If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Huffington Post)   Old news: 'Stand your ground' defense. New news: 'Storm the castle' doctrine   (huffingtonpost.com) divider line 204
    More: Scary, Bethany Arceneaux, CBS Boston, Boston Police Department, kidnappings, missing man  
•       •       •

17277 clicks; posted to Main » on 12 Nov 2013 at 1:35 PM (46 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



204 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-11-12 04:21:17 PM

doglover: Mentalpatient87: I know of a guy who decided to blow off his head when he heard the sirens coming, instead of continuing to try to burn down his ex's house.

He also could have said "fark, outta time." and shot the ex instead of burning the house down.

No accounting for crazy.


Or he could have taken cover to blast Johnny Law when he pulled up. I know, I thought about this. It wasn't a good situation.
 
2013-11-12 04:21:51 PM

Mentalpatient87: guestguy: Thingster: Exactly, they would have come up sirens blaring while brandishing weapons.

Somehow I doubt that would be their approach when they have a mentally unstable, hostage-holding suspect...

I know of a guy who decided to blow off his head when he heard the sirens coming, instead of continuing to try to burn down his ex's house. So, your doubt is a little misplaced. When responding to a call of "this guy dressed down in combat fatigues is pouring gas all over this house," sirens blaring seemed to be SOP.



Could be that they would roll up just as recklessly as a group of untrained civilians, but I would have a lot more faith in the cops doing what's right in that situation than a bunch of emotionally charged vigilantes.
 
2013-11-12 04:24:08 PM

meyerkev: CDC says 1.5 Million defensive gun uses.


CDC says there's more defensive gun uses than violent crime?

Stop lying please. This shiat is farking pathetic.

Everyone citation of these made up stats goes back to the BS, not valid in ANY way study by Kleck.

Stop citing it, stop believing the lies you have been fed over and over again. They are not true, they have been discredited hundreds of times. The methodology is inherently faulty.

What we know for certain is that there are 1.2m violent crimes per year. That is a FACT. The number of defensive gun uses should be proportionally related to this number and by definition, cannot exceed it.
 
2013-11-12 04:24:10 PM

bucket_pup: And not single Fark was given that day for the deceased.


Zombies don't need no farking but pray there's a fark in the hereafter. Eternity is a very long time to withhold criticism.
 
2013-11-12 04:25:28 PM

Molavian: I don't know who you are. I don't know what you want. If you are looking for ransom, I can tell you I don't have money. But what I do have are a very particular set of skills; skills I have acquired over a very long career. Skills that make me a nightmare for people like you. If you let my daughter go now, that'll be the end of it. I will not look for you, I will not pursue you. But if you don't, I will look for you, I will find you, and I will kill you.


Yes.
 
2013-11-12 04:26:22 PM

guestguy: but I would have a lot more faith in the cops doing what's right in that situation than a bunch of emotionally charged vigilantes.


Doesn't really matter, you said you doubted they would do what I told you they actually did. Is your doubt gone?
 
2013-11-12 04:27:51 PM

nocturnal001: Facetious_Speciest: Obviously, it's generally a bad thing to kick in a door and shoot someone, but I think there's the occasional exception...

I had assumed this would be the all to common "excessive force guy kills somebody and wingnuts rush to defend gun rights" deal but this seems pretty legit.

Maybe stupid of them not to have given the tip to the police though, but I can't blame them.  Now if they had broken in the door and shot him without an imminent threat to the woman's life, then that might be a problem.


....................not if they killed him.
 
2013-11-12 04:28:55 PM

guestguy: redmid17: guestguy: redmid17: The third party was in the same area as the family and the police. Somehow the family found out first. The police showed up second.

Take your pick: incompetent or lazy

Because the family wouldn't be searching the exact same spot as the cops, that would be stupid.  It sounds like a parallel effort trying to cover as much ground as possible, and the family happened to stumble onto a tip first.

The family spread out between the area by the car and near the kidnapper's home with police. The cops were near the kidnapper's home after they had given up searching the area around the car with bloodhounds and interviewing the people in the area.

