How Often Do We Use Guns in Self-Defense? (1 Viewer)

[MathewSmith]

It's not news that the gun owners’ lobby opposes restrictions on civilian acquisition and possession of firearms because (as they claim) law-abiding people need guns to defend themselves. Some people use guns only for hunting . But at the core of the NRA’s argument is self-defense. At the same time criminologists concur that the unusual prevalence of guns in America—some 300 million in private hands—makes our violent crime more lethal than that of other countries. And that's so true. So, do we know exactly how frequently defensive gun use occurs? Do Americans really need guns to protect themselves? Or may be, we can find some kind of alternative, how do you think?

 

[iangb]

I spent quite a bit of time looking at this a few years ago, and my conclusion was that there is nowhere near enough data, or well-made surveys. Different surveys give estimates of annual DGUs (defensive gun uses) as being between about 70,000 and 3.5 million - quite the difference!

The very high ones have some huge flaws (for example, a bank robber 'defending himself' against the police mid-crime would have been included by the survey, as would situations where a gun-owner never displayed or mentioned their weapon but "felt" like it had made an impact), and the very low have some problems as well (the NCVS, for example, was only asked of people who actually reported a crime happening to them and hence ignored all situations where the (attempted) crime was not reported).

My best guess would be it's somewhere around 250,000DGUs per year total, based on looking at a variety of the surveys, their various methodological flaws, and where the majority of the data points. However, I'm sure there are those that disagree.

 

[fmw]

Twice for me. One night I heard some stirring in my barn. I grabbed a shotgun and went there. There was a truck and horse trailer there and two men leading one of our horses toward the trailer. I racked the pump action on the shotgun and they stopped. I asked them to put the horse back. They did so and never returned.

The second time was on the west side of Chicago. I stopped at a stop light and three men ran out in front of the car and put up there hands to prevent me from going forward. I pointed a pistol at them through the windshield and asked them them to clear out. They did so. Guns are illegal in Chicago, by the way.

Neither incident was reported or involved police or the legal system. They don't count in whatever numbers are available. I'm not sure the numbers mean that much.

 

[LagerHead]

It's not news that the gun owners’ lobby opposes restrictions on civilian acquisition and possession of firearms because (as they claim) law-abiding people need guns to defend themselves. Some people use guns only for hunting . But at the core of the NRA’s argument is self-defense. At the same time criminologists concur that the unusual prevalence of guns in America—some 300 million in private hands—makes our violent crime more lethal than that of other countries. And that's so true. So, do we know exactly how frequently defensive gun use occurs? Do Americans really need guns to protect themselves? Or may be, we can find some kind of alternative, how do you think?

99.9% of the time, law-abiding citizens don't need guns to protect themselves. Some people will go their entire life never needing a gun, and for that they can be truly grateful. But when a gun is needed, it is absolutely the best tool for the job.

All of which is completely irrelevant. The 2nd Amendment isn't truly about protecting our families from criminals, though that is also ingrained in there according to the Supreme Court. It is about protecting us from a government which would take our guns and then impose their will upon us with no means to resist.

 

[Chomsky]

Once for me.

I thwarted a violent break-in at 1:00A occurring at the house next-door. This was in a very densely populated working class immigrant neighborhood on Chicago's Southside, on a mild summer night where I had fallen asleep with the windows open.

It was the result of a small-time drug-deal (more like low-level drug use & cost sharing) gone wrong in a neighborhood bar, where an individual came looking for the son of my next-door neighbor who lived there, but was not currently present in the house - he was smashing & breaking-in with a baseball bat to the front door, and had already gotten through the storm-door but the solid wooden inner door was still holding. I was awoken by the screams of the middle-aged mother & her 16y.o., who were the only occupants present.

I approached, but kept my distance to no closer than about 15-20 feet (he still had the baseball bat & was still smashing the the door with it) and ordered the attacker off the front porch in an extremely commanding & authoritative tone - a deeply yelled-out command, in actuality. He appeared extremely intoxicated (I later found out he was on PCP), and slowly started down the steps, then again slowly turning towards me when he was on the sidewalk directly in front of me, raising the baseball bat above his head. We were maybe 12 feet separate then. In that instant I reached my right hand inside my unbuttoned leather cabretta & placed it on the handle of my J-frame S&W in my waste-band, with the piece still remaining hidden under the cabretta - holding my ground and staring him down (in the eyes) without saying a word. He paused & blinked for what seemed like an eternity and tried to absorb the situation in his drug-addled mind - in reality it was maybe 5-7 seconds. He must have eventually figured I had serious heat under my jacket, and then turned without a word & dashed the 10-15 feet into his car parked curbside and still running with the drivers-door still open. He fled the area.

