• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Is The NRA Wrong? New Study Shows Guns Rarely Used for Self-Defense

imyoda

DP Veteran
Joined
May 6, 2012
Messages
5,731
Reaction score
1,025
Location
Sarasota, Florida
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Is The NRA Wrong? New Study Shows Guns Rarely Used For Self-Defense
Is The NRA Wrong? New Study Shows Guns Rarely Used for Self-Defense


Personal safety is one of the most-cited reasons to buy a gun. But a new study challenges the assumption that firearms are often used for self-defense.

The Violence Policy Center found that a very small proportion of firearm homicides can be attributed to so-called justifiable situations. Just one-gun death per every 32 criminal gun killings happened in self-defense scenarios in 2012, the most recent year for which data is available. And, while gun advocates argue that they want a firearm handy in their house in case of an intruder, just 0.1 percent of the justified attacks involved property crimes.

“The [National Rifle Association] has staked its entire agenda on the claim that guns are necessary for self-defense, but this gun industry propaganda has no basis in fact,” Josh Sugarmann, the executive director of VPC, which conducted the review, said in a statement. “Guns are far more likely to be used in a homicide than in a justifiable homicide by a private citizen. In fact, a gun is far more likely to be stolen than used in self-defense.”

Of the 8,601 total homicides recorded in 2012, just 259 of those deaths were the result of a self-defense scenario, according to the study. There were 13 states in which zero justifiable firearm deaths were logged that year. That no-deaths list included states with relatively strict gun control laws as well as states where firearms are more easily accessible. From New York and New Jersey, with tighter regulation, to Idaho and Montana, known for their love of hunting and opposition to gun control, firearms don’t appear to be used with any real frequency to save one’s self or family, according to the study.

“Purchasing a gun may help enrich the firearms industry, but the facts show it is unlikely to increase your personal safety,” Sugarmann said. “In fact, in a nation of more than 300 million firearms, it is striking how rarely guns are used in self-defense.” …………..


ALSO SEE:
Personal Safety Top Reason Americans Own Guns Today
http://www.vpc.org/studies/justifiable15.pdf
Self-Defense Gun Use is Rare, Study Finds | Violence Policy Center
Lobbying Spending Database - National Rifle Assn, 2015 | OpenSecrets
http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/totals.php?id=D000000082&cycle=2014


Since a gun is seldom used "protecting "honey and home" and the cost of a gun.........some might consider installing deadbolt lock in the entry doors..........some what cheaper and more effective and certainly much safer........... than trying to shoot an intruder in the dark.........

Wouldn't you agree?
 

TurtleDude

warrior of the wetlands
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2005
Messages
259,765
Reaction score
79,553
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
The VPC (Vile Propaganda Center) is even more dishonest that the Brady Organization, It was the VPC that sent out a circular to left wing media outlets telling them to deliberately confuse the public over "assault weapons" and machine guns. After the magazine ban was instituted by Clinton, the VPC started whining that gun makers were downsizing their 9mm and 45 ACP handguns (why make a gun big enough to take a 17 round magazine when all you could sell was a 10 rounder) and the VPC said this meant more and more "lethal" but easily concealable handguns.

and when their jihad against Assault weapons failed-they tried to ban rifles with magnifying scopes as "sniper rifles


the VPC starts with the goal that all firearms should be banned (except for the government and criminals) and works backwards. NOTHING that lying bunch of asses proffers is anything other than dishonest propaganda
 

TurtleDude

warrior of the wetlands
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2005
Messages
259,765
Reaction score
79,553
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Is The NRA Wrong? New Study Shows Guns Rarely Used For Self-Defense
Is The NRA Wrong? New Study Shows Guns Rarely Used for Self-Defense


Personal safety is one of the most-cited reasons to buy a gun. But a new study challenges the assumption that firearms are often used for self-defense.

The Violence Policy Center found that a very small proportion of firearm homicides can be attributed to so-called justifiable situations. Just one-gun death per every 32 criminal gun killings happened in self-defense scenarios in 2012, the most recent year for which data is available. And, while gun advocates argue that they want a firearm handy in their house in case of an intruder, just 0.1 percent of the justified attacks involved property crimes.