So I will go with incompetence.

This article is much more thorough:

http://www.theadvertiser.com/article/20131109/NEWS01/311090023/

Maybe I'm missing it (please point it out if I am), but I don't see anything in that article indicating that police had given up on the area where the family members got the tip.  It says that police and family/friends were searching both areas on Friday.

Also:  "When Thomas heard family members enter the house, she said, he began stabbing her."
So the guy only started stabbing when he heard the family members storming the house.  At that point, they sure as shiat had every right to shoot the guy, but it does sound like their not-so-delicate entry was the impetus for the violence towards the girl.  Reckless.


Even if the police were in the area, someone how they still didn't info. The guy stabbing her also hadn't given her any food or water in over 2 days.
 
2013-11-12 04:33:38 PM

redmid17: Violent crime and murders are clustered in very small areas.


Usually areas about 9mm across.
 
2013-11-12 04:39:02 PM
justtray

No, they aren't. And again no, not per the CDC.

Please stop lying. Thanks.


We're all reading one report from the CDC, essentially commissioned by the president.

You're sticking your fingers in your ears and saying "LIARS! LIARS!"

It's a huge conspiracy against you, personally.
 
2013-11-12 04:43:11 PM
justtray

Read it.
 
2013-11-12 04:44:52 PM

Mentalpatient87: guestguy: but I would have a lot more faith in the cops doing what's right in that situation than a bunch of emotionally charged vigilantes.

Doesn't really matter, you said you doubted they would do what I told you they actually did. Is your doubt gone?



No, my doubt is not gone because of your "this one time" story.
 
2013-11-12 04:45:05 PM
Their only mistake is they didn't get it done quietly, then finish the job with a 50 gallon barrel of hydrochloric acid.
 
2013-11-12 04:45:20 PM

Theaetetus: What makes you so sure of this? The kid is 2 years old, and she only got the protective order in June. He could've become abusive after the kid's birth. With no evidence either way, you're sure jumping quickly to the conclusion that she was to blame.


No, she knew what he was. You can say "there's no evidence" but youd be both 1) lying and 2) not living in the real world.
 
2013-11-12 04:48:28 PM

redmid17: Even if the police were in the area, someone how they still didn't info. The guy stabbing her also hadn't given her any food or water in over 2 days.



Because it would be stupid for the police and family to knock on the exact same doors...they were spreading out and covering different areas in parallel from the sound of it.  And yes, she was hungry and dehydrated, but she wasn't stabbed until the family stormed the place.
 
2013-11-12 04:49:42 PM
That woman really needs to evaluate her life choices. This is like what, the 3rd or 4th time this has happened in the last few days?
 
2013-11-12 04:54:49 PM

guestguy: redmid17: Even if the police were in the area, someone how they still didn't info. The guy stabbing her also hadn't given her any food or water in over 2 days.

Because it would be stupid for the police and family to knock on the exact same doors...they were spreading out and covering different areas in parallel from the sound of it.  And yes, she was hungry and dehydrated, but she wasn't stabbed until the family stormed the place.


Except the cops would have done the same thing when they heard her screams. Unless of course they decided to surround the house and announce their presence.
Then Stabby LaStabberson could have finished her off in peace while they waited for a hostage negotiator.
 
2013-11-12 04:56:57 PM

Agnes Gonxha's Confidant: Vertdang: Good for all involved. Solid work family.

If I faced that same situation, where one of my girls was taken from me, not the cops, not the abductor, not even GOD HIMSELF could stop me from getting them back.

[cl.jroo.me image 551x414]


You're god damn straight. You don't mess w/ my little girls.
 
2013-11-12 05:04:06 PM

Luse: Except the cops would have done the same thing when they heard her screams. Unless of course they decided to surround the house and announce their presence.
Then Stabby LaStabberson could have finished her off in peace while they waited for a hostage negotiator.



Yep, the training that they put cops through to handle situations like that is mostly for show.  When push comes to shove, they're really no better than untrained civilians...amirite?
 