At that very moment an undercover car came around the corner, ironically just missing hitting him, not realized he was the assailant, and they then rushed the house (at me) with guns drawn, then immediately crouching back behind their car, guns trained on me, when I put my hands up but the wind caught the cabretta and as one side opened away from my body they caught sight of my revolver. I shouted-out I was the neighbor that had scared-off the attacker as the mother and daughter came out running down the steps shouting the same, and by then several marked cars had arrived on the seen, guns drawn as well. With the victims' chants and my shouts and hands held overhead, the police hesitated, and a dangerous situation was then quickly diffused.

This was during the mid '80's, and Chicago had banned handguns maybe 5 or 6 years previously, but grandfathered in those that chose to register their handguns if they possessed a valid FOID, so my guns were legally registered and I was legally licensed to own them - but there were no carry permits being issued then. However, the police were not aware of the status of my gun or myself. The copper questioning me simply asked, "Is that registered"? I replied, "Of course"! And without his wanting to verify or see my paperwork or FOID, I'll never forget his exact words: "Thanks for helping out - now go put that thing away before someone accidently gets hurt"!

 

[blackjack50]

It's not news that the gun owners’ lobby opposes restrictions on civilian acquisition and possession of firearms because (as they claim) law-abiding people need guns to defend themselves. Some people use guns only for hunting . But at the core of the NRA’s argument is self-defense. At the same time criminologists concur that the unusual prevalence of guns in America—some 300 million in private hands—makes our violent crime more lethal than that of other countries. And that's so true. So, do we know exactly how frequently defensive gun use occurs? Do Americans really need guns to protect themselves? Or may be, we can find some kind of alternative, how do you think?

Do you know of ANY alternative that levels the playing field for a 50 year old petite woman and a 220lb street fighter? And it has to work every time.

 

[blackjack50]

I spent quite a bit of time looking at this a few years ago, and my conclusion was that there is nowhere near enough data, or well-made surveys. Different surveys give estimates of annual DGUs (defensive gun uses) as being between about 70,000 and 3.5 million - quite the difference!

The very high ones have some huge flaws (for example, a bank robber 'defending himself' against the police mid-crime would have been included by the survey, as would situations where a gun-owner never displayed or mentioned their weapon but "felt" like it had made an impact), and the very low have some problems as well (the NCVS, for example, was only asked of people who actually reported a crime happening to them and hence ignored all situations where the (attempted) crime was not reported).

My best guess would be it's somewhere around 250,000DGUs per year total, based on looking at a variety of the surveys, their various methodological flaws, and where the majority of the data points. However, I'm sure there are those that disagree.

Home invasions are exceedingly rare in my home town. Everyone knows you don't break into a house when the person is home. Good way to get shot.

 

[faithful_servant]

It's not news that the gun owners’ lobby opposes restrictions on civilian acquisition and possession of firearms because (as they claim) law-abiding people need guns to defend themselves. Some people use guns only for hunting . But at the core of the NRA’s argument is self-defense. At the same time criminologists concur that the unusual prevalence of guns in America—some 300 million in private hands—makes our violent crime more lethal than that of other countries. And that's so true. So, do we know exactly how frequently defensive gun use occurs? Do Americans really need guns to protect themselves? Or may be, we can find some kind of alternative, how do you think?

Its' not about how often they get used, but how often the very idea of their presence stops crime. If you put a sign on the front of your convenience store that states that the clerk is armed and trained in firearms use, I can guarantee you that the chances of your store getting robbed just went WAY down. Firearms are intended to be primarily a deterrent, and secondly a response.

 

[faithful_servant]

99.9% of the time, law-abiding citizens don't need guns to protect themselves. Some people will go their entire life never needing a gun, and for that they can be truly grateful. But when a gun is needed, it is absolutely the best tool for the job.

All of which is completely irrelevant. The 2nd Amendment isn't truly about protecting our families from criminals, though that is also ingrained in there according to the Supreme Court. It is about protecting us from a government which would take our guns and then impose their will upon us with no means to resist.

EXACTLY!!! The 2nd Amendment makes The People the de facto 4th branch of the gov't. It gives us the RIGHT to tell our gov't "HELL NO!!", but only if we do it together ( a couple of pissed off people isn't going to do anything, it would take a united nationwide effort). That means that the gov't has to WAY over the edge (far beyond what we've ever seen it do).

 

[Chomsky]

I accidentally hit the button & posted prematurely before I could fully finish my post, but want to add:

Great idea for a thread!

Let's keep the stories coming - I'm very interested in hearing my fellow citizen's narratives of their defending themselves & their neighborhoods!