“The [National Rifle Association] has staked its entire agenda on the claim that guns are necessary for self-defense, but this gun industry propaganda has no basis in fact,” Josh Sugarmann, the executive director of VPC, which conducted the review, said in a statement. “Guns are far more likely to be used in a homicide than in a justifiable homicide by a private citizen. In fact, a gun is far more likely to be stolen than used in self-defense.”

Of the 8,601 total homicides recorded in 2012, just 259 of those deaths were the result of a self-defense scenario, according to the study. There were 13 states in which zero justifiable firearm deaths were logged that year. That no-deaths list included states with relatively strict gun control laws as well as states where firearms are more easily accessible. From New York and New Jersey, with tighter regulation, to Idaho and Montana, known for their love of hunting and opposition to gun control, firearms don’t appear to be used with any real frequency to save one’s self or family, according to the study.

“Purchasing a gun may help enrich the firearms industry, but the facts show it is unlikely to increase your personal safety,” Sugarmann said. “In fact, in a nation of more than 300 million firearms, it is striking how rarely guns are used in self-defense.” …………..


ALSO SEE:
Personal Safety Top Reason Americans Own Guns Today
http://www.vpc.org/studies/justifiable15.pdf
Self-Defense Gun Use is Rare, Study Finds | Violence Policy Center
Lobbying Spending Database - National Rifle Assn, 2015 | OpenSecrets
http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/totals.php?id=D000000082&cycle=2014


Since a gun is seldom used "protecting "honey and home" and the cost of a gun.........some might consider installing deadbolt lock in the entry doors..........some what cheaper and more effective and certainly much safer........... than trying to shoot an intruder in the dark.........

Wouldn't you agree?

why would I agree with your stupid loaded questions which assume facts that are not in evidence? even the government-when run by Democrats, have founded hundreds of thousands of defensive uses of firearms a year.

I also suggest that all the gun hating politicians give up armed security if the Vile Pile of Crap is so accurate
 

MickeyW

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 10, 2015
Messages
14,012
Reaction score
3,439
Location
Southern Oregon
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Is The NRA Wrong? New Study Shows Guns Rarely Used For Self-Defense
Is The NRA Wrong? New Study Shows Guns Rarely Used for Self-Defense


Personal safety is one of the most-cited reasons to buy a gun. But a new study challenges the assumption that firearms are often used for self-defense.

The Violence Policy Center found that a very small proportion of firearm homicides can be attributed to so-called justifiable situations. Just one-gun death per every 32 criminal gun killings happened in self-defense scenarios in 2012, the most recent year for which data is available. And, while gun advocates argue that they want a firearm handy in their house in case of an intruder, just 0.1 percent of the justified attacks involved property crimes.

“The [National Rifle Association] has staked its entire agenda on the claim that guns are necessary for self-defense, but this gun industry propaganda has no basis in fact,” Josh Sugarmann, the executive director of VPC, which conducted the review, said in a statement. “Guns are far more likely to be used in a homicide than in a justifiable homicide by a private citizen. In fact, a gun is far more likely to be stolen than used in self-defense.”

Of the 8,601 total homicides recorded in 2012, just 259 of those deaths were the result of a self-defense scenario, according to the study. There were 13 states in which zero justifiable firearm deaths were logged that year. That no-deaths list included states with relatively strict gun control laws as well as states where firearms are more easily accessible. From New York and New Jersey, with tighter regulation, to Idaho and Montana, known for their love of hunting and opposition to gun control, firearms don’t appear to be used with any real frequency to save one’s self or family, according to the study.

“Purchasing a gun may help enrich the firearms industry, but the facts show it is unlikely to increase your personal safety,” Sugarmann said. “In fact, in a nation of more than 300 million firearms, it is striking how rarely guns are used in self-defense.” …………..


