OSU researchers study risks of armed self-defense

[ThePhonMan]

The professors plan to continue studying gun culture, with their next project possibly focusing on the experience of non-gun owners in a country where there are so many guns, Huff said.

I completely missed the end of this sentence. Are they serious? What the hell does that have to do with the price of cheese?

Why don't they examine the experiences of people who don't own a toothbrush or dental floss, deodorant, exercise good hygiene, etc.? Who cares what a non-owner thinks about the subject? How is what they think relevant in any way?

As I experienced in SoCal during the Rodney King riots, non-gun owners suddenly seek you out and need your help when they realize that nobody is coming when they call 911. The rest of the time, you're a crazy that should be locked up.

Academics are idiots and hang out with other idiots in their echo chambers of "higher learning". This is another great example of educated stupidity.

 

[Colts4me]

Just my opinion but a lot of science has lost its credibility. The biggest loss comes from science being settled in one of their claims. Real science is not settled on topics that change year by year. We own more guns now than ever and it shows in the crime statistics and those statistics will change year by year. Society changes year by year so it's odd these scientist want to use one point in time to make a conclusion.

It seems the world has gone to fake news and junk science on guns now but honestly the truth was settled with the second amendment.

 

[Vendor Hidden]

""You're doing something in public but it's not public," Huff said. "You're not letting other people know you do it so it's really hard for social norms to evolve when you're engaging in an activity that is not really social even though you're doing it in a social space."

That same quote could describe a sociopath looking for victims, or Kevin Spacey, but I repeat myself.

 

[Sstrand]

The scientific method is based on proof . . . However, in some fields, "consensus" is good enough!?!?!?!?
Especially if it fits your narrative!


Sheldon

 

[Vendor Hidden]

The scientific method is based on proof . . . However, in some fields, "consensus" is good enough!?!?!?!?
Especially if it fits your narrative!


Sheldon

They call it "social science" but it's as scientific as Scientology.

 

[Urgaburga]

This thread was probably an OSU plant and we are now subjects in their experiments.

Probably, and the article was possibly even written with the lay person in mind given that these researchers seem to be completely new to firearms at the time of starting the study. Anything else would be preaching to the converted, which might be interpreted from some of the responses here ... They did raise some interesting comparisons concerning cross state CHL requirements. Does anyone here think that completing an online safety course is an adequate qualification for an individual to carry a gun? Would you trust a person whose CHL training is limited to an online course to make sound judgement when drawing their gun? Cops make mistakes often enough without an unidentified stranger who is possibly standing next to you, your wife , or your kid suddenly joining in and confusing the situation (like that incident at a Walmart a few months ago where there was a delay in ID'ing the shooter because of all the CCW's drawing their guns).


All good points really if you give it a chance rather than interpreting it as a personal attack on your rights. Drawing the comparison between gun ownership and driving a car too, which has been raised here in the past, was an interesting point. "Just because YOU can doesn't mean YOU should (or be allowed shoe laces in some instances). The article assumes people do not go any further with their CHL training, and whereas that is not true for all, it is possibly true for some.

There's also the fact there is always an element among CHL holders who named their carry gun after their prom date and train with it relentlessly who are just itching to use their gun, just the same as the element of preppers who actually want armageddon to come along.

I didn't see any statements where the researchers omitted surprise at CHL holders using their brains, maybe I missed it somewhere. But I am certain that there are some extreme leftists for whom nothing less than the complete justification of their hatred and wild sweeping assumptions about gun owners are proven true are copying pasting these responses.

 

[Slobray]

They did raise some interesting comparisons concerning cross state CHL requirements. Does anyone here think that completing an online safety course is an adequate qualification for an individual to carry a gun? Would you trust a person whose CHL training is limited to an online course to make sound judgement when drawing their gun? Cops make mistakes often enough without an unidentified stranger who is possibly standing next to you, your wife , or your kid suddenly joining in and confusing the situation (like that incident at a Walmart a few months ago where there was a delay in ID'ing the shooter because of all the CCW's drawing their guns).

If that's how you really feel, you should probably stay out of WA............ as, we up here don't even have to take "an online safety course" to carry concealed (the horror). Honestly, I have only one problem with the WA concealed carry license is .......................... that it exists, because I'm of the mind that the government shouldn't be involved in granting us permission to exercise a right.



