Guns
-
[email protected]replied to [email protected] last edited by
I think it's the marketing. Everything has to me monetized or giggified and it's hard for us to just do stuff for no good reason (like collect and/or shoot guns). We've got to justify by protecting ou family from the zombie apocalypse or crime waves or something.
I think a lot of it is whistling in the dark as well. Our powerlessness coupled with hyper individualism and lack of social support makes for some pretty uncomfortable truths.
Plus the grab bag of racism and misdirected class fear.
-
[email protected]replied to [email protected] last edited by
No ..no it doesn't. These studies are stupid levels of flawed. Not all crimes are reported to the police where nothing happened. Most DGUs no shot is fired, but they don't get counted because they're not reported.
The studies that try and show that a gun in the home is more dangerous use suicide statistics as well, which is like saying you're more likely to drown in a pool if you own one...which the answer is "no shit".
-
Always loved that archer got the noise right in the show...mawp
-
[email protected]replied to [email protected] last edited by
I agree, but it still felt like the comment wasn't being genuine. Horrible things can be horrible without making them sound more horrible than they actually were
-
[email protected]replied to [email protected] last edited by
Yes it does, there's many studies across all the USA. It's one of the most studied thing ever.
-
[email protected]replied to [email protected] last edited by
I already requested the link for the info you are referencing, and I have told you where I found mine. Please provide a source, I would like to learn.
-
[email protected]replied to [email protected] last edited by
I’m not saying one is worse than the other, rather that both fucked around and found out.
-
[email protected]replied to [email protected] last edited by
I did!
The court transcripts which I've read, you haven't and I'm not your goddamn mom. You know the source, go get it for yourself.
-
[email protected]replied to [email protected] last edited by
Well that's strange because one is a convicted murderer.
-
[email protected]replied to [email protected] last edited by
And the others probably would have been convicted of burglary if they lived, what’s your point?
-
[email protected]replied to [email protected] last edited by
I do get what you are saying, and may offer some pov. I do not perceive anyone who breaks into my house as human, simply because I am aware of how weak I am. Not a gun owner, but if I am in kitchen, trust me I am grabbing a knife - anything to level the playing field - and setting myself on fight rather than flight.
But it's mostly fear and adrenaline. If something happened, I have no doubt I would go for it to secure mine and my partner security. How much of a wreck I'd be later remains to be seen, though for sure it would hit me hard.
Honestly, not much difference between that and chihuahua. Fight to kill out of fear.
-
There's a severe epidemic of "I wish a motherfucker would" going around.
-
[email protected]replied to [email protected] last edited by
Absolutely. If you think unarmed burglary and premeditated murder are the same morally and legally I cannot agree.
-
[email protected]replied to [email protected] last edited by
Never said that. You are taking everything I say and twisting it.
The man is a murderer, the intruders are burglars, everyone sucks here. That is the only point I have ever made in this thread.
-
[email protected]replied to [email protected] last edited by
I’m not saying one is worse than the other, rather that both fucked around and found out.
Except it isn't, you keep saying he had the right for the first few shots the jury found he did not.
-
[email protected]replied to [email protected] last edited by
Ah yes. The true red blooded American solution; the only way to solve a serious problem is to escalate it out of proportion.
-
[email protected]replied to [email protected] last edited by
And I am definitively saying the murderer is worse than his victims
-
[email protected]replied to [email protected] last edited by
Honestly, not much difference between that and chihuahua. Fight to kill out of fear.
Yeah. Everyone has a right to pursue a safe place to be.
If someone or something puts me in an unsafe enough position, I might have to go through them instead of around them to get to safety.
There's no shame in that. It's also nothing to be proud of. It just is.
-
[email protected]replied to [email protected] last edited by
No it is not. Even the one you linked is from a poll. The CDC pulled the original numbers for DGUs because they're basically impossible to obtain properly and the CDC didn't like that it didn't paint guns in a bad light
Here is the study that was requested by the cdc and by Obama...
Read "Priorities for Research to Reduce the Threat of Firearm-Related Violence" at NAP.edu
Read chapter Priorities for Research to Reduce the Threat of Firearm-Related Violence: In 2010, more than 105,000 people were injured or killed in the Uni...
The National Academies Press (nap.nationalacademies.org)
Defensive use of guns by crime victims is a common occurrence, although the exact number remains disputed (Cook and Ludwig, 1996; Kleck, 2001a). Almost all national survey estimates indicate that defensive gun uses by victims are at least as common as offensive uses by criminals, with estimates of annual uses ranging from about 500,000 to more than 3 million (Kleck, 2001a), in the context of about 300,000 violent crimes involving firearms in 2008 (BJS, 2010).
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2013. Priorities for Research to Reduce the Threat of Firearm-Related Violence. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/18319.This part talks about the study you directly linked, which states that respondents were not ansed specifically about defensive gun use.
On the other hand, some scholars point to a radically lower estimate of only 108,000 annual defensive uses based on the National Crime Victimization Survey (Cook et al., 1997). The variation in these numbers remains a controversy in the field. The estimate of 3 million defensive uses per year is based on an extrapolation from a small number of responses taken from more than 19 national surveys. The former estimate of 108,000 is difficult to interpret because respondents were not asked specifically about defensive gun use.
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2013. Priorities for Research to Reduce the Threat of Firearm-Related Violence. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/18319.So no, it's not, it's also lacking heavily in studies...and as I said why one of reasons the CDC pulled the numbers.
-
[email protected]replied to [email protected] last edited by
You sound like a responsible gun owner and not a gun nut.