ALSO SEE:
Personal Safety Top Reason Americans Own Guns Today
http://www.vpc.org/studies/justifiable15.pdf
Self-Defense Gun Use is Rare, Study Finds | Violence Policy Center
Lobbying Spending Database - National Rifle Assn, 2015 | OpenSecrets
http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/totals.php?id=D000000082&cycle=2014


Since a gun is seldom used "protecting "honey and home" and the cost of a gun.........some might consider installing deadbolt lock in the entry doors..........some what cheaper and more effective and certainly much safer........... than trying to shoot an intruder in the dark.........

Wouldn't you agree?

Well, as usual, the VPC has their own anti-gun agenda. I will read the article and then illustrate the many flaws.

Ok, I read that piece of lying excrement!
 
Last edited:

TurtleDude

warrior of the wetlands
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2005
Messages
259,765
Reaction score
79,553
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Well, as usual, the VPC has their own anti-gun agenda. I will read the article and then illustrate the many flaws.

its going to take a long time to deal with all the propaganda that comes from a guy whose main agenda is promoting far left values. Josh Sugarmann got kicked out of the Brady conspiracy for being (or I should say-for publicly stating what we all knew) too extreme and admitting that gun bans were the Brady thugs ultimate goal
 

TurtleDude

warrior of the wetlands
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2005
Messages
259,765
Reaction score
79,553
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
BTW the article ImYoda cities doesn't really have any factual backup

but it does have this-something that anyone active in this area knows is a sure fire sign that BS is afoot

The VCP study was funded by the Herb Block Foundation, a nonprofit in Washington, D.C., that focuses on prejudice and poverty. The Joyce Foundation, a Chicago-based nonprofit that focuses at least in part on anti-gun violence campaigns, also provided funding.
 

imyoda

DP Veteran
Joined
May 6, 2012
Messages
5,731
Reaction score
1,025
Location
Sarasota, Florida
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
NO.

Self-defense is not limited to active use against criminals.

Self-defense applies to any and all forms of threat. Not only criminal, but wild animals, foreign invasion, and government oppression.

Moreover, it includes deterrence. The fact that so many people are armed serves as a deterrent to criminal activity and government oppression.

It's a GOOD thing that so few people find themselves in a situation where they need to use a gun. It's a BETTER thing to have one in case you ever DO need it.


REALLY.............."foreign invasion, and government oppression"......... a dead bolt lock IMHO may leave you with a better outcome...........More so it all sounds more like a 7 yr-old boy on a "Let's play guns" fantasy trip ...............IMHO
 

imyoda

DP Veteran
Joined
May 6, 2012
Messages
5,731
Reaction score
1,025
Location
Sarasota, Florida
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
why would I agree with your stupid loaded questions which assume facts that are not in evidence? even the government-when run by Democrats, have founded hundreds of thousands of defensive uses of firearms a year.

I also suggest that all the gun hating politicians give up armed security if the Vile Pile of Crap is so accurate


Loaded question? how so?.................all I ask is if a deadbolt loch on the doors might be better, safer, and cheaper...............then using a gun.............are you referring to the loader gun as a question?
 

TurtleDude

warrior of the wetlands
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2005
Messages
259,765
Reaction score
79,553
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Loaded question? how so?.................all I ask is if a deadbolt loch on the doors might be better, safer, and cheaper...............then using a gun.............are you referring to the loader gun as a question?

that is like saying a putter is the best solution for playing a golf ball.
 

MickeyW

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 10, 2015
Messages
14,012
Reaction score
3,439
Location
Southern Oregon
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
By all means........please do


Capt. stated above the fact, that a gun is a deterrent. Emphasis on that Yoda!!! It's not about how many people a gun owner has to kill to satisfy stats, it's all about when not to shoot and changing the mind of a would be assailant.

And it's not just about a person's home. It's about defending oneself at work, in the park, at church, schools, in the woods hiking, traveling on the highways, being in a diner or restaurant, or the WalMart parking lot.

More crime has been stopped cold, by the mere presence of a firearm.....w/o a shot fired! You and the VPC ignore those facts.

