Scholars dispute numbers of `defensive gun uses' in U.S.

[CO Liberal]

Scholars dispute numbers of `defensive gun uses' in U.S.

BY RICK MONTGOMERY
Knight Ridder Newspapers

KANSAS CITY, Mo. - (KRT) - Tom Beiting was heading for work one day when, realizing he had left something at home, he returned to his apartment and found a stranger walking out.

The man held a portable television in one arm and a case of beer in the other.

The intruder dropped the items and reached for a knife tucked in his pants pocket. Beiting, a criminal-defense lawyer, also packed a weapon - a .380-caliber pistol clipped to his belt under his suit jacket.

Pointing the gun at the man's face, Beiting yelled, "Freeze!" The man froze.

"His eyes got huge. … Then he actually wet his pants," said Beiting, of Newport, Ky.

Every day in America, a civilian brandishes a gun to stop a crime. But, you wonder, just how often?

<more>

http://www.centredaily.com/mld/centredaily/news/6539893.htm

[MrBenchley]

1. Funny how the numbers dwindle

if the survey is conducted so that repsondents are asked first if they were threatened with a crime and THENN asked did they use their gun....

"Hemenway recently flipped through stories told by respondents describing their acts of self-defense.

"Here's one: `The police called. The alarm in my building went off so I went there to shut it off. Two men were outside my building, so from my car I shot at the ground near them.' "

Hemenway paused. "That's self-defense?" he asked.

"Here's another," the researcher said. "A 58-year-old male is watching TV with a holster strapped on him. He tells us, `I was watching a movie, and he (an acquaintance) interrupted me. I yelled that I was going to shoot him, and he ran to his car.'

"I'm thinking, are these the best stories they can tell?" Hemenway said."

Yup.

[iverglas]

9. ah, that self-reporting

Never influenced by the self-reporter's perception of anything ... why, who wouldn't perceive someone standing around in public, or someone interrupting his/her television viewing, as a person committing A CRIME, and him/herself as USING A FIREARM IN RESPONSE TO the threat of that CRIME ...

Heavens to betsy. Let's not even get into survey bias.

.

[Spoonman]

30. Please refer to

Post number 10

[Superfly]

2. Just how often???

If it happens JUST ONCE to prevent a crime, then that's good enough for me.

[iverglas]

10. who asked you?

"If it happens JUST ONCE to prevent a crime, then that's good enough for me."

I don't recall anyone calling for anyone else's opinion of anything.

What is this bizarre urge to burp up an opinion every time anyone says anything about anything?

It seemed to me that this thread was about facts, and the collecting and reporting thereof. Might you have any opinion about THAT?

Now, if you had something to present in support of whatever such an opinion might be, wouldn't that be unusual fun ...

.

[Superfly]

14. This IS a discussion board

NT

[el_gato]

3. who cares?

If people in this country didn't have guns we'd already be living in concentration camps. No other reason is needed to justify citizen ownership of guns.

[papau]

4. and they are fun to shoot - and cheap meat is good!

but I agree self-defense does not hold up as reason to own guns.

But there are gun nerds that can tell you a complete spec page with eval comments for just about any weapon - from memory - you have got to be impressed.

And competition shooting is as much a sport as golf!

Whatever floats your boat - :-)

and I agree gun ownership should not be banned - OK for regulated, licenseed, controlled, register the weapons - but not banned.

they are fun to shoot - and cheap meat is good - and that is a fact :-)

:toast:

[MrBenchley]

5. Say what?

Typical RKBA hysteria.

[iverglas]

11. help! help!

I'm being held prisoner in a concentration camp somewhere in the remote wilds of ... uh, northern Quebec.

I didn't have a gun. The gouvernement came & got me. I don't know why, I can't even imagine. Things were going so well. And then one morning the gouvernement just said -- you don't have a gun, so it's concentration camp for you!

It doesn't make any sense to me, but here I am, concentrating away, in a camp. Maybe one of the illustrious deep thinkers hereabouts can help me understand my predicament ...

.

[jody]

6. Most authoritative data is from DoJ including data collected under Reno

" Self-protective measures employed by victims"

" Reporting and not reporting victimization to police"

[MrBenchley]

8. Table 3.21

Estimated percent distribution of self-protective measures employed by victims of violent crime

Attacked offender with weapon....0.9%

Threatened offender with weapon....0.8%

[Walter_Bowman]

12. Most of those who use guns in self-defense

never become "crime victims". Guess why...