 

[blackjack50]

The closest I've ever come to pulling my gun in self defense was on an angry pit bull looking dog. I was in a ghetto area and the dog wasn't on a leash. It raced after a jogger and was stopped by a fence (a portion I couldn't see). I was worried I would have to stop and shoot the thing in full view of traffic.

 

[Chomsky]

Twice for me. One night I heard some stirring in my barn. I grabbed a shotgun and went there. There was a truck and horse trailer there and two men leading one of our horses toward the trailer. I racked the pump action on the shotgun and they stopped. I asked them to put the horse back. They did so and never returned.

The second time was on the west side of Chicago. I stopped at a stop light and three men ran out in front of the car and put up there hands to prevent me from going forward. I pointed a pistol at them through the windshield and asked them them to clear out. They did so. Guns are illegal in Chicago, by the way.

Neither incident was reported or involved police or the legal system. They don't count in whatever numbers are available. I'm not sure the numbers mean that much.

Guns are not and never were 'illegal in Chicago, but there was a handgun ban (similar to NYC) occurring in the mid-eighties that was recently repealed. Long guns were exempt from the ban, and were always legal. So we might try to say, "handguns were illegal for a period", but that's not accurate either - handguns purchased previous to the ban were grandfathered-in (read my story in post #5). So guns (even handguns) were never illegal in a carte blanche manner, but yes it was illegal to specifically bring newly purchased handguns into the city from the time of the band until the recent repeal. So you are right in that regard, and the handgun ban was total B.S. I'm glad it was overturned.

Now, Chicago (as Illinois) fully allows all federally legal gun ownership, easily issues concealed-carry permits (but requires a safety class), and respects all carries from the other states. No special circumstances are required in Chicago to purchase & own any firearm (simply buy it & keep it), unless one desires a carry permit. But Illinois still requires an FOID (firearm owner's) card, which is essentially an I.D. verifying you've passed an Illinois State Police background check.

+++

I'm very glad to hear your situation on the Westside was diffused w/o incident - good work! :2wave:

For all the talk about how bad the Southside is, when I was growing-up the Westside always had the reputation as being the very toughest. The Southside (now) has large areas of relative poverty, but it varies & blends with lower economic areas that are not truly 'impoverished', and working-class areas that are still pretty tough. It's a pretty large blended swatch, and then of course there good (even high-end) areas on the Southside too, but they are shrinking with all the 'white-flight' (and 'black-flight', if that's a term) to the 'burbs.

The Westside on the other hand, has much smaller geographic crime areas, but they are very intense, highly impoverished, and homogeneous. Also, they encompass many of the areas that burned in the King riots of '68, and the current crime areas were never or only partially rebuilt, often resembling a semi-bombed-out no-man's land. To make matters worse, the Eisenhower Expressway (290) flows from the more affluent Northwest Suburbs directly into the heart of the Westside, becoming the suburban kid's conduit to the drug markets in the city. And some of these areas just off the major exits truly are 24/7/365 open-air drug markets, including having a health dose of skanky prostitution for good measure - to say nothing of it being the car-jack capitals of Chicago.

So if you were in one of these Westside areas, you did well to handle yourself as you did - you may have been on the path to a carjacking.

 

[fmw]

Guns are not and never were 'illegal in Chicago, but there was a handgun ban (similar to NYC) occurring in the mid-eighties that was recently repealed. Long guns were exempt from the ban, and were always legal. So we might try to say, "handguns were illegal for a period", but that's not accurate either - handguns purchased previous to the ban were grandfathered-in (read my story in post #5). So guns (even handguns) were never illegal in a carte blanche manner, but yes it was illegal to specifically bring newly purchased handguns into the city from the time of the band until the recent repeal. So you are right in that regard, and the handgun ban was total B.S. I'm glad it was overturned.

Now, Chicago (as Illinois) fully allows all federally legal gun ownership, easily issues concealed-carry permits (but requires a safety class), and respects all carries from the other states. No special circumstances are required in Chicago to purchase & own any firearm (simply buy it & keep it), unless one desires a carry permit. But Illinois still requires an FOID (firearm owner's) card, which is essentially an I.D. verifying you've passed an Illinois State Police background check.

+++

I'm very glad to hear your situation on the Westside was diffused w/o incident - good work! :2wave:

For all the talk about how bad the Southside is, when I was growing-up the Westside always had the reputation as being the very toughest. The Southside (now) has large areas of relative poverty, but it varies & blends with lower economic areas that are not truly 'impoverished', and working-class areas that are still pretty tough. It's a pretty large blended swatch, and then of course there good (even high-end) areas on the Southside too, but they are shrinking with all the 'white-flight' (and 'black-flight', if that's a term) to the 'burbs.

