Guns = Freedom

[Goshin]

Since truth cannot be repeated too often, here's some real facts and figures...

National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS).

Data from the NCVS imply that each year there are only about 68,000 defensive uses of guns in connection with assaults and robberies, [16] or about 80,000 to 82,000 if one adds in uses linked with household burglaries. [17] These figures are less than one ninth of the estimates implied by the results of at least thirteen other surveys, summarized in Table 1, most of which have been previously reported. [18] The NCVS estimates imply that about 0.09 of 1% of U.S. households experience a defensive gun use (DGU) in any one year, compared to the Mauser survey's estimate of 3.79% of households over a five year period, or about 0.76% in any one year, assuming an even distribution over the five year period, and no repeat uses. [19]
The strongest evidence that a measurement is inaccurate is that it is inconsistent with many other independent measurements or observations of the same phenomenon; indeed, some would argue that this is ultimately the only way of knowing that a measurement is wrong. Therefore, one might suppose that the gross inconsistency of the NCVS-based estimates with all other known estimates, each derived from sources with no known flaws even remotely substantial enough to account for nine-to-one, or more, discrepancies, would be sufficient to persuade any serious scholar that the NCVS estimates are unreliable.
...The NCVS was not designed to estimate how often people resist crime using a gun. It was designed primarily to estimate national victimization levels; it incidentally happens to include a few self-protection questions which include response categories covering resistance with a gun.

The Kleck study concluded that there were possibly as many as 2.5 million defensive gun uses per year, many of which involved no shots fired or no one injured, and many of which were not reported:

The most technically sound estimates presented in Table 2 are those based on the shorter one-year recall period that rely on Rs' first-hand accounts of their own experiences (person-based estimates). These estimates appear in the first two columns. They indicate that each year in the U.S. there are about 2.2 to 2.5 million DGUs of all types by civilians against humans, with about 1.5 to 1.9 million of the incidents involving use of handguns.

Based on study parameters, the NCVS is probably far too low; possibly the Kleck study is too high. Both indicate that guns are used defensively far more often than they are used to criminally murder or in fatal accidents.

These Wikipedia articles are good sources of general information on concealed-carry permits and related issues.
They include information from both pro and anti perspectives.

Concealed carry in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

North Carolina reports only 0.2% of their 263,102 holders had their license revoked in the 10 years since they have adopted the law.[61]

Permit holders are a remarkably law-abiding subclass of the population. Florida, which has issued over 1,408,907 permits in twenty one years, has revoked only 166 for a "crime after licensure involving a firearm," and fewer than 4,500 permits for any reason.[62]

Firearms as Used in Crime
Annual Criminal Abuse of Firearms Nationally: Less than 0.2% of all firearms, and less than 0.4% of all handguns. More than 99.8% of all guns, and 99.6% of all handguns are NOT used in criminal activity in any given year.(BATF, FBI)

Crime in the United States
Chance of Any Single Individual Being a Victim of Violent Crime In Their Lifetime: Currently about 65 to 70%, depending on age, profession, lifestyle, geographic and demographic factors.(US DoJ, FBI UCR)

Firearms Accidents and Firearms Safety Education
Fatal Firearms Accidents for All Ages Annually: 1,134 nationwide in 1996. Rate of 0.4 per 100T population. Represents a roughly 90% decrease from record high in 1904. Accident rate is down by 65% since 1930, while U.S. population has doubled and number of privately-owned firearms has quadrupled. Compare to other types of fatal accidents, for all ages: Motor Vehicles 16.7/100T, Falls 4.8/100T, Poisoning 4.0/100T, Drowning 1.7/100T, Fires 1.6/100T, Choking 1.1/100T.(National Safety Council, National Center for Health Statistics, BATF, US Census)

Fatal Firearms Accidents for Children 14 and Under Annually: 138 nationwide in 1996. About 3% of all fatal accidents under age 14. Represents a 75% decrease from record high of 550 in 1975. Compared to other types of fatal accidents for children: Motor Vehicles 44%, Fires 16%, Drowning 14%, Choking 4.5%.(Nat'l Safety Council, Nat'l Center for Health Statistics)

Guns in responsible and law-abiding hands do not increase overall risk, and demonstrably are used far more often in lawful defense than in all murders and fatal accidents combined. "Paranoia" doesn't have to have anything to do with a citizen's decision to bear arms.

 

[TurtleDude]

Live is really not the dramatic movie you and your NRA buddies seem to think it is.

I lived and boozed in LA 40 years and neither I, nor my drinking buddies, friends, and relatives, ever needed a gun to protect ourselves. Disagreements, yes, but only rare fist fights... never guns.

ricksfolly

My late parents had fire insurance for the 49 years of their married lives and fire extinguishers in their home and never once needed either

same with flood and tornado insurance

 

[TurtleDude]

Oh, well if you never needed it, then there's no way that anyone else could have ever needed it, cause that's how statistics work.

I know of a mugger who probably would agree that I once needed a gun

and he would also say he probably needed to have picked someone else to mug

 

[hazlnut]

The study is linked in post #5

Great ... even the abstract doesn't back up the OP. This whole thread is based on a strawman version of the study.

 

[Guy Incognito]

Great ... even the abstract doesn't back up the OP. This whole thread is based on a strawman version of the study.

It's true. Countries with higher amounts of gun owners have lower levels of corruption and higher levels of liberty.
[...]
It appears that, in a sense, guns really do equal freedom.

As you can see, the OP is hardly a "straw man," but a fair characterization of the study. Don't blame me if you didn't actually read the thread, just skimmed it and shot your mouth off.

 

[hazlnut]

As you can see, the OP is hardly a "straw man," but a fair characterization of the study. Don't blame me if you didn't actually read the thread, just skimmed it and shot your mouth off.

Nice try, Guy.

But OP the misstates the findings/summary in the abstract. Not grossly, but enough... That's a straw man, bud.

Anybody can click on the link and read it. Why you would so boldly stick your foot in your mouth is beyond me. The abstract does not fully back up the OP.

How about answering some of the questions I raised? Or did you just 'skim' over them?

How does one quantify freedom?

And what's the background date on the Civil Rights Worker (false) analogy?

 

[Guy Incognito]

How does one quantify freedom?

And what's the background date on the Civil Rights Worker (false) analogy?

You would know the answers to these questions if you read the study.

But OP the misstates the findings/summary in the abstract. Not grossly, but enough... That's a straw man, bud.

You clearly posted here without reading the thread, as evidenced by the fact that you asked for a link to the study when there is a link on page 1. By your own admission you haven't read the study, only the abstract. My OP is, in fact, a fair characterization of the study. I have already acknowledged that it is "just my take on it," and if you disagree with my assessment I would be pleased to discuss the merits.

I'd be very interested to discuss the empirical basis of this study, and it is in fact you who is making a straw man out of my OP, and mischaracterizing the title of this thread (which clearly means that there is empirical evidence to suggest guns are a correlative with freedom, which, again, is a fair characterization of the study). On the other hand, if you would rather get on an antigun soapbox that's fine too, just don't go making a straw man out of my claims. I will not be parsing my posts anymore, it is very tedious.