[MrBenchley]

15. Don't have to guess....

The answer is quite clear....

"Forty-five respondents reported a defensive gun use
in 1994 against a person (exhibit 7). Given the
sampling weights, these respondents constitute 1.6
percent of the sample and represent 3.1 million
adults. Almost half of these respondents reported
multiple DGUs during 1994, which provides the basis
for estimating the 1994 DGU incidence at 23
million. This surprising figure is caused in part
by a few respondents reporting large numbers of
defensive gun uses during the year; for example,
one woman reported 52!

Respondents might falsely provide a positive
response to the DGU question for any of a number of
reasons:

o They may want to impress the interviewer by their
heroism and hence exaggerate a trivial event.

o They may be genuinely confused due to substance
abuse, mental illness, or simply less-than-accurate
memories.

o They may actually have used a gun defensively
within the last couple of years but falsely report
it as occurring in the previous year--a phenomenon
known as "telescoping." "

http://www.ncjrs.org/txtfiles/165476.txt

[demsrule4life]

16. And if you go by these numbers

Only one out of every 123 handguns (less than 1 percent) and one out of every 1,247 long guns (less than one-tenth of 1 percent) are used in crime in any given year.13
Even under very generous assumptions to maximize the estimated percentage of guns used in a crime, at most 6.7 percent of handguns would ever be involved in a crime.14
If we realistically allow for repeated criminal uses of the same weapons, the fraction of all guns that are ever involved in crime would be less than 1 percent, with long guns under 0.5 percent and handguns under 2 percent

Just came off a 12 hour mid and cant think how to convert to percentage, but what would it be with your number of 30,000 gun deaths a year to 260,000,000 guns in the country?

http://www.ncpa.org/pub/st/st176/s176b.html

[demsrule4life]

17. Also with these numbers why is gun control even an issue?

[CO Liberal]

18. Because Even 30,000 Gun Deaths a Year is Too Damn Many

[BullDozer]

19. Too damn many? Yes it is.

30,000? Always rounding up right?

The year 2000 there were 28,663 of which 16,586 were suicides. (CDC)
For 1999 it's 28,874 with 16,599 suicides.

I lobby against including the number of suicides into the total without acknowledging the number of deaths that are suicides.

[Paladin]

20. Have It Your Way

If you're able to derive any sort of comfort from the number of non-suicidal gun deaths in this country being 12,077 for a year, be my guest. It makes me want to:(a)puke my guts out; and (b)actively oppose you "Democrats" who want our party's position on guns to be just like the RepubliNRAcans'.....

[MrBenchley]

22. And bear in mind

while trying to pretend the number of gun deaths is "only 12,000," the RKBA crowd is actively working to INCREASE that number by tearing down what public safety regulations there are.

[BullDozer]

23. It's called accuracy

If you want to keep using inaccurate numbers to bolster your side of the discussion then so be it, but don't get bent out of shape when it's pointed out that your base numbers are wrong.

You can also stuff your non too subtle allegation that all RKBA posters aren't Democrats.

[MrBenchley]

24. No, it's called spin

employed by those trying desperately to minimize the actual cost of the Republican Party letting the corrupt gun industry run free.....

[Paladin]

27. About Those "Inaccrate Numbers"

In case it got past you, I was using your numbers in my previous post.

And I'll stop challenging the Democratic credentials of RKBA posters when you guys stop spewing blatently Republican sentiments about guns, backed up by articles and quotes from far right-wing sites and publications.

[BullDozer]

28. Blind

Great so now it's back to if you are Pro-Gun you are a Republican or at least suspected of being one. Do you want to just keep on adding more fuel to the Democrats are Anti-Gun fire?

I didn't question your number that you gleaned from my post, it's the 30,000 number that's inaccurate, and if the number of suicides are not at least acknowledged than a total number by itself is at best disingenuous IMHO.

I'm allowed to be in agreement with a far right wing site and/or publication if they happen to have an article or what not that supposrts my position. It's not my damn fault if others are so blinded by social/political orientation that they can't see their way to even admit that someone on the right could be right about something.

1)I hate the KKK
2)The KKK likes pizza
3)It's still possible for me to like pizza and hate the KKK at the same time.

[MrBenchley]

29. Too too funny

You want to pretend that people who shoot themselves are somehow not dead by gunshot.

Don't you EVER wonder why the RKBA crowd quotes ONLY far right wing propaganda? The rest of us sure do.

An RKBA "enthusiast" quotes from WorldNutDaily
World Nut Daily's aims its lies and propaganda at far right wing Republicans...
One draws one's own conclusions...

