Gun rights top gun control in major public opinion shift

[LeilaniMP]

"Americans now believe having a gun is the best way to protect against crime, 63 percent to 30 percent."

No surprise there!

Many have seen the need to be able to protect and defend themselves and their families.

If any miscreant tries to harm me or mine, they won't be able to do so without a fight.

I also have my CCW.

We live in a crazy world. I refuse to be a statistic on some crime report.

 

[MrMike]

Good thug deterrence

 

[LeilaniMP]

The only good thug is a dead thug.

Good thug deterrence

 

[trapdoor]

As this comes from Pew, watch how fast liberals move to discredit Pew.

 

[MrMike]

Some thugs even go all out Thuggery attire for formal events like funerals etc. Obviously they do loves those gangs.

The only good thug is a dead thug.

 

[Arkady]

"Americans now believe having a gun is the best way to protect against crime, 63 percent to 30 percent."

No surprise there!

Many have seen the need to be able to protect and defend themselves and their families.

If any miscreant tries to harm me or mine, they won't be able to do so without a fight.

I also have my CCW.

We live in a crazy world. I refuse to be a statistic on some crime report.

Statistically, people are at greater risk with a gun in the house. But most people aren't rationally driven by the statistical facts.

 

[freyasman]

"Americans now believe having a gun is the best way to protect against crime, 63 percent to 30 percent."

No surprise there!

Many have seen the need to be able to protect and defend themselves and their families.

If any miscreant tries to harm me or mine, they won't be able to do so without a fight.

I also have my CCW.

We live in a crazy world. I refuse to be a statistic on some crime report.

When damn near everyone has either been a victim, or knows someone who has, sooner or later they'll learn. And the ones who don't, die..... Darwin at work.

 

[freyasman]

Statistically, people are at greater risk with a gun in the house. But most people aren't rationally driven by the statistical facts.

Training mitigates any risk from accidents, and being armed mitigates one's risk of being a crime victim.
(BTW, grown-ups don't need anyone to make decisions for them; take your stats and go somewhere else.)

 

[connieb]

"Americans now believe having a gun is the best way to protect against crime, 63 percent to 30 percent."

No surprise there!

Many have seen the need to be able to protect and defend themselves and their families.

If any miscreant tries to harm me or mine, they won't be able to do so without a fight.

I also have my CCW.

We live in a crazy world. I refuse to be a statistic on some crime report.

I wonder how this statistic relates to public opinion of law enforcement?

Personally, I think a cop is just as likely to give the person calling grief - as they are to help. So, I can see why people would figure its best just to be prepared to deal with something on your own, rather than have to ask for help from a Cop.

I know in my area, most people have weapons. Mostly for hunting, but in general you had best be prepared to deal with something yourself, because even if you had the utmost respect for cops, the closest one is about 20 minutes away at top speed, assuming they aren't tied up with something else when you call.

connie

 

[connieb]

Statistically, people are at greater risk with a gun in the house. But most people aren't rationally driven by the statistical facts.

Most rational people know that to conflate real risks of actual gun violence with oh say the risk you will decide to blow out your own brains is ridiculous for the purpose of determining "risk".

 

[Charcat]

I would rather have a gun than not. If you're afraid of them, you shouldn't own one. Respect is one thing, fear is another.

 

[Zam-Zam]

Statistically, people are at greater risk with a gun in the house. But most people aren't rationally driven by the statistical facts.

That might depend on what neighborhood you live in.

 

[Arkady]

being armed mitigates one's risk of being a crime victim.

What makes you think that?

 

[Barbella]

That might depend on what neighborhood you live in.

We live out in the country, a quiet neighborhood (so far, at least). And yet, when everyone is home that's supposed to be home, and I hear any suspicious noises, I feel strangely reassured knowing there's a gun nearby. Hmmm.... I wonder why?

 

[Arkady]

Most rational people know that to conflate real risks of actual gun violence with oh say the risk you will decide to blow out your own brains is ridiculous for the purpose of determining "risk".