The Westside on the other hand, has much smaller geographic crime areas, but they are very intense, highly impoverished, and homogeneous. Also, they encompass many of the areas that burned in the King riots of '68, and the current crime areas were never or only partially rebuilt, often resembling a semi-bombed-out no-man's land. To make matters worse, the Eisenhower Expressway (290) flows from the more affluent Northwest Suburbs directly into the heart of the Westside, becoming the suburban kid's conduit to the drug markets in the city. And some of these areas just off the major exits truly are 24/7/365 open-air drug markets, including having a health dose of skanky prostitution for good measure - to say nothing of it being the car-jack capitals of Chicago.

So if you were in one of these Westside areas, you did well to handle yourself as you did - you may have been on the path to a carjacking.

At the time this occurred handguns were illegal and my Indiana carry permit meant nothing. Glad to see Chicago has improved its view of the second amendment.

 

[MaggieD]

Guns are not and never were 'illegal in Chicago, but there was a handgun ban (similar to NYC) occurring in the mid-eighties that was recently repealed. Long guns were exempt from the ban, and were always legal. So we might try to say, "handguns were illegal for a period", but that's not accurate either - handguns purchased previous to the ban were grandfathered-in (read my story in post #5). So guns (even handguns) were never illegal in a carte blanche manner, but yes it was illegal to specifically bring newly purchased handguns into the city from the time of the band until the recent repeal. So you are right in that regard, and the handgun ban was total B.S. I'm glad it was overturned.

Now, Chicago (as Illinois) fully allows all federally legal gun ownership, easily issues concealed-carry permits (but requires a safety class), and respects all carries from the other states. No special circumstances are required in Chicago to purchase & own any firearm (simply buy it & keep it), unless one desires a carry permit. But Illinois still requires an FOID (firearm owner's) card, which is essentially an I.D. verifying you've passed an Illinois State Police background check.

+++

I'm very glad to hear your situation on the Westside was diffused w/o incident - good work! :2wave:

For all the talk about how bad the Southside is, when I was growing-up the Westside always had the reputation as being the very toughest. The Southside (now) has large areas of relative poverty, but it varies & blends with lower economic areas that are not truly 'impoverished', and working-class areas that are still pretty tough. It's a pretty large blended swatch, and then of course there good (even high-end) areas on the Southside too, but they are shrinking with all the 'white-flight' (and 'black-flight', if that's a term) to the 'burbs.

The Westside on the other hand, has much smaller geographic crime areas, but they are very intense, highly impoverished, and homogeneous. Also, they encompass many of the areas that burned in the King riots of '68, and the current crime areas were never or only partially rebuilt, often resembling a semi-bombed-out no-man's land. To make matters worse, the Eisenhower Expressway (290) flows from the more affluent Northwest Suburbs directly into the heart of the Westside, becoming the suburban kid's conduit to the drug markets in the city. And some of these areas just off the major exits truly are 24/7/365 open-air drug markets, including having a health dose of skanky prostitution for good measure - to say nothing of it being the car-jack capitals of Chicago.

So if you were in one of these Westside areas, you did well to handle yourself as you did - you may have been on the path to a carjacking.

Illinois does not recognize other state carries. None of them. You can transport a gun in Illinois if you follow special transport rules.

 

[Chomsky]

At the time this occurred handguns were illegal and my Indiana carry permit meant nothing. Glad to see Chicago has improved its view of the second amendment.

Then yes, you are accurate for your situation - no argument there (and once again, good work in providing a safe ending).

 

[robles]

It turned out caused by any small-time drug-deal (more like low-level medication employ & charge sharing) long gone incorrect within a town clubhouse, in which somebody arrived trying to find this son associated with the next-door neighbour exactly who existed right now there, although wasn't at the moment found inside your home -- he or she was striking & breaking-in which has a football bat for the front door, and also got witout a doubt gotten from the storm-door nevertheless the stable wood made intrinsic entrance was nevertheless having. My partner and i was awoken through the screams on the middle-aged mum & your ex 16y. a., have been the only occupants found.

 

[Chomsky]

Illinois does not recognize other state carries. None of them. You can transport a gun in Illinois if you follow special transport rules.

Thanks for the reply (and correction), MaggieD.

Yes, you are right & I stand corrected.

I assumed the recent Supreme Court case reversing Chicago's ban (and capitulation) reset everything, but a little research shows it does not affect the carries at the State level.

There appears to be four states that Illinois will honor reciprocity, but special paperwork for Illinois needs to be processed in advance of carrying.

So your are substantially correct.