[BullDozer]

40. Self Determination Freedom of Choice

Suicides are dead by choice.

I didn't say don't count them as deaths but be honest and acknowledge the number for what it is. But no; the antigun forces would rather have a bigger number of deaths that they can prance around with as they dance in the blood of people who willingly took their own lives.

Don't you EVER wonder why the RKBA crowd quotes ONLY far right wing propaganda? The rest of us sure do.

Find me some lefties who don't have their heads stuck up their asses on this issue and are willing to speak up about it. Yet we still wonder how the left and the Democratic party have gotten the anti-gun reputation.

Once again, I bet some people on freerepublic like pizza, I like pizza too, that doesn't make me a freeper. It is possible to have things in common with people and groups you otherwise do not agree with. It's not a take it all or leave it all world, at least not for us sane people.

Try reading what is presented and arguing against it based on the content not the frikkin masthead that it's run under, to do otherwise is to act like a loon from freerepublic.

[MrBenchley]

41. Dead is dead

"I didn't say don't count them as deaths"
And yet every time the nnumber is mentionned you scream in rage and try desperately to spin it away....

"Yet we still wonder how the left and the Democratic party have gotten the anti-gun reputation."
Perhaps it's due to outright lies like those posted at the right wing sites you RKBA "enthusiasts" are obsessed with.

"Once again, I bet some people on freerepublic like pizza, I like pizza too, that doesn't make me a freeper."
What makes freepers freepers isn't their love of pizza but their unwillingness to accept facts and to swallow right wing horseshit unquestioningly.

"It's not a take it all or leave it all world"
Funny, weren't you telling us all left wingers "have their heads stuck up their asses"?

[BullDozer]

48. Trying using what was actually posted when you quote.

And yet every time the nnumber is mentionned you scream in rage and try desperately to spin it away
Wanting to see a number qualified is rage and spin? Get a grip on reality. There's not a damn thing wrong with saying in the year 2000 there were 28,663 people killed with guns of which 16,586 were suicides.


"Yet we still wonder how the left and the Democratic party have gotten the anti-gun reputation."
Perhaps it's due to outright lies like those posted at the right wing sites you RKBA "enthusiasts" are obsessed with.

Yeah sure, you just go right on and believe that it's all someone elses fault with your one man campaign to make the party look as antigun as possible.

A misquote so soon? What's wrong is your cut and paste broken or did you intentionally misquote me in a feeble attempt to defame me?

What I said was "Find me some lefties who don't have their heads stuck up their asses on this issue and are willing to speak up about it." not Funny, weren't you telling us all left wingers "have their heads stuck up their asses"? as you erroneously claim, and yes the lefties who are on the antigun side sure do have their heads stuck up their asses on this issue.

I'm going to introduce you to the concept of hypocrisy, you say "What makes freepers freepers isn't their love of pizza but their unwillingness to accept facts and to swallow right wing horseshit unquestioningly" but you won't accept that there is a fundamental problem with your out of hand dismissing anything that comes from a source you regard as right wing or otherwise unacceptable to you without even looking at the information and making a real arguement against it.

You damn the people in freeperland for their dogmatic views yet you maintain the exact same practice every single day.

Try reading what is presented and arguing against it based on the content not the frikkin masthead that it's run under, to do otherwise is to act like a loon from freerepublic.

[Name removed]

49. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[BullDozer]

52. Spin is your thing

Yeah, surrrrrrrrre....that's why you keep quoting from Worldnutdaily and NNewsmax.

Can you point those out to me? I may have used one 3-4 months on DU-One ago, do try and find something more recent.

I regard as right wing?
That's right you seem to slap that or another label on anything you can't argue against.

the NRA lies about the Second Amendment publicly.
Yeah, OK whatever, even after you got spanked in your much touted general discussion for your misstatements about US v Miller you continue with your BS.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=170057 See posts 66 and 95.

"Try reading what is presented and arguing against it based on the content"

snivel
Finally, yes you do spend a lot of time sniveling, you certainly don't often if ever present any sort of reasoned and sensible argument.