2013-11-12 05:05:53 PM
meyerkev:
On the other hand, there were ~9K gun murders and ~18K suicides IIRC.
/Mind you, I admit that I'm pulling these numbers out of my ass, but


Try "In 2010, there were 19,392 firearm-related suicide deaths, and 11,078 firearm-related homicide deaths in the United States " and just under that many total automobile deaths.
 
2013-11-12 05:08:15 PM

guestguy: Yep, the training that they put cops through to handle situations like that is mostly for show. When push comes to shove, they're really no better than untrained civilians...amirite?


You really wanna open that can of worms on Fark, home of the weekly police abuse thread?
 
2013-11-12 05:09:03 PM
Damn straight, good for those folks. That is what family is about, protecting their own.
 
2013-11-12 05:13:36 PM

Mentalpatient87: guestguy: Yep, the training that they put cops through to handle situations like that is mostly for show. When push comes to shove, they're really no better than untrained civilians...amirite?

You really wanna open that can of worms on Fark, home of the weekly police abuse thread?



I do love a good train wreck.
 
2013-11-12 05:17:11 PM

Doom MD: Oh look another innocent life saved by firearms. I guess some of the statists in here would prefer she be stabbed to death.


And if they had the wrong house?  What happens when somebody exercises the "Storm the castle" defense and gets the wrong house?
 
2013-11-12 05:18:23 PM

Facetious_Speciest: justtray

Read it.


I don't need to read it because I know it is factually impossible to achieve that number.

You didn't even link anything except the cover of a report that did no actual analysis.

In fact, I read the first 15 pages of you link, googled it, and still couldn't find anything that stated the CDC did ANY study on DGU at all other than to reiterate existing studies.

Here's the quotation I found through another website from the CDC report;

 * The National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) has estimated that there are between 60,000 and 105,000 DGUs per year.  Between the years 1992 and 1994, the NCVS reported there were in total 116,000 DGUs.
 * Kleck and Gertz (1995) estimated the annual occurrence of DGUs to be around 2.5 million per year.
 * The CDC report made no effort to reconcile the differing estimates of DGUs, except to note that the estimate provided by the Kleck group was larger by an order of magnitude than the estimate arising from the NCVS.  The CDC report noted that the estimate of DGU provided by the Kleck group is twice again as large as the estimate of the Dept. of Justice that there are 1.3 million crimes committed with a gun in the USA every year.


All you're doing by saying the CDC says that is lying again. You're taking an already verifiably false number comparing it to much more rational one (100,000) and cutting the difference saying, "well Kleck was wrong but it's probably between Kleck and some other report."

What you are reporting as DGU is a lie. It is not CDC numbers, it is not real. It is nothing more than the fevered imagination of a multitude of gun nuts. You have been caught reiterating a lie that you believed because of confirmation bias.

Please admit you were wrong and change your position accordingly.

And just to really dive home how wrong and ignorant you are;

Perhaps this is the lie you're attempting to repeat (from 2001 and again 100% invalid study)

The researchers found that six percent of the sample population had used a firearm in a burglary situation in the last twelve months. http://davekopel.org/2a/LawRev/LawyersGunsBurglars.htm#FN;F32">[FN32] Extrapolating the polling sample to the national population, the researchers estimated that in the last twelve months, there were approximately 1,896,842 incidents in which a householder retrieved a firearm but did not see an intruder. http://davekopel.org/2a/LawRev/LawyersGunsBurglars.htm#FN;F33">[FN33] There were an estimated 503,481 incidents in which the armed householder did see the burglar, http://davekopel.org/2a/LawRev/LawyersGunsBurglars.htm#FN;F34">[FN34] and 497,646 incidents in which the burglar was scared away by the firearm. http://davekopel.org/2a/LawRev/LawyersGunsBurglars.htm#FN;F35">[FN35] In other words, half a million times every year, burglars were likely forced to flee a home because they encountered an armed victim.

DGU is nothing more than a lie constantly repeated to make gun nuts feel like theres ANY math on their side that supports their position. Even the people who are out there chronicling ALL DGU they can find can't even get to numbers over 1000.

