ARE YOU NEW HERE? NOT LOGGED IN? PLEASE TAKE A MOMENT TO REGISTER FOR AN ACCOUNT AND LOGIN TO REMOVE THIS WINDOW
Welcome to PatsFans.com. Do you have an account? If not - please take a moment to register for our forum and experience a much smoother experience with fewer ads, along with no longer having to see this notification window. Also learn about how you can receive a free Patriots T-Shirt from the Patriots Official ProShop by CLICKING HERE. Please enjoy your stay here, and Go Pats!
An Atlanta mom took matters into her own hands on Friday when confronting an intruder. The unidentified woman hid with her 9-year-old twins in a crawlspace as a man broke into her house and began rummaging through it. The alleged burglar, Paul Ali Slater, eventually found the family’s hiding space, but not before finding himself staring down the barrel of a .38 revolver. The woman fired six shots, five of which hit Slater in the face and neck, but he managed to flee after the family ran to a neighbor’s house. Slater is expected to survive.
Good for her.....imagine if she didn't have her gun to protect her.
DONATE TO PATSFANS.COM
RECEIVE A FREE PATS T-SHIRT AND SAVE 15% OFF WHEN YOU BUY FROM THE OFFICIAL PROSHOP!
Free T-Shirt & Save 15% Off!
Like Our Site? Please help support our site and server costs by DONATING TO PATSFANS.COM and receive a FREE PATRIOTS T-SHIRT and SAVE 15% off EVERY purchase you make from PatriotsProShop.com. You'll also receive added benefits to your account including Removing All Ads During Your Experience Here At Our Forum.
NEEDED YEARLY SITE DONATIONS: 345 | CURRENT # OF SUBSCRIBED SUPPORTERS: 98
An Atlanta mom took matters into her own hands on Friday when confronting an intruder. The unidentified woman hid with her 9-year-old twins in a crawlspace as a man broke into her house and began rummaging through it. The alleged burglar, Paul Ali Slater, eventually found the family’s hiding space, but not before finding himself staring down the barrel of a .38 revolver. The woman fired six shots, five of which hit Slater in the face and neck, but he managed to flee after the family ran to a neighbor’s house. Slater is expected to survive.
Once in awhile guns work defensively. More often than not, it's the children of gun owners who die accidentally or gun owners who injure other people. But, take heart, RI that you actually found that rare example of a gun owner having the time, awareness, and quick access to use the gun for protection.
Once in awhile guns work defensively. More often than not, it's the children of gun owners who die accidentally or gun owners who injure other people. But, take heart, RI that you actually found that rare example of a gun owner having the time, awareness, and quick access to use the gun for protection.
• Guns used 2.5 million times a year in self-defense. Law-abiding citizens use guns to defend themselves against criminals as many as 2.5 million times every year — or about 6,850 times a day.1 This means that each year, firearms are used more than 80 times more often to protect the lives of honest citizens than to take lives.2
• Of the 2.5 million times citizens use their guns to defend themselves every year, the overwhelming majority merely brandish their gun or fire a warning shot to scare off their attackers. Less than 8% of the time, a citizen will kill or wound his/her attacker.3
• As many as 200,000 women use a gun every year to defend themselves against sexual abuse.4
• Even anti-gun Clinton researchers concede that guns are used 1.5 million times annually for self-defense. According to the Clinton Justice Department, there are as many as 1.5 million cases of self-defense every year. The National Institute of Justice published this figure in 1997 as part of “Guns in America” — a study which was authored by noted anti-gun criminologists Philip Cook and Jens Ludwig.5
• Armed citizens kill more crooks than do the police. Citizens shoot and kill at least twice as many criminals as police do every year (1,527 to 606).6 And readers of Newsweek learned that “only 2 percent of civilian shootings involved an innocent person mistakenly identified as a criminal. The ‘error rate’ for the police, however, was 11 percent, more than five times as high.”
Under "Key Findings," in case you don't want to do the hard work...
Quote:
o Evidence suggests that this survey and others
like it overestimate the frequency with which
firearms were used by private citizens to defend
against criminal attack.
From the body of the report...
Quote:
The
results still suggest that DGU estimates are far
too high.