What you people also ignore, are the number of times a firearms encounter is not reported. Does the term Shoot and Shovel mean anything to you?

Interesting little comments at the end about discrimination and poverty. Discrimination is exactly what the VPC practices ...and wants to see those in poverty defenseless.

Yes, a deadbolt is easier and cheaper, but it only constitutes the basics of defending your home...it sure isn't the total answer.

And then............................you are all fixated on the home.....it's not just about your home....it's every place you go ...day or night!

Most home invasions are made up of two or more people and a deabolt will only work for so long.....ever hear of breaking a window? Easy peasy.
Ever think about how much time one has to grab a gun, if intruders come through your window? I seriously doubt you have! Try 5 seconds or less. And one gun somewhere in your home does not suffice. 2-3, in strategic locations is advised and the bigger the house and older you are, the more time it will take to reach that gun.

And please, I have never known an anti gun Conservative.......
 
Last edited:

MickeyW

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 10, 2015
Messages
14,012
Reaction score
3,439
Location
Southern Oregon
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
REALLY.............."foreign invasion, and government oppression"......... a dead bolt lock IMHO may leave you with a better outcome...........More so it all sounds more like a 7 yr-old boy on a "Let's play guns" fantasy trip ...............IMHO

Obviously, you are just another poster here with no clue of real life scenarios, never been on the short end of the stick....am I right?

The 2nd Amendment was installed specifically over the chance of govt. oppression. Study some history of various countries, like Spain, Germany, Italy Russia, most of Asia. Yes yoda...it can happen here too. The only "fantasy" around here Yoda, is the trash put out by VPC and the dopes who believe them!!
 
Last edited:

OpportunityCost

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 27, 2011
Messages
34,493
Reaction score
7,689
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/cv14.pdf

From 2013 to 2014, no statistically significant change was detected in the rate of serious violence, domestic violence, intimate partner violence, violence resulting in an injury, and violence involving a firearm.

No measurable change was detected in the rate of nonfatal firearm violence from 2013 (1.3 per 1,000) to 2014 (1.7 per 1,000) (table 2). An estimated 466,110 nonfatal firearm victimizations occurred in 2014, compared to 332,950 in 2013. The rate of firearm violence in 2014 was similar to the rate in 2005 (2.1 per 1,000). In 2014, about 82% of all serious violent crimes that involved a firearm were reported to police. No measurable change was detected in the percentage of firearm violence reported to police from 2013 to 2014.

Gun and self-defense statistics that might surprise you -- and the NRA - LA Times
But an analysis of five years’ worth of stats collected by the federal Bureau of Justice Statistics’ National Crime Victimization Survey puts the number much, much lower — about 67,740 times a year.

Or 13458 crimes prevented per year, not counting deterrence. The OP source counts just deaths. This is standard for every gun control article, as they ignore the overall effect on crime. Meanwhile, without any gun control, crime seems to be dropping and gun related incidents are also dropping according to the US DoJ. I find it to be a more reliable source, don't you?
 

imyoda

DP Veteran
Joined
May 6, 2012
Messages
5,731
Reaction score
1,025
Location
Sarasota, Florida
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Capt. stated above the fact, that a gun is a deterrent. Emphasis on that Yoda!!! It's not about how many people a gun owner has to kill to satisfy stats, it's all about when not to shoot and changing the mind of a would be assailant.

And it's not just about a person's home. It's about defending oneself at work, in the park, at church, schools, in the woods hiking, traveling on the highways, being in a diner or restaurant, or the WalMart parking lot.

More crime has been stopped cold, by the mere presence of a firearm.....w/o a shot fired! You and the VPC ignore those facts.

What you people also ignore, are the number of times a firearms encounter is not reported. Does the term Shoot and Shovel mean anything to you?

All the report says is the claims for the need of a gun protection of life and property is much less than claimed..............Yet yall go bonkers...... I sure cannot explain such a violent emotional reaction to a rather straight-forward apolitical study/report............
 

