I suppose you're just going to accuse me of lying, as you have just admitted you are predisposed to do so, but while I have never needed to use my weapon in anger, I personally know of at least 7 people in 3 families who are alive today because they were armed. Of those, only one had to pull the trigger, with the others just drawing their firearm (a SCAR in one case, the others were pistols) was enough to make the bad guy turn tail and skedaddle.
I wonder how many people at this forum have been in similar situations where simply deploying a firearm stopped a crime in progress? It's almost impossible not to find yourself confronted by criminals if you live an active life and happen to live and / or work in a rough neighborhood for a long period of time no matter how careful you are. Thanks for relating your experiences. Anyone else had similar confrontations with dangerous criminals?
Not doubting your source (won’t open for me at the moment) but https://gunresponsibility.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/GV-Fact-Sheet.pdf Obviously this is a law with low compliance
Yep! And you are such a (bad) example that the rest of us do not want to emulate your morbidity and mortality rates
I hope that you will consider the fact that there is less of a difference between the homicide rates of our two countries when calculations are tabulated the same way. For example "5 Tricks Gun-Control Advocates Play" https://mises.org/wire/5-tricks-gun-control-advocates-play EXCERPT "And finally, there is the problem of the fact that not all countries count homicides in quite the same way. In the US, killings committed in self defense are included as homicides, as are unsolved homicides. Things are done differently in the UK, for example, as noted in this April 2000 report from Parliament: Figures for crimes labelled as homicide in various countries are simply not comparable. Since 1967, homicide figures for England and Wales have been adjusted to exclude any cases which do not result in conviction, or where the person is not prosecuted on grounds of self defence or otherwise. This reduces the apparent number of homicides by between 13 per cent and 15 per cent. "CONTINUED Since I have been a Psychiatric Case Worker and worked in the mental health field for about 10 years, I feel that America's homicide rate could best be lowered by more affordable and accessible mental health care. Violent and angry people are pulling those triggers, they're not pulling themselves. How would you rate the availability and affordability of mental health care in your country (or your immediate region)? Thanks,
A deep dive into the data, in an area that most people except for me are afraid to even think about, much less say out loud, reveals that of the firearm homicides in 2021, ~61% of victims and ~62% of perpetrators were black. This is a marked increase from prior years, where they were roughly 5-6% lower, but even at 5-6% lower, that represents about 500% more per capita for blacks than all other races. People on the left likely do not want to hear this! Overall homicide and all violent crime rates spiked in 2020, after a 30-year period of decline to levels that were very close to the lowest since data has been tracked in the early 1960s. Had that spike not happened, 2020 would have been the lowest overall homicide rate since data started being officially tracked in the early 1960s, at least if the trend had continued. Sadly, it did not. The reasons behind those trends are a bit murky, and there is no single reason that can be attributed to them, but several hypotheses jump out at me as being the most likely explanations. The start of the decrease in homicides as well as all other categories of crime coincided with two factors that I believe both had a contributory role. The first is that the decrease started at approximately the same time that concealed weapon permits for civilians started to be issued, with the first State being mine, the Freedom State of Florida. The second thing that I believe played a role is that the late 80s to early 90s also roughly coincides with the time that many unwanted children were aborted rather than reluctantly carried to term because of Roe v. Wade. I don't think it's too big of a logical leap to assume that unwanted children are more likely to grow up in an environment that is not ideal for them, and such environments tend to ultimately lead to criminal behavior starting at about ages 15-18, which aligns almost perfectly with the decision that enabled those unwanted pregnancies to be aborted. People on the Right likely don't want to hear this! Likewise, the reasons for the spike in 2020 are as nebulous as the decreases I spoke of before, but the most likely logical explanations to me are the pandemic (and the fallout from that), the summer of riots in 2020, and the 'defund the police' movement that all occurred at roughly the same time, an event I have started to refer to as the 'Triple Witching Hour'. What does all this data mean? I'll let my readers come to their own conclusions, and I will do the same with regards to what implications it may have on the firearms 'debate', even though that is effectively over following the most recent Supreme Court decisions (especially Heller, McDonald, and Bruen) that validate the 2nd Amendment as protecting (not creating) a personal right to keep and bear arms, unrelated to any service in the military or militia services of the US. I will, however, take a moment to point out, once again, that even if SCOTUS hadn't already made the argument moot, all able-bodied men in the US between 17 and 45 years of age are, by existing and current Federal Law, members of the US Militia, a fact that most people are completely blind to. Case law in other areas would imply that the 14th Amendment would extend that membership to women as well, but there is no direct on point cases that I am aware of, so it officially remains an unanswered legal question.