For example, in only a small fraction of rape and
robbery attempts do victims use guns in
self-defense. It does not make sense, then, that
the NSPOF estimate of the number of rapes in which
a woman defended herself with a gun was more than
the total number of rapes estimated from NCVS
(exhibit 8). For other crimes listed in exhibit 8,
the results are almost as absurd: the NSPOF
estimate of DGU robberies is 36 percent of all
NCVS-estimated robberies, while the NSPOF estimate
of DGU assaults is 19 percent of all aggravated
assaults. If those percentages were close to
accurate, crime would be a risky business indeed!
Figuring this is a U.S. government doc and therefore in the public domain. Suffice it to say, the researcher in question does a fair job explaining why the insane estimates of defensive gun uses get so inflated, from the one woman claiming 52 defensive gun uses per year (I suppose she goes shopping weekly,) to the greater prevalence of defensive gun uses than attempted crimes in some categories.
I'm not certain exactly why so little crime has happened to me. I have lived in some of the more dangerous zip codes in the country in my time. I've also intervened in a violent crime unarmed, and I've had a home broken into... in fact, at one point I was held at gunpoint in a store robbery where I worked. In none of these instances do I think my chances would have been better with a gun than without one. Of course, that's subject to attribution error; of course I think that, because I lived. But the same is true of anybody who did have a gun and survived such a situation.
I'm sure some people use guns defensively, but these self-report studies from 1994 repeated ad infinitum don't really give us much to go on in quantitative terms -- as the author of one of your quoted studies plainly states.
It is an interesting overview of gun stats from 20 years ago, and while the numbers may well have changed, I am sure some of the dynamics have remained relatively consistent... such as the half-million guns that get stolen each year, just for example.
Regardless of which estimates one
believes, only a small fraction of adults have used
guns defensively in 1994. The only question is
whether that fraction is 1 in 1,800 (as one would
conclude from the NCVS) or 1 in 100 (as indicated
by the NSPOF estimate based on Kleck and Gertz's
criteria).
That sounds a lot more like what I observe in conversations with actual gun owners.... a few people showing their gun in the waistband whenever someone disagrees with him on whether there was interference on a play, or pointing it out the window at traveling salesmen and yelling "get off my property!!!"... and a whole lot of paranoids and hobbyists yammering on about how they're for "protection."
I'm really happy for the Atlanta Mom. Her family is still in danger, however, and she's its source.
Under "Key Findings," in case you don't want to do the hard work...
From the body of the report...
Figuring this is a U.S. government doc and therefore in the public domain. Suffice it to say, the researcher in question does a fair job explaining why the insane estimates of defensive gun uses get so inflated, from the one woman claiming 52 defensive gun uses per year (I suppose she goes shopping weekly,) to the greater prevalence of defensive gun uses than attempted crimes in some categories.
I'm not certain exactly why so little crime has happened to me. I have lived in some of the more dangerous zip codes in the country in my time. I've also intervened in a violent crime unarmed, and I've had a home broken into... in fact, at one point I was held at gunpoint in a store robbery where I worked. In none of these instances do I think my chances would have been better with a gun than without one. Of course, that's subject to attribution error; of course I think that, because I lived. But the same is true of anybody who did have a gun and survived such a situation.
I'm sure some people use guns defensively, but these self-report studies from 1994 repeated ad infinitum don't really give us much to go on in quantitative terms -- as the author of one of your quoted studies plainly states.
It is an interesting overview of gun stats from 20 years ago, and while the numbers may well have changed, I am sure some of the dynamics have remained relatively consistent... such as the half-million guns that get stolen each year, just for example.
PFnV
Yes, I read the report already...thanks. I think the article clearly points out the difference between the 2.5 million figure and the 1.5 million figure. Either way, there is significant evidence to demonstrate that guns stop crime.
"Applying those restrictions leaves 19
NSPOF respondents (0.8 percent of
the sample), representing 1.5 million
defensive users. This estimate is directly
comparable to the well-known
estimate of Kleck and Gertz, shown in
the last column of exhibit 7. While the
NSPOF estimate is smaller, it is statistically
plausible that the difference is
due to sampling error."
12Likes
Atlanta Mom saves her family with a gun
Linear Mode
