Comments | serar_is

serar_is_gay

guns

Mar 25, 2004 16:27

Alright, due to constant pressure to update from last week's asshole, I will! I found the new joining communities thing to be fun! I joined 10 communities in my spare time and posted on them, detailing why they sucked! I only got 25-30'ish responses, though :(, most of which were immensely unclever. So anyway, I wanted to address a couple ( Read more... )

Comments 7

Concerning Gun Control... radio_quiet May 8 2004, 19:06:22 UTC

Whether you're talking about "what the founders really meant", rate of firearm use to stop violent attacks, rate of firearm ownership as correlates to rate of violent and property crime, and everything else, not one bit of evidence comes in favor of gun control. Not one bit.

The closest they've ever come was a smear job by this guy named Michael Belliselles. The liberal academic elite was so delighted to see such attacks on civil liberties, that they don't agree with and seek to deny, that they awarded him some big award for it. Unfortunately, upon more detailed examination, his research was concluded to be so sloppy and filled with many indications of the creation of falses numbers and records that even a good number of his liberal colleagues decried his work for fiction.

Re: Concerning Gun Control... radio_quiet May 8 2004, 19:11:18 UTC

Sorry about that, I hit the wrong combination of keys.

Anyway, he Belliselles lost his big award and almost lost his tenure.

Gary Kleck, a criminologist, set out to study the role of gun use in crimes, expecting to find that gun use among civilians either increased crimes or did nothing to stop them. The results he saw were so staggering in opposite direction that he was forced to switch his views on the value of private firearms.

John Lott (of "More Guns, Less Crime" fame) along side Gary Kleck basically demolished the case made by any 'gun grabber'.

Re: Concerning Gun Control... serar_is_gay May 9 2004, 08:47:54 UTC

Not really in this frame of mind at all right now, but I have this saved that was on the "NRA Fact Card" from their website a few years ago. Might be a little higher or lower right now after five years, but I doubt it's anything substantial.

"Approximately 11% of gun owners and 13% of handgun owners have used their firearms for protection from criminals.

When citizens use guns for protection from criminals, the criminal is wounded in about 1 out of every 100 instances, and the criminal is killed in about 1 out of every 1000 instances."

11%-13%, about 1/10th, so sue me. If you want to talk successful use, it's about 1/1000 times. That's a good reason why gun control shouldn't be any tighter? I don't think so.

Re: Concerning Gun Control... radio_quiet May 9 2004, 10:22:27 UTC

Success rate is not a matter of how many criminals are killed by gun wielding-law abiding citizens, but a matter of how many crimes were prevented or stopped by either simply owning the gun, revealing the gun, or raising the gun to fire ( ... )

Thread 7