This link explains the issues pretty clearly with DGU.

Stop linking DGU stats, stop quoting them, and most importantly, stop pretending like they're real.
 
2013-11-12 05:33:48 PM

ferretman: Another thread where dems/libs will imply that 'Stand Your Ground' law was involved in the Zimmerman/Martin incident.


Other than changing the jury instructions to make it impossible to convict him, it had nothing to do with Zippy's acquittal.
 
2013-11-12 05:35:46 PM

stevetherobot: Hobodeluxe: Doom MD: Oh look another innocent life saved by firearms. I guess some of the statists in here would prefer she be stabbed to death.

no one wants to take your gun. we just want to try to keep them out of the crazy people's hands. sure we might not stop all of them but we should at least make it more difficult don't you think?

Speaking of crazy persons, if the crazy person kidnapper had had a gun, he would have shot her instead of stabbing her and she would most likely be dead now.


Like what happened in the very same town not long ago. Mickey Schunick was kidnapped and she fought good and long for her life. She managed to stab the scumbag with his own knife before he shot her.

What's it with my hometown and the insane scumbags?

I also agree with whoever said don't fark with a Cajun girl.
 
2013-11-12 05:39:39 PM
justtray

I don't need to read it because I know it is factually impossible to achieve that number.

Oh, lol.

You didn't even link anything except the cover of a report that did no actual analysis.

In fact, I read the first 15 pages of you link...


One or the other. Either there was nothing (it's a link for you to get the report, which shouldn't have been terribly difficult to figure out) or there were multiple pages.

I assume you mean you read the first fifteen pages elsewhere. Where'd you get your copy?

...and still couldn't find anything that stated the CDC did ANY study on DGU at all other than to reiterate existing studies.

Remember when you called me a liar? Look at what you quoted. "Depending on the study," I said. That means multiple studies. "Per the CDC," I said. As in those studies are what they're talking about in the report. Derp.

No lying. You're just insane when it comes to anything touching on firearms.

I don't expect you to admit you were wrong, even though you're now contradicting yourself.

All you're doing by saying the CDC says that is lying again.

No, in actuality, the report does cite those studies. I am not lying. You are simply a crazy person with tunnel vision and poor reasoning skills.

If you can't discuss this rationally, I won't discuss it with you. Calling me a liar over and over isn't rational. If you can't move past that, I'll live.
 
2013-11-12 05:49:59 PM
Facetious_Speciest:

Dude that was some impressive spinning there. 10/10.

All you had to say was, "you're right I was wrong I will adjust my position based on how you showed me factually wrong with the actual quotes unlike the non sources I provided."

The fact remains that no, the CDC does NOT say there are 500k+ DGU per year. That was a lie on your part. The CDC does not say that, they say that there are non valid, factually incorrect studies that assert that.

I even went so far to provide you a link that explains in detail why those numbers are made up and have no place in reality.

I didn't contradict myself at all. Your link did not even provide the numbers you said it did, and I had to find the link myself to the actual report. You failed at even the most basic fundamental level of being able to source your lies which caused me to actually do the real work of showing your lies to you with actual links.

I'm sorry I wasted time with you, I will not make that mistake again. You have proven yourself to be a liar within this thread, unable to acknowledge or accept the facts and common sense given to you. You are literally the definition of a lost cause low information human being.
 
2013-11-12 06:08:48 PM
justtray

Brass tacks:

The fact remains that no, the CDC does NOT say there are 500k+ DGU per year. That was a lie on your part.

This is not true. At all.

I even went so far to provide you a link that explains in detail why those numbers are made up and have no place in reality.

I'll trust the CDC's information over "Professor Propaganda."

Your link did not even provide the numbers you said it did, and I had to find the link myself to the actual report.

You can't link to the report, can you?
 
2013-11-12 06:11:22 PM

Precious Roy's Horse Dividers: [annanimmity.com image 360x206]


Done in 1.
 
2013-11-12 06:30:05 PM

Witty_Retort: ferretman: Another thread where dems/libs will imply that 'Stand Your Ground' law was involved in the Zimmerman/Martin incident.

