Do guns make us safer?

[SecularMotion]

Do guns make us safer?

It's an article of faith among many gun owners that yes they do.

Last week, I presented in this space some evidence of the dangers of gun ownership: the elevated risks of accident and suicide in households that own guns. I pointed to a paradox: More Americans support gun rights, even as fewer Americans own guns. I explained this paradox with data that suggested many Americans hold false ideas about the prevalence of crime -- and wrongly look to gun ownership for self-defense.

Over the following seven days, I heard from many angry gun-rights supporters.

http://articles.cnn.com/2012-07-30/opinion/opinion_frum-guns-safer_1_gun-ownership-gun-advocates-defensive-gun

[Glassunion]

1. Do the police make us safer?

[MotherPetrie]

26. Perhaps if you look 100% white. If you are A-A or Latino, much iffier.

[shadowrider]

2. It's an article of faith among many gun owners that yes they do.

It's an article of faith among many gun owners that a gun evens the odds with no guarantees given or expected.

It doesn't make me safer.

[Stooge]

3. Guns and the mind...

If in your mind you feel safer, then you are safer. I ask myself this: I live in Miami, I'm 55 years old, I've lived a pretty good (wild) life. I have been in some pretty dangerous parts of town and done some pretty dangerous things in my life. How many times could I have used or needed a gun? ZERO! How many people do I know and I know a lot of people that could have used a gun? ZERO!.......Draw your own conclusions. Be honest with yourself.

[shadowrider]

4. I'm 58 and have never needed mine, but all it takes is one time n/t

[TheCowsCameHome]

5. +1

It's like the guy standing on the corner clapping his hands over and over.

A passerby asks "What are you doing?"

The man replies "Scaring the elephants away"

The passerby says "That's silly. There isn't an elephant within 1,000 miles of here"

The man replies, "See, it's working!"

[GreenStormCloud]

10. Are you claiming that violent crime does not exist?

Are you claiming that there is no such thing as victims of violent crime?

[TheCowsCameHome]

13. I don't recall saying that.

Perhaps you could find the quote for me while you're doing nothing.

[GreenStormCloud]

15. Then since we both agree that violent crime does exist...

...I shall continue to be armed and hope that I continue to be lucky and not need my gun. But if I do need it, I will have it.

[GreenStormCloud]

8. My your good luck continue.

I choose not to trust to luck, but to instead be prepared - just in case.

[Hoyt]

18. Ah, come on -- gun culture tells us you are defenseless at your age and just prey.

Like you, I've been in some situations, but not any that a gun would have done anything but gotten some people killed needlessly.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

19. Welcome to DU and the group :) n/t

[Starboard Tack]

24. Nice post. Welcome to DU and the gungeon.

[PavePusher]

31. Is your experience indicative of everyone else?

Should everyone else be restricted on the results of your broadly-based analysis?

[ileus]

6. I carry my safety device every day...does it make me safer?

No...it's gives me another option should I find myself in a situation that isn't textbook.

[Clames]

7. Just like the anti-gunners to ignore the real world.

Ignorance tends to dull them to what's going on outside their idyllic boxes.

[GreenStormCloud]

9. Being armed give me the option of fighting back if some thug targets me.

First, I will seek to avoid or retreat if possible. I don't want the problems that come with a shooting, even if it a good shoot.

But if a criminals does target me, then I have the ability to fight back. The other choice is to be helpless. I refuse to be a "good victim".

[MotherPetrie]

28. Yup, that's the fantasy. Dream on.

[PavePusher]

32. Are you saying that crime doesn't exist....

or that people do not successfully defend themselves from criminals?

[GreenStormCloud]

11. That is a biased article. He ignores some facts.

He says:
"There are some problems with these government numbers, beginning with the fact that they are based on data from the early 1990s, when crime rates were much higher than they are today. The number of criminal attempts has declined 30% to 40% since then, and one would expect the number of occasions for self-defense to decline correspondingly."

He leaves out that since that study about 10 million Americans have obtained CCWs and three states have allowed unlicensed concealed carry. So millions of Americans are now carrying guns that weren't able to before, and those folks are generating defensive gun uses. He ignores that effect completely.

As usual with gun-controllers he imagines that violent criminals would obey gun laws.

[gejohnston]

12. on opinion piece by one of Shrub's former speech writers

he is as full of shit on guns as he is on economics.
and a Republican......................................

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Frum

[rDigital]

14. More garbage science document dumping.

[lastlib]

16. NO.

Period.

[GreenStormCloud]

21. Yes. My wife has twice used her gun to defend against being mugged.

She would arrive first at work and had the combination to the door of the warehouse. Both times the would be attacker hid behind a tree until after she parked and started walking toward the door. Each time the guy came out of hiding and tried to approach her to within attack range. Both times they ran like hell when they discovered that she had a .38 in her hand.