You should check out the data, since you seem to be unfamiliar with it, if you think it's just about conflating the risk of suicide with the risk of other forms of violence. People with guns in the home aren't just at a greater risk of deadly accidents and suicide. They were also at a greater risk of dying from a firearm homicide.

http://aje.oxfordjournals.org/content/160/10/929.full

If people are comfortable with putting their family members at greater risk that way, that's their call to make. But, they should make that call with an informed understanding of the fact they're putting their family members at greater risk, rather than a false assumption that they're making them safer.

The analogy I've made before is to swimming pools. Putting in a swimming pool at your house puts your family at greater risk of drowning. That doesn't mean it's negligent to do so. Life has risks and a responsible person can choose to subject his family to some if the other things they're getting out of it are worth it (e.g., the family enjoyment made possible by having that swimming pool). But it would be foolish to lie about the stats just because they're a little uncomfortable. In the same way, if whatever someone gets out of having a gun in the house is good enough to be worth an increased risk of death for his family, then that's a call he can make. I just think he should make it in an informed way, rather than pretending the choice actually makes the family safer.

 

[Arkady]

That might depend on what neighborhood you live in.

That's possibly true. I know of no stats that have broken it down by neighborhood. The study I've seen did show that the increased risk showed up regardless of the storage practice, type of gun, or number of guns. But it's possible that a gun makes you less safe in safer neighborhoods (where the increased risk of home-grown violence might outweigh any possibility of defensive uses), while making you safer in more dangerous neighborhoods (where defensive uses are enough of a meaningful statistical possibility to be the driving consideration).

It's also possible that overall gun saturation in an area matters. For example, maybe in areas where guns are rare, having a gun in the house makes you less safe, since it's more likely that someone will break in, unarmed, and then find the gun and use it against you, whereas in areas where guns are common, having a gun in the house makes you safer, since anyone who breaks in is likely to be armed, anyway. Or maybe it goes the other way. Maybe in gun-rich areas, someone without a gun is less likely to be gunned down by an armed crook (who won't feel threatened and will just make off with the property), whereas if the victim is armed, it's more likely to prompt an exchange of fire where the gun owner dies. Tough to say.

 

[trapdoor]

Yes, yes, people who own guns are at a greater risk of homicide. Now, let's throw out all of the gang bangers and drug dealers, and others who live a criminal lifestyle and look at that stat again.

Sorry, but it appears your statistics are incomplete. I've known gun owners in various shooting disciplines and in hunting my entire life. None lived criminal lifestyles, and precisely one was ever shot -- he was a police officer shot in the line of duty.

You can cook the books, in other words, to show anything you want. What you can't show, however, is that fewer than 30,000 gun deaths on a baseline gun-ownership rate of 50 million, is a significant risk. It's barely a parts-per-million risk.

 

[as seen on tv]

the frightening thing is that so many of the 63% supporters are parents who live in the hood, and whose kids discover the (unlocked) handgun in a dresser drawer, and take it to the street.

 

[Fast Eddy]

Crime rates drop in areas that loosen the gun laws, its been proven over and over.

I live on a farm and your all alone as a sheriff will take an hour to get to you. Owning a gun only makes sense.

 

[marvin martian]

I wonder how this statistic relates to public opinion of law enforcement?

Personally, I think a cop is just as likely to give the person calling grief - as they are to help. So, I can see why people would figure its best just to be prepared to deal with something on your own, rather than have to ask for help from a Cop.

I know in my area, most people have weapons. Mostly for hunting, but in general you had best be prepared to deal with something yourself, because even if you had the utmost respect for cops, the closest one is about 20 minutes away at top speed, assuming they aren't tied up with something else when you call.

connie

Agreed. The response time for police in my neighborhood is about 20-25 minutes. Fire/EMS is about 10-12 minutes.
As far as I know (and I know all my neighbors) there is at least one firearm in every house.

I wouldn't likely call the police for anything occurring on my property, at least until after it went down. There's way too much chance of them overreacting and injuring or killing a member of my family or a neighbor in the confusion. I see the police as a mop-up crew, to come in after the fact and perform an investigation, take statements and make the event "official" for the legal record. At any rate, the police force for my area is the county sheriff's office, and they are way overtaxed as far as their numbers and how much area they cover.