I prefer dangerous freedom over safe slavery any day of the week, and twice on Sunday, an attitude shared by our Founders, and the generations since. Sadly, there are far too many people in 21st century America who share your totalitarian attitudes, but happily their quest to control guns the way you would like them to be (a legal issue that is none of your business to begin with) has been completely disabled by our Supreme Court. The gun control debate, like the same-sex-marriage debate, is over. We can continue with the mental masturbation of the same people saying the same things over and over again in thread after thread, including interlopers like yourself who are messing with things that you should not be messing with, but legally, it's over. There will be NO 'assault weapon' bans, there will be no bans on magazine size, there will be no bans based on cosmetics, and as soon as NY, NJ, CA, and IL (along with any others) who are trying to get around the Bruen decision by effectively making everywhere aside from your own residence a 'no-carry zone', qualified persons will be permitted to carry a sidearm in public pretty much everywhere (with a few minor exceptions), including NYC and Chicago, two areas that historically have all but banned firearms in public for anyone but on-duty Law Enforcement. Despite those legal restrictions, they have been and remain among the most dangerous cities in the USA, though there is a very real case to be made that it is because of those restrictions, not despite them. Those are the legal, and now indisputable facts. The only way to alter that would be to pass one (and likely several) Amendments to the US Constitution, something that is about as likely as pigs orbiting the moon, or for the same Supreme Court that just finalized those legal facts to change their minds, and reverse themselves, which is equally as unlikely, at least for the next several decades. Are you in denial about that?
Yup. The law was passed without any means of enforcement, and so predictably, its largely ignored. Tho, you'd think if it were going to have an effect, the 36% compliance would have still reduced gun murders, not doubled them. But anyway, How would you suggest the compliance issue be remedied to make the law effective? IE- how to force people to use their gun safes?
It's funny you bring that up, because it doesn't help your case. You are correct insofar that violent crime in the US was, before 2020 at least, on a multi-decade trend LOWER, despite the fact that many believe it's been getting worse. Since 2020, it has been increasing, but that year was so unique that it belongs in a category all by itself, a category that I don't think we're quite finished with just yet. But it's also true that our trend towards less violent crime occurred during the exact same time that both firearm ownership in general and government sanctioned concealed carry have dramatically increased. Whether or not that is pure coincidence or not is something that is both unknown and unknowable, but it does completely falsify the idea that more guns equal more crime. I think the primary reason many people perceive that criminal activity has been increasing is simply the ease of which information is now available to us at our fingertips. Whereas our parent's generation had but 3 TV channels to choose from, that ran 1.5 hours of news per day under normal circumstances, today we have a 24x6x365 news cycle, and information that would have been only local stories a few decades ago become quickly known nationwide and can and sometimes do become major stories with vast political implications. It's not that crime is increasing, it's that our knowledge of crimes that were unknown to us previously has increased, creating a false impression. And that's before even mentioning little things like say, the Internet, smart phones, electronic communications, Facebook, Twitter, and other social media.
In many cases, the official answer to your question is 'no'. By official, I mean that many cases like your example do go unreported for various reasons. As a gun owner, I can tell you that if something like that happened to me, say an intruder came into my home, saw me holding (but not yet using) a gun, and fled, I wouldn't report it. It's unlikely the police would investigate it if I did, and while I live in a gun friendly State, if I were to call 911 and admit that I just pointed a gun at someone, even a bonafide home intruder, if the wrong cop takes my report, and that information gets sent to the wrong prosecutor, I could find myself catching one or more charges, and prosecuted based on my own self 'incrimination', which would be life altering even if I was ultimately exonerated, and an event that may destroy my life. Recent events that you are unaware of, and that I won't link to in order to protect privacy, prove what I just said, as I have a friend who was prosecuted for a self-defense shooting and just last week was exonerated. He lost his wife, job, house, custody of his son (though that will likely be reversed very soon), his life savings, and had his future put in grave doubt, despite being a legit genius with all the fancy papers to hang on his wall to prove it. When future background checks show he was prosecuted for attempted murder, well... What do you think that will do to his prospects of landing that job, despite his not guilty verdict? So, yeah, there are a lot of situations where violence actually occurred (or would have absent the would-be victim being armed) that don't show up on any report or statistic, that nobody but the victim and bad guy know even happened. The number is unknown and unknowable, but I suspect it's not small. While my friend is the only person, I know in that situation to have been prosecuted, he is not the only one I know that have protected themselves with a gun, and only one of the other incidents got reported. Our justice system also doesn't find defendants 'innocent', just not guilty by the subjective standard of 'beyond a reasonable doubt'. Therefore, many companies will treat a not guilty verdict on such a charge no differently than they would a guilty one.