After those two times there were no further incidents. The word had gotten out among street criminals that she was dangerous to attack.

Absolutely YES, her gun made her safer.

Would you be happier if she had been unarmed and been a violent crime statistic?

[4th law of robotics]

17. It's an article of faith among angry gun grabbers that they don't

and they will not accept any evidence to the contrary.

They seem oblivious to the paradox that while gun laws are loosening crimes are on the decline.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

20. Absolutely...

...not.


Lord Acton said, "Liberty is not the means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end." The government's respect for the individual RKBA is only a bit of liberty. And, as Franklin said, "Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both."


However, the embedded question within the OP question is: 'Safer from what?" It is that question that should occupy the thinking of someone planning to purchase a firearm, if safety is the reason for the purchase.


In the third to last paragraph at the link:

"To be clear: I'm not disputing that guns sometimes save lives. They must. I'm certainly not disputing that the Constitution secures the right of individual gun ownership. It does." - David Frum, CNN Contributor

[Starboard Tack]

22. Great question and fraught with so much irony.

First we must define who "us" is. Is it you and me (the general public), or gun owners, or the US?

If it means "you and me", then I think guns make us neither more nor less safe. Unless we have the really bad misfortune of being in the wrong place at the wrong time.

If it means gun owners, then the answer is definitely "NO". They are the group most likely to be killed or injured by either their own guns or those of others.

If it means the US, then the answer is again "NO!" How can a society be safe when millions of it's members own guns because they fear the government and millions more fear other gun owners. And then there are the complete freaks who think that without guns in the street there would be mass killings by knife wielding lunatics.

[gejohnston]

23. based on what?

If it means gun owners, then the answer is definitely "NO". They are the group most likely to be killed or injured by either their own guns or those of others.

how are you defining "gun owners"? Gun culture or gang culture? The you are correct about the latter, the former not so much.

If it means the US, then the answer is again "NO!" How can a society be safe when millions of it's members own guns because they fear the government and millions more fear other gun owners. And then there are the complete freaks who think that without guns in the street there would be mass killings by knife wielding lunatics.

Same question as above. I doubt millions own guns in fear of he government. I have yet to see anyone claim gun prevent mass knifing, although the other side has claimed there would be mass shootings and duels over parking spaces.

[Starboard Tack]

25. Gun owners, period. I don't differentiate.

If you play with fire, there is more likelihood you will eventually be burned, whether you are a fire fighter or an arsonist.

[MotherPetrie]

27. They have killed many many, many more innocent people than they have kept safe.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

29. Welcome to DU and the group :) n/t

[GreenStormCloud]

33. Legal concealed carry saves more innocent lives than it takes.

In Texas the detailed statistics are compiled annually by the Department of Public Safety and published on the internet. It is likely that the Texas experience with Concealed Handgun Licenses would be about the same in other states. The last year for which statistics are published is 2011 for convictions. http://www.txdps.state.tx.us/rsd/chl/index.htm

In 2011 there were 512,625 people who had CHLs. Out of those people there were exactly four (4) murder convictions. Out of the general population there were 553 convictions for murder in its various forms.
So very, very few CHL holders go bad, but some do.

The DPS also publishes an annual Crime in Texas Report. http://www.dps.texas.gov/crimereports/10/citCh3.pdf
From that report, page 15:

Statistics on murder circumstances, victims, and
victim/offender relationships on the next page
include justifiable homicides. Justifiable homicide
is the killing of a felon by a peace officer in the
line of duty or the killing (during the commission
of a felony) of a felon by a private citizen. In
2010, there were 98 justifiable homicides, of
which, 50 were felons killed by private citizens,
and 48 were felons killed by police.

In Texas all homicides, even those that are clearly self-defense, have to go before a grand jury which will rule if the killing was justified or not. So those 50 justified private citizen homicides were ones in which the defender genuinely and legitimately feared for his life. Since most shootings are merely woundings there would be a much larger number of justified woundings in which the defender genuinely feared for his life, but that number is not kept. Obviously there are dozens of cases each year in which a CHL holder uses their gun to save themselves.

Dozens of innocent lives saved versus four innocents killed shows the concealed carry is working in Texas. As already stated, there is no reason to believe that other CCW states have a different experience.

Legal concealed carry saves innocent lives.

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

30. Bullet-proof vests make people safer, and you're free to go buy one.

"Do Guns Make us Safer?"

Probably not... but then again, do many of our other freedoms make us safer? Does the right to smoke or drink alcohol make us safer? The right to consume foods loaded with HFCS and saturated-fat make us safer? What about the right to own cars that can drive faster than 75mph? The right to own swimming pools? The right to vote republican?

Freedoms are usually risky and do not necessarily make us safer.
To such naysayers of guns... I would say, "Bullet-proof vests make people safer, and you're free to go buy one."