf.org/LawReviews/KleckAndGertz1.htm identified that up to 2.5 millions DGU’s occur per year.

Can you academically refute the scholastic reputation of one of the most noted anti gun advocates Professor Wolfgang http://www.saf.org/LawReviews/Wolfgang1.html could not find fault with professor Kleck & Gertz’s methodology. The best they have done is to rant about the sample size.

Then we go to the anti gun hero expert professors http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles/165476.pdf which is the “Guns in America: National Survey on Private Ownership and Use of Firearms” by Philip J. Cook and Jens Ludwig from 1997.

This is a GOVERNMENT sponsored study that creates some problems for the gun banners in that it can’t debunk the standard of Professor Kleck & Gertz’s 1995 study either, but still admits DGU’s occur on page 10:

From their study: The only question is whether that fraction of occurrences is 1 in 1,800 (as one would conclude from the NCVS) = 165,000 dgu’s (adjusted for 2008 population) or 1 in 100 (as indicated by the NSPOF estimate based on Kleck and Gertz's criteria) = 3 million dgu’s per year (2008 population level).

Ludwig & Cook have also created a failure in their logic in:

The key explanation for the difference between the 108,000 NCVS estimate for the annual number of DGUs and the several million from the surveys discussed earlier is that NCVS avoids the false-positive problem by limiting DGU questions to persons who first reported that they were crime victims. Most NCVS respondents never have a chance to answer the DGU question, falsely or otherwise.

Of course a respondent who replied they were not a victim because they had defended themselves by showing their weapon, thereby preventing the physical attack from occurring, that data was not considered by Ludwig & Cook., hence their survey value for DGU’s was affected and made artificially low down from the 1.5 million DGU they identified in their study.

Now the problem you have is that the 165,000 (adjusted for 2008 population) is not insignificant and is agreed upon by your anti gun professors of whom have been contracted to perform multiple studies for the anti gun organizations, but that is the minimum, not the maximum.

The next problem is that during their study, Ludwig and Cook reached that 1.5 million DGU’s BEFORE they used their illogic to arbitrarily remove valid data from the study. That is the same number that the Clinton administration agreed occurred on average every year in 1997.
Lets see, the best anti professors noted 1.5 million DGU, the Clinton Administration admitted that 1.5 million DGU’s occur every year, government data and reports point to over 1.5 million DGU’s per year, guess you have irrefutable data to prove otherwise?

We have so much evidenced that armed citizens do reduce the body count or prevent crimes, Pearl Mississippi teacher 1997, two Appalachian law students 2002, Colorado church 2008, Nebraska mall shooting 2008, Burger King Florida 2009, the Georgia college student in 2009 saving himself and 9 others, oh so many more.

Care to count how many concealed carry people shot people by accident, or how many successful DGU (Defensive Gun Uses) get reported, start the count for the last month at the web sites below!

Of course we have the following web sites
http://www.keepandbeararms.com/news/nl/disp.asp?d=3/22/2010,
http://www.thearmedcitizen.com/
http://www.kc3.com/self_defense/Self_Defense.htm
http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?cid=25&id=2257

Shall we consider the what if games the anti gun crowd loves to play where "blood will run in the streets", here is what we consider a real risk.

ATF Max 8 million CPL's US, approximately 186 million age 21 or older or 4.3% of the people licensed for CPL.

Possible deaths from CPL holders in 3 year time span from Violence Policy Center report last year, 107 or 35 per year equals .0000044 per concealed license holder. You can also review Florida's data on CCW at http://licgweb.doacs.state.fl.us/stats/cw_monthly.html
it says the same thing for Texas if you look at the data.
http://www.txdps.state.tx.us/administration/crime_records/chl/chlsindex.htm

JAMA http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/full/286/4/415 700,000 doctors in US kill 44,000 to 98,000 by medical malpractice every year or .14 per physician.

Physician is .064 or .14 /.0000044 = 14,000 to 31,818 times more likely to harm you than a CPL holder.

So where is the risk from concealed carry holders and why aren't the anti's crying to ban doctors?

Then lets go to the circumstantial evidence of reality. Of the 1.36 million reported violent crimes to the FBI UCR database in 2008, on 381,000 involved a firearm. Did every firearm involved incident result in a shot, no. Evidence from hospital databases and police data shows shots fired 8-15% of the time, otherwise there would be more than 9,424 murders with a firearm and around 70,000 reported injuries as all hospitals by law report treatment of gun fire injuries. Then on tope of that we have police data studieshttp://www.virginiacops.org/Articles/Shooting/Combat.htm, http://www.theppsc.org/Staff_Views/Aveni/OIS.pdf, http://www.nyclu.org/files/nypd_firearms_report_102207.pdf that clearly show the best hit ratio among police is 25%, kinda coincidental these numbers tie in with actual reported murders and injuries eh?