[MrBenchley]

56. Who do you think you're kidding?

Let's stay with post #1 in that thread for a minute....because that shows what the RKBA crowd is REALLY all about: "Kicked off Democraticunderground for the 9th time...My wolf-in-sheep's-clothing act gets better every time out....They're terrified of debate...that's so funny...makes me feel good...how else would you get away with proliferating liberal nonsense...My favorite screename I came up with was "left of stalin"...After hanging out with the DU crowd, I'd suggest a good shower at a biohazard facility..."
A bit more of the enlightenment from this intellectual haven: "That would lull them into thinking you're one of the "progressives" while actually showing a wee bit of true colors...Reading that message board is like watching a political debate between semi-literate 4-year-olds...."shallow-thinker" "blind-sheep" either one should get you appointed to a "moderator" status fairly quickly on those liberal lemming sites....Demorats have had that problem for a very long time now. They would dearly love to have their socialist utopia, but they know they must make their way through the intransigent partisans to get there..."

And as for Miller v US...go peddle the NRA's lies to somebody dumb enough to believe them.

[BullDozer]

57. Are you that lost?

That's just sad for you Benchley you said "Let's stay with post #1 in that thread for a minute" and then go on to rail against other Internet boards, well Mr-I-don't-bother-to-pay-attention-to-what-I-am-talking-about-in-weak-attempt-to-divert-the-discussion the first post in this thread is not about other Internet boards it's about "Scholars dispute numbers of `defensive gun uses' in U.S."

And big damn deal if people from other boards come and have fun here, the disrupter banning procedure works pretty damn smoothly and don't even pretend for a second that regular posters here don't go to other types of boards and play with them there.

And as for Miller v US...go peddle the NRA's lies to somebody dumb enough to believe them.

The only lies on US v Miller here are whatever liars crap you are trying to sell.

Even your hallowed General Discussion forum has beaten you up on US v Miller already.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=170057 See posts 66 and 95.

[MrBenchley]

58. Gee Dozer

I can unnderstand why you'd want to spin away the ugly fact of what the RKBA crowd is really all about and what tactics they use...

"Mr-I-don't-bother-to-pay-attention-to-what-I-am-talking-about-in-weak-attempt-to-divert-the-discussion the first post in this thread"
Gee, who was it that brought up a completely irrelevant bit of rubbish in another thread about the second amendment? Why, it was Dozer.

But as long as we're looking at THAT thread, let's look at what THAT thread was about. And it wasn't somebody peddling the NRA's horseshit about what the Second Amendment means.

"And big damn deal if people from other boards come and have fun here"
Yeah,., a right wing turd calling hiself "leftofstalin" sure seems like lots of laughs.

[BullDozer]

60. Quick call NASA

You've generated so much spin that you've managed to leave Earths orbit without using any supplemental thrust. Look out Mars he's coming your way!

[MrBenchley]

62. Call all the help you want

the only spin here is yours.

[Cthulu_2004]

25. compare the number of gun deaths...

with the number of drownings. Then compare it to the number of heart attack victims.

Try to keep it in perspective...

[MrBenchley]

26. Funny, the American Heart Association

doesn't deny there's a problem with heart disease...or sponsor phony studies to spin away the real numbers...or do all they can to increase the number of heart attacks...

[Spoonman]

31. Hmmmmm

Funny, the American Heart Association doesn't deny there's a problem with heart disease...or sponsor phony studies to spin away the real numbers...or do all they can to increase the number of heart attacks...

Funny the American Heart Association doesn't seem to be trying to sue everyone out of business that sells anything that contributes to heart disease either.

I have yet to see them screaming “the fast food kills people, we should make it illegal”.

They are trying to prevent heart disease through education.

You are absolutely right, they don’t sponsor phony studies to spin away the real numbers like the Joyce Foundation (NROC).

[CO Liberal]

32. As Opposed to John "Cook The Books" Lott???

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm???

[Spoonman]

33. Have you ever

seen me post his drivel?????

NO

[CO Liberal]

34. Do You HAve Any Evidence That The Joyce Foundation Does Fake Studies??

Or is it simply that they disagree with you?

[Spoonman]

36. That wasn't the point,

Go back and re-read the post, they "sponsor" fake studies.

Next question.... already no what it will be so....

Asked and answered.

Everyone on this board that disputes any pro-RKBA study or statistics, lists the reason for dispute as "it was funded by the RKBA gun nuts".

So if that logic validates their argument, then the same validation applies if a anti-RKBA group funded the study that is pro-control.

We can go round and round with this, but the bottom line is this.
The Joyce Foundation is not going to hand out money to anyone who doesn't support their anti-RKBA stance!

[MrBenchley]

38. Gee, Spoon...

The funding for Lott's study is just one of many reasons why Mary Rosh's work is rubbish...and in that case, it's worth noting that Lott is funded by the actual gun industry itself...which vainly tries to hide the fact by running the payment through a foundation'sd books.