Other than changing the jury instructions to make

 THE FACTS MADE it impossible to convict him, it had nothing to do with Zippy's acquittal.

FTFY
 
2013-11-12 06:37:11 PM

Doom MD: Oh look another innocent life saved by firearms. I guess some of the statists in here would prefer she be stabbed to death.


You used the word "statist" so please give a moment to catch my breath.

Whew.

Ok.

Have fun fantasizing about what people you don't agree with "would prefer".  You're a fun one.
 
2013-11-12 06:59:36 PM
Tired of waiting for "LIAR!" guy.

From the CDC report, commissioned by President Obama in the wake of numerous shootings: "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 per year..."

It's on page 15, last paragraph before the footnotes, under "Defensive Use of Guns." Direct quote. I am literally looking at it right now.

This report and its contents in this regard have been acknowledged by such right-wing publications as Slate, Daily Kos, Democratic Underground and PBS.

It is not a vast conspiracy. Some people are just idiots.
 
db2
2013-11-12 07:03:50 PM
Bethany Arceneaux, Kidnapping Victim, Rescued By Family Members Who Killed Her Captor: Cops

She was being held captive by cops?
 
2013-11-12 07:16:40 PM

Facetious_Speciest: justtray

Brass tacks:

The fact remains that no, the CDC does NOT say there are 500k+ DGU per year. That was a lie on your part.

This is not true. At all.

I even went so far to provide you a link that explains in detail why those numbers are made up and have no place in reality.

I'll trust the CDC's information over "Professor Propaganda."

Your link did not even provide the numbers you said it did, and I had to find the link myself to the actual report.

You can't link to the report, can you?


In his defense:

From his quote, DGU was functionally defined as "I grabbed a gun because I thought I *might* need to use it".  That's where they got 1.5 Million from, of which 500K were "I pulled my gun and showed it off".  And keep in mind that if the house didn't get robbed (or "Homeless dude is acting crazy in my general direction, I lift my shirt to show off my gun, he starts acting crazy in the opposite direction"), there wasn't a crime (or at least, I know a lot of people who wouldn't bother reporting it), and therefore it wouldn't show up on crime statistics, so it's not so much 800K gun users defended themselves against 1.2 million crimes as "Some percentage of X DGU's went towards fighting off 1.2 Million crimes, some were unnecessary, and some of them went towards ensuring that there weren't another however many hundreds of thousands MORE violent crimes".

Now his preferred study had some problems of its own, namely that the NVCD is a non-anonymous survey, that they ask location questions before gun use questions, and that you are then confessing having committed a crime to a federal employee who knows who you are and where you live.

http://www.guncite.com/gun_control_gcdguse.html - 2nd wall of text - "...  In short, it is made very clear to respondents that they are, in effect, speaking to a law enforcement arm of the federal government, whose employees know exactly who the respondents and their family members are, where they live, and how they can be recontacted.  ...  It is not hard for gun-using victims interviewed in the NCVS to withhold information about their use of a gun, especially since they are never directly asked whether they used a gun for self-protection.   ... 88% of the violent crimes which respondents [Rs] reported to NCVS interviewers in 1992 were committed away from the victim's home, i.e., in a location where it would ordinarily be a crime for the victim to even possess a gun, never mind use it defensively. Because the question about location is asked before the self-protection questions, the typical violent crime victim R has already committed himself to having been victimized in a public place before being asked what he or she did for self-protection. In short, Rs usually could not mention their defensive use of a gun without, in effect, confessing to a crime to a federal government employee."

So some number between the 100K and the 1.5M of the average of all those other reports were actual defensive gun uses.  CDC's probably a bit high, NVCD is definitely low.

Actually, let's have a thought experiment:

NVCD said ~100K DGU's.
12% of NVCD crimes were "legal" (or at least inside the home)
Assume that DGU's and "inside the home" are independent variables.  (And this is bullshiat, but it's still an interesting thought experiment)
Assume that of the defensive gun uses, every inside the home use was reported as such, and every outside the home (ie: "illegal") was not.  (ditto)
So 12% of DGU's was about 108K.
Which means that there were 900K DGU's last year.

