1. Sign up now and join over 35,000 northwest gun owners. It's quick, easy, and 100% free!
  2. We're giving away over $850 in prizes this month -- enter now for your chance to win!
    Dismiss Notice

DGU: Firearms No Advantage

Discussion in 'Education & Training' started by RicInOR, Jul 24, 2015.

  1. RicInOR

    RicInOR Washington County Bronze Supporter Bronze Supporter

    Likes Received:
  2. Certaindeaf

    Certaindeaf SE Portland Well-Known Member

    Likes Received:
    What the heck are they complaining about? They should be happy for any and all work. They probably run down and kill more people while driving their Jags to the golf course than all the thug shootings in Zimbabwe. lol
    Stomper likes this.
  3. Deebow

    Deebow Portland Well-Known Member

    Likes Received:
    I don't even need to read the rest of the study to know 2 things immediately:

    1) Whatever methodology they are using is flawed.
    2) They didn't talk to anyone of statistical significance that has been in a situation like this.

    And here is where you find the nugget:

    "The study found that in incidents where a victim used a gun in self-defense, the likelihood of suffering an injury was 10.9 percent. Had the victim taken no action at all, the risk of injury was virtually identical: 11 percent. Having a gun also didn’t reduce the likelihood of losing property: 38.5 percent of those who used a gun in self-defense had property taken from them, compared to 34.9 percent of victims who used another type of weapon, such as a knife or baseball bat."

    So let's see, incidents where a gun was used in self defense, you stand only a 10 percent chance of being stabbed, shot or beat to death with a hammer or bat by a crack-head who wants your money, but if you do nothing then you only stand an 11 percent chance of you stand only a 10 percent chance of being stabbed, shot or beat to death with a hammer or bat by a crack-head who wants your money?

    And that is not 10 percent vs. 11 percent "injured;" that is a 10 vs. 11 percent chance of being beat hard enough to cause brain damage, stabbed to the point you bleed out or shot repeatedly to finish you off.

    How about the lady in NJ recently who evidently stood a 100 percent chance of being injured (fatally) because she had no gun to use to defend herself? How about the woman last year in Georgia who had to shoot the intruder until the gun was empty in order to survive after hiding in the house?

    And if this is true how come police officers call guns?

    Statistics show that you are more likely to die from medical malpractice than from gun violence. Maybe we should ban doctors?
  4. No_Regerts

    No_Regerts United States Well-Known Member

    Likes Received:
    Ever wonder why they call it "practicing" medicine?

    I'll accept their medical expertise, but doctors are just as full of schitt as anyone except they think their opinion counts because of some extra letters behind their name.
    Brutus57 likes this.
  5. Medic!

    Medic! What just happened? Has eagle eyes. But cant remember what he saw. Bronze Supporter

    Likes Received:
    OK. Now that you have been armed with the knowledge. ''My gun won't help me''. Let's do a little experiment?

    You come at me with a knife. And try to take my truck parked out in my driveway.
    Then after I shoot you full of holes. You may at first try to take solace in the fact. That this event is just a statistical anomaly. Really! You should have drove off in my truck.

    But now your bleeding to death on my concrete. With the thought slowly creeping into your mind.
    ''Those liberal fools that made this study are maybe full of $hit''?

    Witch is exactly what I knew when you came at me with that knife!;)
    Koda likes this.
  6. ZA_Survivalist

    ZA_Survivalist Oregon AK's all day.

    Likes Received:
    Just a puff piece to promote the law of:
    "fleeing from an attacker" which in 98% of the cases never works. It leaves the victim robbed or raped or murdered.

    No advantage having a firearm? Hahaha what a larf.
  7. DuneHopper

    DuneHopper Douglas County. Well-Known Member

    Likes Received:
    Ok after I laughed real hard I then am responding.
    I have 2nd Degree Black Belt, in Kenpo which is very much adapted to street fighting.
    That said, anytime you are with in striking distance it also means your opponent is as well.
    I remember when I was in training in my younger days we would spar in tournaments with other arts. One thing particular you could notice was the ones that focused more on kicks in their art needed a lot of room in practical use. ( ya there is a point I am making ).
    A strike with a leg can be far more powerful but is also not as practical in close quarters.
    All that said, a firearms has the ability to equalize the needed distances for even a novice at defense. Having come from a gang area in my youth I can tell you criminals love weakness and if you run to flee you are not a threat but now a victim. Robbers and Rapist seldom look for victims outside a Karate Studio. But they will look for people with kids in parking lots, what do they expect a elderly person, disabled or out of shape person to do? Run until they drop.

    This idea will get more killed as more will be harmed by those looking for easy fleeing sheep.
    Oathkeeper1775 and MikeE like this.
  8. Oathkeeper1775

    Oathkeeper1775 Coast Range Well-Known Member

    Likes Received:
    Premise unsupported; no way to calculate how many crimes were not committed because the firearms exist.

    Arguably, many more crimes would be committed if fewer firearms were in the hands of the population. How else could those people move accross Rwanda; killing a million+ with machetes, other-than the victims had no way to defend themselves?

    Studies like these exist because nobody is shooting them down; too many peer-evals.
    Last edited: Aug 17, 2015
    DuneHopper likes this.