"The Joyce Foundation is not going to hand out money to anyone who doesn't support their anti-RKBA stance!"
Tell us, spoon, do you think they quizzed these folks about guns?

"Hundreds of thousands of Midwest welfare recipients have gone to work since 1996, but most have taken jobs that pay low wages, are part-time, or don't last, according to a major report released today by the Joyce Foundation. As a result, most of those who have made the transition from welfare to work remain poor.
These findings and recommendations were released today in "Welfare to Work: What Have We Learned?" The report presents leading research on welfare-to-work initiatives in Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio, and Wisconsin. Midwest states have been innovators on welfare policy both before and since the 1996 national welfare reform.
"We hope policymakers will use this information to build on the gains of the last five years, stabilize working families, help them weather economic downturns, and provide the supports they need to climb out of poverty," said Ellen Alberding, president of the Joyce Foundation. "Meanwhile, we need strategies to reach out to the poorest families still untouched by policy reforms or national prosperity." "

http://www.commondreams.org/news2002/0424-01.htm

[Spoonman]

43. and................

The Joyce Foundation sponsors BS studies.

[BullDozer]

47. Bull droppings

The funding for Lott's study is just one of many reasons why Mary Rosh's work is rubbish...and in that case, it's worth noting that Lott is funded by the actual gun industry itself...which vainly tries to hide the fact by running the payment through a foundation'sd books.

You keep screeching this over and over again but you've provided not one damn fact to prove it.

[MrBenchley]

50. Been there, done that

Go cry about the corrupt funding for this right wing nutcase to someone who gives a crap.

Why not go up to general discussion and tell the entire board how cruel it is someone is slandering your beloved John Lott? I'm sure THEY could use a BIG laugh.

[BullDozer]

51. Wrong as usual

"Been there, done that"

Then you won't mind providing me the link to and the post number of exactly where you showed this at?

Yeah I didn't think so.

You can't link to that which does not exist.

Am I defending Lott or am I again taking issue with your knee jerk out of hand dismissal of things that you clearly have no true and accurate knowledge of but instead you spew forth your blind rabid dogmatic Pavlovian responses? Here's your clue, it's the latter.

It seems to me that you are the one that brings up John Lotts name for more than every other forum member combined ever has.

[MrBenchley]

53. Dozer, been there, done that.....

I'll do it again....Lott's payments come from the gun industry through the corrupt Olin Foundation. You can scream and pout all you like, but it is a facct.

"Am I defending Lott"
Sure seems like it. I sure as hell can't imagine what the hell else you're tryinng to do with this desperate spin.

"instead you spew forth your blind rabid dogmatic Pavlovian responses?"
Hahahahahahahahahahaha.....too too funny.

[Spentastic]

54. Now even I find this funny

""instead you spew forth your blind rabid dogmatic Pavlovian responses?"
Hahahahahahahahahahaha.....too too funny."

[BullDozer]

55. Proof?

Prove it! You also should prove that the Olin Foundation is corrupt since you now level that charge.

Lott's payments come from the gun industry through the corrupt Olin Foundation. You can scream and pout all you like, but it is a facct.

You're claiming (actually more like screaming, similar to that which one might find a mental patient who has been living on the street for far too long doing) that it is so doesn't make it a fact. Where is your actual proof? You have almost as much proof of your baseless aligation as the far right have to link Bill Clinton as the cause of death of all of those people on that Clinton Death List AKA Clinton Body Count that used to circulate.

I sure as hell can't imagine what the hell else you're tryinng to do with this desperate spin.

Try reading what has been written and then think about it, I'm sure it will come to you.

[MrBenchley]

59. Dozer, go peddle it to somebody dumb enough to believe it

"The New York-based John M. Olin Foundation, which grew out of a family manufacturing business (chemical and munitions), funds right-wing think tanks like the American Enterprise Institute, the Heritage Foundation, the Manhattan Institute for Public Policy Research, and the Hoover Institute of War, Revolution and Peace. It also gives large sums of money to promote conservative programs in the country's most prestigious colleges and universities.
Financed by the Olin chemical and munitions fortune. "

http://www.mediatransparency.org/funders/john_m_olin_foundation.htm

[BullDozer]

61. Been there before, seen it before... BFD

Sorry but mediatransparencys' objectivity is in question on this one, they show a quote and a link right to VPCs psycho rantings about the Olin Foundation. That's similar to skinheads using the Turner Diaries as a reference source for facts.