You comment on negative facts, but the logic failure you have is the same as the Ludwig & Cook report, because a physical attack didn't occur, you will dismiss that it even happened, utter illogic. The laws of probability dictate that all probable outcomes from an event occur in some fashion or repeatability. Above is the basis and founding based from government studies, organizations, medical etc... all not initiated or started by the NRA.

That is the logic and facts which our argument is based on, and which whenever the elitist anti gun promoters Helmke, Sugarman, Horowitz and MSM idiots are confronted with, they refuse to respond. The beginning of real discussion on any issue is the ability to communicate, so if the anti gun people refuse to acknowledge the actual real facts, what then is there to discuss and why should we even engage them in a discussion that only leads to pro gun advocates giving up more rights? That in a practiced negotiators reality is frankly stupid!

So I say to you, what amount of skull sweat does the Anti gun crowd wish to lose in refusing to acknowledge the good side of self defense and promoting more useless gun laws?

Oh yeah, here is our support for the uselessness of the current gun laws in the US.

Haynes vs. U.S. 390 U.S. 85 1968, where the US SUpreme Court ruled 8-1 in favor of Haynes that any law requiring a felon to self incriminate themselves and violate their 5th amendment rights was not enforceable as a charge for prosecution. Hence criminals don't have to follow the laws that do so, e.g. your stolen weapons, registrations, etc.... Amazing how the criminals don't have to obey these laws yet only law abiding citizens do? This just validates the hypocrisy that laws affect only the felons!

Of course we see from the USDOJ Background Check & Firearm transfer report 2008 http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/html/bcft/2008/bcft08st.pdf
Brady Check report that of the 99 million checks for purchases from licensed sources only, since 1994. We see a total of 1.67 million valid rejections, a 68% decrease in felons attempting to buy from a licensed source, and 58% of those rejected being felons. We see that between 2000-2008 only 13,024 were prosecuted, or less than 1%.

We of course see how the anti gun lobby claims such effectiveness of this pathetically useless law with the hard data they can present that the 1.66 million plus who weren’t prosecuted then didn’t go and buy from an unlicensed source? We also see how the USDOJ survey in 1997 where felons identified purchasing their weapons from 80% street buys, 12% retail stores, 2% gun shows. Then that 68% reduction of attempted buys from licensed sources puts the street buys at 90% in today’s numbers. Firearm Use by Offenders, Bureau of Justice Statistics, November 2001 http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=940

Amazing how ineffective that poster child of futility is and this trend is similar with ALL gun control laws.

Yeah, again amazing how we gun advocates always have the facts and the anti's only emotional plea's and a repeated mantra of pushing for the same repeated failures that don't stop or prevent violence.

Not enough of a data delug?

I mean shall we even describe the gun control experiments going on in Australia, Canada and England that began in 1997? England violent crime goes up from 445k reported to 1.4 mill in 2008, murders don't go down, firearms crimes up, Australia 30% increase, Canada stayed the same all at minimum 2 times the US Crime rate which has been going down for over 2 decades. Yeah we see how less guns equals more crimes. Oh darn, forgot to make sure that when you check their data, they count the same as we do, uh, they don't. Don't forget either that England only counts solved cases, so as not to scare their tourist trade off! This result is repeated wherever gun control is attempted.

www.homeoffice.gov.uk/crime-victims/crime-statistics/index358e.html?version=6 Britain

www.aic.gov.au/en/statistics.aspx Australia

www40.statcan.gc.ca/l01/cst01/legal01-eng.htm Canada

Shall we now look at government studies that show gun control doesn't do anything to prevent violence, maybe you should start here with an FBI report from several years ago?

www.americanfirearms.org/downloads/fbi_rc_1to3.pdf
www.americanfirearms.org/downloads/fbi_rc_4.pdf
www.americanfirearms.org/downloads/fbi_rc_5to6.pdf
www.americanfirearms.org/downloads/fbi_rc_7to8.pdf
www.americanfirearms.org/downloads/fbi_rc_9.pdf

You can go here and read the National Sciences Foundation report from 2004 on gun control laws, a study that was formed by the anti gun Clinton Administration so just like the Ludgwig & Cook study noted, doesn't prove any causality theory, much less any effect of gun control laws on violent crime, but then you have better data and facts than these experts who by chance, are anti gun, yeah, they are, sucks for the antis when their own study hurts their position, LOL! www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=10881&page=R2.

Why is it, that in many polls, support for outright gun control has fallen from a high of 54% in the early 1990's to less than 38% today? Maybe it is because the many lies, falsified statistics and half truths are getting old and people are actually learning the facts and seeing the results, or correction, the failures of gun control everywhere it is tried. The fact is, is this hill of lies and deceit what the anti gun advocates wish to die on!