Mind you, those 2 middle assumptions are bullshiat, and I admit they're bullshiat, but I'd love to know the actual effects of that survey.  Even if that gets us double the actual number (so ~1 in 4 instead of 1 in 8), that gets us to 450K.  It's still hundreds of thousands of crimes that were prevented by guns that caused 29K deaths last year and ~70K injuries in 2007, which was the first year I found data for (including those defensive gun uses?) -  http://www.uphs.upenn.edu/ficap/resourcebook/pdf/monograph.pdf

/And then of course, you get to account for "Hey, I could rob that house (/mug that person/etc), but there might be a gun inside (Yay for herd immunity*), so I won't rob that house".   "Oh hey, you functionally banned the use of guns in self-defense.  BWAHAHA."

*And I'm stereoblind and losing my right eye, so I LIKE that herd immunity since I'm firmly in the camp of people who should never, ever, under any circumstances be allowed to own guns.
 
2013-11-12 07:17:29 PM
No family members have been charged in the killing of Thomas, and may never be. A state "defense of others" law says homicide can be justified if someone's life is in danger.

Well, at least there are some states where it is (still) legal to use lethal force to stop a person from murdering someone.

But if this had happened in Maryland, for example, the family members would be in jail now.
 
2013-11-12 07:22:57 PM
meyerkev

I totally get arguing methodology, definitions, etc...but to flat-out state that something wasn't published that was, and to call everyone correctly citing said publication liars, because you personally don't like it is both intellectually dishonest and, honestly, the tack of a stupid person.

I don't like anti-sodomy laws, but I would never argue they never existed or that people who point out they exist are liars. That's just idiocy.
 
2013-11-12 07:27:50 PM
Bethany Arceneaux was abducted by her ex-boyfriend Scott Thomas and the father to her 2-year-old son.

It's the son who I pity the most in stories like this. He inherited his father's genes, so you wonder how he'll turn out when he's 29. You hope he gets the positive influence of a decent father figure long before then.
 
2013-11-12 09:39:17 PM

Facetious_Speciest: Obviously, it's generally a bad thing to kick in a door and shoot someone, but I think there's the occasional exception...


This just goes to show that there really is an exception to every rule...
 
2013-11-12 10:31:39 PM

Big_Fat_Liar: Much as we tend to prefer a guilty person to walk rather than have an innocent person hang, there are many people around, and Fark is certainly no exception, that would be quite happy to completely outlaw all gun ownership and have the occassional innoent fatality rather than have individuals able to do things they'd like to see government solely in control of.


2012
All firearm deaths
Number of deaths: 31,672
Deaths per 100,000 population: 10.3

What an occasional innocent fatality may look like.
 
2013-11-12 11:03:07 PM

Precious Roy's Horse Dividers:


Over in one. My faith in FARK is restored.
 
2013-11-12 11:29:30 PM

MythDragon: If I am even in that situation, I've had lots of practice
[static.taigame.org image 800x600]

Now where, exactly, do I even *get* a bunch of horsemen?


Where are the siege engines?
 
2013-11-12 11:30:14 PM

FOUR-WHEELED JUSTICE

 
2013-11-13 01:51:08 AM
This is like the last third of every Sookie Stackhouse novel...
 
2013-11-13 05:37:56 AM
What do you do when the peat blows off your garden?
 
2013-11-13 07:28:12 AM

give me doughnuts: MythDragon: If I am even in that situation, I've had lots of practice
[static.taigame.org image 800x600]

Now where, exactly, do I even *get* a bunch of horsemen?

Cavalry are useless in storming a castle. You need sappers, archers, and seige-engines.


belhade: MythDragon: If I am even in that situation, I've had lots of practice
[static.taigame.org image 800x600]

Now where, exactly, do I even *get* a bunch of horsemen?

Where are the siege engines?


They are all on the other side of the castle. While they are mocking my horses, and thinking how silly I am, they are about to catch a boulder to the back of the head. That's some Sun Tzu shiat right there. "All warfare is based on deception". Who would leave unguarded siege engines on the back side of someone's castle and park a bunch of horses out front? No one! That's why it will work.