A quick browse through Olin Foundations list of 1999 grants (totaling $19,357,408)(Including $70,000 to Michigan State University one of my schools and definitely NOT Right Wing)($260,000 authorized to Univ of Michigan, another of my schools again NOT a right wing place) shows a few places that are on the right for sure, some that I identify on the left, so it seems to me that there are strong indications that it's balanced in it's grants.

Where did the Olin Foundation get their money? Why I'm sure at least a good chunk of it comes directly from John Olins share of Olin Corporation a leading producer of copper alloys, ammunition and chlorine and caustic soda.

Calling that the Gun industry and trying to claim, without a shred of proof I'll remind you, that the gun industry funded and directed Lotts research to a predetermined conclusion is nothing but pure B.S.

But you go right ahead and stick with your claim that proof isn't needed http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=118&topic_id=2765#3083 post 108 "Because none is needed" None in this case being proof.

You still have offered nothing more than rabid speculation of your claims, to the best of my knowledge neither has any other entity.

[MrBenchley]

63. Yeah, THEIR objectivity is in question

Now go peddle your rubbish to someone dumb enough to believe it.

http://www.ttu.edu/ranchingheritagecenter/body_boss.htm

[MrBenchley]

35. Sorry, the Joyce foundation has credibility

and the RKBA "enthusiasts" have none.

"I have yet to see them screaming “the fast food kills people, we should make it illegal”."

"Pereira says that Americans may be susceptible to television advertising of fast foods, but most people probably don't realize the long-term effects on their lifestyle and health.
"There are a quarter of a million fast food restaurants in this country. Further study of fast food on public health should be given a priority."
All Americans need to reduce the number of fast food meals to help avoid the growing epidemic of obesity and diabetes in this country, he says. "Try to get in the habit of picking up your food in grocery stores instead of the fast food window; and eat at home with family and friends if possible.""

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2003/03/030310064547.htm

[Spoonman]

37. Whatever

you fail to support your arguments again!

Nowhere do I see "we should make it illegal" like the anti-RKBA crowd.
They realize it is individual responsibility that is the issue.

"Sorry, the Joyce foundation has credibility and the RKBA enthusiasts have none."
Those are purely your opinions, and you are intitled to them.

[MrBenchley]

39. Guess again, spoon

" "Sorry, the Joyce foundation has credibility and the RKBA enthusiasts have none."
Those are purely your opinions"

Want to take this up to General Discussion and see?

[Spoonman]

42. Is that

all you can ever come up with, start a thread, do you think ANYONE here cares. Do you have to gather in numbers to be "right".
I'll post my opinions ANYWHERE!

[MrBenchley]

44. Very telling

"do you think ANYONE here cares. Do you have to gather in numbers to be "right"."

Gee, spoon....sounds like you know EVERYONE here cares but a handful of RKBA "enthusiasts."

"I'll post my opinions ANYWHERE!"
Except where most of the posters can see them, evidently.

[Spoonman]

45. Read #6

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=80156

Then cry me a friggin river of peddling horse hooey shit.

[MrBenchley]

46. Gee, spoon...

Most of us don't have to work quite so hard explaining away all the right wing garbage from Newsmax and WorldNutDaily and the Washington Times we swallow...because we know better than to swallow that crap in the first place.

So do you want to go up and try peddling that the Joyce Foundation is biased and antiDemocratic in General Discussion?

[MrBenchley]

21. It would be utterly meaningless

Just as the claim of millions of DGUs evaporates when actual fact is considered.

"Only one out of every 123 handguns (less than 1 percent) and one out of every 1,247 long guns (less than one-tenth of 1 percent) are used in crime"
What a silly comment.

[Romulus]

7. whatever

This anti-gun-owner researcher Hemenway is the one that keeps trying to discredit any statistic on the use of firearms for self defense that doesn't meet Scary Brady approval. (Blanket statement pre-emptively acknowledged)

He and his buddies keep trying to discredit Kleck's 2.5 million use-survey, even by talking about a comparable number of "space alien contacts" using Kleck's methodology, but I guess that speaks more to a criticism of ALL surveys.(i.e. "75% of people LOVE GW Bush!!")

Kleck's DGU survey expressly asked follow-up questions on the context of the defensive firearm use to weed out the "armchair commandos" and "alarm checker-outers" that Hemenway talks about here as "the best" examples of defensive gun uses.

[Walter_Bowman]

13. Right on the money!

Great post there, Romulus!