Funny you mention that, as I recently had an aha moment when watching an episode of NCIS that some of those fictional agents shoot and kill a bad guy (or several) virtually episode, where in real life most LEOs go their entire career without shooting anyone. A recently retired NYPD friend of mine fired his sidearm only once in his, and that was on 9/11 on the bottom floor of one the Trade Center buildings to break the glass and create a larger exit. Afterwards, the brass was trying to figure out who did it, but he didn't out himself as he didn't know if their intent was to give whoever did it a commendation, a pink slip, or a prison sentence. Likewise, many shows and movies that have an underlying 'cops and robbers' theme show bad guys with automatic weapons as though every criminal uses those on a regular basis, when in fact I can count on one hand the number of times it's happened in my entire life.
What your country did to Mr. Martin falls under what I would describe as a crime against humanity. I have said that we don't care how the rest of the world does things so many times you are probably tired of hearing me say it, but this sad story only served to reinforce and strengthen my resolve in that regard. Had he lived in my State, unless he got a prosecutor more concerned with their own personal career and steps up the ladder than the actual proper application of the Law and actual justice, he would have been guilty of nothing. We don't have any gun registrations requirements, in fact I think that is hard-coded into our State Constitution, and an intruder's presence in your home is presumed to meet the 'reasonable fear of imminent death or grave bodily injury' standard used that makes the use of lethal force legal.
I agree that securing firearms is of utmost importance and all gun owners should keep their firearms in a secure place to protect kids and protect their investment. This law, however, should allow 100% of the cost to be written off. A small, to medium gun safe in $500+ It's easy to get into the $800 neighborhood when buying a safe. But, a $300 safe? That isn't going to protect anything, in my opinion.
They're either watching too many movies or too much news. But yeah you should make a very good point some police officers can go a 40-year career with never firing their pistol. I would say that's probably 50 times more common if not more than a police officer killing somebody.
They trot out Trump when they don’t have facts or an intellectual argument. She tries it with me even though she knows I loathe the guy. It’s just the only tool left in their toolbox—never mind they are trying to hammer nails with a chalk line string. Some interesting information on Australia. In Australia it’s never rape—the women have a “duty” to put out. Australia is the second most misogynistic country—big surprise there huh? Second only to Muslim majority and official religion Malaysia. https://www.globalcitizen.org/en/content/australian-men-rank-among-most-misogynistic/ How can you keep stats on rape if unwilling sex is the duty of women in Australia? I don’t think such a culture in a country where women can’t even carry pepper spray is something to brag about. Australia has a tendency to fudge statistics at times. Here’s a link that documents it. https://www.mja.com.au/journal/2010...uicide-australia-rationale-and-program-change Pretty easy to reduce firearm suicides and hide substitution by hanging if you code both suicides as accidental deaths. LOL. Funny that incorrect coding started in 1997 right after passage of the National Firearms Agreement. What’s even more telling is research showing hangings replacing firearm suicide prior to the NFA. Here is an interesting study of how hanging suicides increased at the same rate firearm suicides decreased during the 1975 to 1998 time period in Australia. (Until they started coding both suicide methods as accidental deaths of course LOL.) https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12882416/ And these are the blokes we are supposed to listen to about firearm policy! SMH
Well, we agree - but I would limit it to one or two times as a write off - after that if you want to hoard an armoury - fund it yourself.
I have seen such studies, but they do not seem realistic. Justifiable homicide is very rare -- about 3% of all homicide. Here.
So it's your view the only way you can use a firearm to defend your life as if someone dies. If you don't think weapons can be used defensively you're in denial of reality from start to finish. We've been creating weapons since the Stone age probably even before for this whole purpose of defending ourselves. Purpose in reason for all weapons to have existed throughout all of human history. For you to say you're going to happen because it's not enough people dying. It is probably the single most brain dead thing I've ever heard anyone say in regard to this discussion.
The problem with a $300 gun safe, is it can literally be carried off. Not much security, there. If anti-gunners demand gun safes, then the government can pay for it. That's how that works. That's called, "compromise".
Of course, most self-defense is non-lethal. Nevertheless, studies claiming over a million acts of self-defense per year do not sound credible.
Why not? We live in a nation of 330,000,000 people, possibly as much as 1/3rd of them who own a gun of some sort. But, as has been said to an extent already, one doesn't have to kill someone, shoot someone, pull the trigger, or in some cases even HAVE a firearm, just a credible threat that they might, for it to be a DGU. I would think most cases where no shots are fired and nobody is seriously injured don't get reported to anyone, nor would the person who used a gun defensively answer a survey or poll honestly, as the potential ramifications are real, and serious. As just one example, is showing a gun to prevent a fist-fight a reasonable and legal way to have a DGU? If you answered no to the above, which many people would, does it change your mind if I told you that I am disabled and limited to a wheelchair, and that a single punch to my gut that a normal person might find no more than insulting might be fatal for me? (True story, BTW.) Do you think anyone who did so would answer yes to some stranger calling them on the phone asking intrusive questions that are none of their business?