/update: It didn't work. They must not have read Sun Tzu.
 
2013-11-13 09:23:02 AM

Facetious_Speciest: Tired of waiting for "LIAR!" guy.

From the CDC report, commissioned by President Obama in the wake of numerous shootings: "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 per year..."

It's on page 15, last paragraph before the footnotes, under "Defensive Use of Guns." Direct quote. I am literally looking at it right now.

This report and its contents in this regard have been acknowledged by such right-wing publications as Slate, Daily Kos, Democratic Underground and PBS.

It is not a vast conspiracy. Some people are just idiots.


Uh...I dont have a dog in this fight, but,


Kleck is best known for his 1995 study with Marc Gertz that claims that up to 2.5 million incidents of defensive gun use occur every year. Media figures and the National Rifle Association frequently cite this study to bolster their claims that owning firearms makes people safer.

But critics point to the study's "serious methodological difficulties" -- it extrapolates a very rare event, the slightly more than one percent of respondents to a survey that said they had used a gun in self-defense over the past year, to the entire population of 200 million adults. This means that even slight deficiencies in the accuracy of the survey, whether due to false positives or a sample that is not perfectly indicative of the overall population, can lead to large differences in the result. Harvard Injury Control Research Center Director David Hemenway has labeled Kleck's result "an enormous overestimate" and pointed out that the results require one to believe, for instance, that "burglary victims use their guns in self-defense more than 100% of the time."

Contra Kleck, data from the National Crime Victimization survey produced by the Department of Justice's Bureau of Justice Statistics suggests that there are roughly 100,000 instances of defensive gun use per year.

Right-wing media have pointed to the report's citation of Kleck's research to claim that it proves that "guns actually save lives." In fact, the report's treatment of the criminologist's work is more complex, typically contrasting his results with other studies that show dramatically different results. For example, the report states (emphasis added):

    Estimates of gun use for self-defense vary widely, in part due to definitional differences for self-defensive gun use, different data sources, and questions about accuracy of data, particularly when self-reported. The NCVS has estimated 60,000 to 120,000 defensive uses of guns per year. Based on data from l992 and l994, the NCVS found 116,000 incidents (McDowall et al., 1998). Another body of research estimated annual gun use for self-defense to be much higher, up to 2.5 million incidents, suggesting that self-defense can be an important crime deterrent (Kleck and Gertz, 1995). Some studies on the association between self-defensive gun use and injury or loss to the victim have found less loss and injury when a firearm is used (Kleck, 2001b).

Similarly (emphasis added):

    Defensive uses 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 per year (Kleck, 2001a), in the context of about 300,000 violent crimes involving firearms in 2008 (BJS, 2010). On the other hand, some scholars point to 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.

A spokesperson for the Institute of Medicine and National Research Council would not comment on Kleck's controversial presence on the committee, but explained that the committee was selected by staff based on "folks that are nominated" with an eye toward providing "enough expertise to address all of the questions" at issue as well as "these different perspectives and points of view with the expertise." She stressed that the slate was approved by the president of the National Academy of Science and that all members must sign off on the report before its release.

Kleck and Leshner did not respond to requests for comment.


Apparently all those figures came from one guy...from the university of FLA, who used faulty polling.
 
2013-11-13 09:40:10 AM
Madbassist1

See my previous comment regarding arguing methodology vs. denying something was published.

They're not the same thing. When someone starts off with "you're a liar!" when it's clear that what I'm saying is true (that those numbers were published, in a report drawn up by the CDC), I have little interest in continuing with them.

"I have a problem with the studies the CDC referenced" is far more likely to generate discussion than "that was never referenced and that report doesn't exist."
 
2013-11-13 09:59:39 AM
I don't have a problem with the report, or its contents. Nor do I have an issue with the story I just sourced. I was just pointing out the issue (which I know nothing about)

/bubble bubble, toil and trouble!
 
Displayed 50 of 204 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report