TurtleDude

warrior of the wetlands
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2005
Messages
259,765
Reaction score
79,553
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
All the report says is the claims for the need of a gun protection of life and property is much less than claimed..............Yet yall go bonkers...... I sure cannot explain such a violent emotional reaction to a rather straight-forward apolitical study/report............

hey its a free country. If you don't want to buy a gun, or more likely you are afraid to own a gun-THEN DO NOT

but stop suggesting that people shouldn't own firearms for self defense.
 

OpportunityCost

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 27, 2011
Messages
34,493
Reaction score
7,689
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
All the report says is the claims for the need of a gun protection of life and property is much less than claimed..............Yet yall go bonkers...... I sure cannot explain such a violent emotional reaction to a rather straight-forward apolitical study/report............

LOL, how do you get violent, emotional reaction from an internet post? Please see post 14. The number is somewhere between the number quoted and the one from the NRA, as is the norm with opposing viewpoints. Both sides want to spin the numbers as much as possible.
 

imyoda

DP Veteran
Joined
May 6, 2012
Messages
5,731
Reaction score
1,025
Location
Sarasota, Florida
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Obviously, you are just another poster here with no clue of real life scenarios, never been on the short end of the stick....am I right?

The 2nd Amendment was installed specifically over the chance of govt. oppression. Study some history of various countries, like Spain, Germany, Italy Russia, most of Asia. Yes yoda...it can happen her too. The only "fantasy" around here Yoda, is the trash put out by VPC and the dopes who believe them!!


Can't deal with the facts.........so what do we do..............Go in with the personal attacks, insulting name calling and questions about my intelligence.............

That's what happens when the debate is over and the denigrating post is a confession of loss and exit......
 

TurtleDude

warrior of the wetlands
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2005
Messages
259,765
Reaction score
79,553
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Can't deal with the facts.........so what do we do..............Go in with the personal attacks, insulting name calling and questions about my intelligence.............

That's what happens when the debate is over and the denigrating post is a confession of loss and exit......

I see you are unwilling to even address the points i have made--that really doesn't give you much room to claim other posters are not dealing with "facts"
 

MickeyW

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 10, 2015
Messages
14,012
Reaction score
3,439
Location
Southern Oregon
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
why would I agree with your stupid loaded questions which assume facts that are not in evidence? even the government-when run by Democrats, have founded hundreds of thousands of defensive uses of firearms a year.

I also suggest that all the gun hating politicians give up armed security if the Vile Pile of Crap is so accurate

Mega Dittos! :thumbs:

http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/cv14.pdf

Gun and self-defense statistics that might surprise you -- and the NRA - LA Times


Or 13458 crimes prevented per year, not counting deterrence. The OP source counts just deaths. This is standard for every gun control article, as they ignore the overall effect on crime. Meanwhile, without any gun control, crime seems to be dropping and gun related incidents are also dropping according to the US DoJ. I find it to be a more reliable source, don't you?

It's because more people are armed.....that crime is dropping.

All the report says is the claims for the need of a gun protection of life and property is much less than claimed..............Yet yall go bonkers...... I sure cannot explain such a violent emotional reaction to a rather straight-forward apolitical study/report............

And the article, like everything else that comes from the VPC....is garbage!
Bonkers? Naw....just incensed at the stupidity of this article and the ignorance of those who would believe it!

hey its a free country. If you don't want to buy a gun, or more likely you are afraid to own a gun-THEN DO NOT

but stop suggesting that people shouldn't own firearms for self defense.

DITTO!!!!!

Can't deal with the facts.........so what do we do..............Go in with the personal attacks, insulting name calling and questions about my intelligence.............

That's what happens when the debate is over and the denigrating post is a confession of loss and exit......

Hey, I didn't call you any names or insult your intelligence....I just surmised that you have no knowledge of, or experience in, these matters and are barking up the wrong tree.
In case you missed it....please read post 12
 
Last edited:

imyoda

DP Veteran
Joined
May 6, 2012
Messages
5,731
Reaction score
1,025
Location
Sarasota, Florida
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
I really cannot understand how a simple study suggesting a gun for protection of the home may be out of sink with the currently belief........may be more so indicative of not needing a gun.......

It is just a study and yall think it was a home invasion...............:roll:


NOW WE NEED CARTOONS?:werd
 

SocialD

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 20, 2015
Messages
2,467
Reaction score
716
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Is The NRA Wrong? New Study Shows Guns Rarely Used For Self-Defense
Is The NRA Wrong? New Study Shows Guns Rarely Used for Self-Defense


Personal safety is one of the most-cited reasons to buy a gun. But a new study challenges the assumption that firearms are often used for self-defense.

The Violence Policy Center found that a very small proportion of firearm homicides can be attributed to so-called justifiable situations. Just one-gun death per every 32 criminal gun killings happened in self-defense scenarios in 2012, the most recent year for which data is available. And, while gun advocates argue that they want a firearm handy in their house in case of an intruder, just 0.1 percent of the justified attacks involved property crimes.

“The [National Rifle Association] has staked its entire agenda on the claim that guns are necessary for self-defense, but this gun industry propaganda has no basis in fact,” Josh Sugarmann, the executive director of VPC, which conducted the review, said in a statement. “Guns are far more likely to be used in a homicide than in a justifiable homicide by a private citizen. In fact, a gun is far more likely to be stolen than used in self-defense.”

Of the 8,601 total homicides recorded in 2012, just 259 of those deaths were the result of a self-defense scenario, according to the study. There were 13 states in which zero justifiable firearm deaths were logged that year. That no-deaths list included states with relatively strict gun control laws as well as states where firearms are more easily accessible. From New York and New Jersey, with tighter regulation, to Idaho and Montana, known for their love of hunting and opposition to gun control, firearms don’t appear to be used with any real frequency to save one’s self or family, according to the study.

“Purchasing a gun may help enrich the firearms industry, but the facts show it is unlikely to increase your personal safety,” Sugarmann said. “In fact, in a nation of more than 300 million firearms, it is striking how rarely guns are used in self-defense.” …………..


ALSO SEE:
Personal Safety Top Reason Americans Own Guns Today
http://www.vpc.org/studies/justifiable15.pdf
Self-Defense Gun Use is Rare, Study Finds | Violence Policy Center
Lobbying Spending Database - National Rifle Assn, 2015 | OpenSecrets
http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/totals.php?id=D000000082&cycle=2014


Since a gun is seldom used "protecting "honey and home" and the cost of a gun.........some might consider installing deadbolt lock in the entry doors..........some what cheaper and more effective and certainly much safer........... than trying to shoot an intruder in the dark.........

Wouldn't you agree?

The argument here seems to be very few criminals were killed by self defensive gun use but defending yourself doesn't require that you actually 'kill' the perpetrator. Nor does it mean you even actually have to fire the gun.
Now those articles are using the FBI numbers. They do include defender attacks with gun, defender attacks with another weapon, or defender attacks without a weapon.
What it does not tell you is... how many of those defenders 'had' a gun.
To elaborate if we have 100k self defense cases. - here is the base numbers

defense.jpg

So looking at that.. how many of those defenders in the 29.6 million violent crimes or 84.5 m property crimes had a gun to even use?

without knowing that we cant really come to much of a conclusion at all. we do see that 235.7k people did defend themselves with a firearm. but maybe that was about all of those that had one.
 

TurtleDude

warrior of the wetlands
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2005
Messages
259,765
Reaction score
79,553
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
I really cannot understand how a simple study suggesting a gun for protection of the home may be out of sink with the currently belief........may be more so indicative of not needing a gun.......

It is just a study and yall think it was a home invasion...............:roll:

you don't seem to get-or more likely you ignore- the fact that the VPC is a group that was created to try to ban gun ownership in the USA.
 

SheWolf

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 27, 2010
Messages
36,409
Reaction score
13,028
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Other
I support the second amendment, and I think the NRA is about money and propaganda. I am glad this study is exposing the NRA for what it is. I don't really support the NRA. My dad was a member for a long time, and recently dropped his membership. I will never join the NRA unless drastic changes are made.
 
Top Bottom