Ray

 

[Urgaburga]

If that's how you really feel, you should probably stay out of WA............ as, we up here don't even have to take "an online safety course" to carry concealed (the horror). Honestly, I have only one problem with the WA concealed carry license is .......................... that it exists, because I'm of the mind that the government shouldn't be involved in granting us permission to exercise a right.



Ray

Research like this can be positive for gun owners and CCW's and could serve to assist in desensitizing and educating the anti-gun public in favor of gun ownership. It can actually serve to convert non shooters to owning guns and showing people that CCW's are accountable and responsible is key to that success. Telling people to bubblegum off because permits are wrong is not going to help.

 

[11Charlie]

Research like this can be positive for gun owners and CCW's and could serve to assist in desensitizing and educating the anti-gun public in favor of gun ownership. It can actually serve to convert non shooters to owning guns and showing people that CCW's are accountable and responsible is key to that success. Telling people to bubblegum off because permits are wrong is not going to help.

HELP us? I can't remember the last time research has benefited us as gun owners! The typical is the bloombergs using it against us for there own agenda!

 

[Slobray]

Research like this can be positive for gun owners and CCW's and could serve to assist in desensitizing and educating the anti-gun public in favor of gun ownership. It can actually serve to convert non shooters to owning guns and showing people that CCW's are accountable and responsible is key to that success. Telling people to bubblegum off because permits are wrong is not going to help.

Um, I wasn't telling you "to bubblegum off because permits are wrong", I was actually making light of your attitude of distrust toward free citizens not being worthy of exercising the right of self defense, because they don't have whatever training you deem mandatory. The mention of permits was just additional commentary.


Ray

 

[Caveman Jim]

Agree, if Thomas Sowell read this article, he might invite our attention to one of his characterizations...in his book "Conflict of Visions" (highly recommended), so will I:

"The Audacity of the Intellectual"

They will use any means necessary to bring down those of us who still believe that we have a constitution and a Bill of Rights.

 

[bbbass]

Trust?

I once had a discussion with a USPSA shooter who wouldn't dream of attending our IDPA matches because we run a "hot" range, ie, cocked and locked. Said he didn't trust any of us walking around with loaded pistols. Yet he had a concealed carry license... how are we to "trust" him? Or if he feels that way about a hot range, how does he feel knowing that his fellow CCW citizens are walking around and he doesn't know who is carrying and who is not?

I don't disagree with everything you wrote @Urgaburga, but you chose one scenario at Walmart when IMO the vast majority of CCW holders have not only been responsible, thoughtful people, but actually a benefit to themselves and to their communities. More and more we are seeing positive reports of criminals stopped in the act by armed bystanders and those cases involving self defense.

 

[nammac]

Constitutional Carry for All...

That's the way it should be...

Responsible adults taking responsibility for their own safety and the safety of their loved ones...

Did John Hancock, George Washington, Samuel Adams, Benjamin Franklin,
Paul Revere, and all the founding fathers have the Kings permission to have firearms?

Truly free people do not ask their governments permission to exercise a God given right... Period...

 

[bbbass]

Constitutional Carry for All...

That's the way it should be...

Idaho??

 

[nammac]

Idaho??

And New Hampshire IIRC...

 

[Urgaburga]

They will use any means necessary to bring down those of us who still believe that we have a constitution and a Bill of Rights.

Describing the opposition as "they" makes up sound like paranoid crazies. Worse it makes us sound the same with the bubblegum traveling in the opposite direction. At no point does this article make political references I fail to see why nobody can see how such studies can be turned to our advantage and start saying crazy bubblegum. I know plenty of liberals who do shoot and plenty who don't but also don't want to stop us from going do "they" are not necessarily the enemy.

 

[Urgaburga]

Constitutional Carry for All...

That's the way it should be...

Responsible adults taking responsibility for their own safety and the safety of their loved ones...

Did John Hancock, George Washington, Samuel Adams, Benjamin Franklin,
Paul Revere, and all the founding fathers have the Kings permission to have firearms?

Truly free people do not ask their governments permission to exercise a God given right... Period...

They also stil

Um, I wasn't telling you "to bubblegum off because permits are wrong", I was actually making light of your attitude of distrust toward free citizens not being worthy of exercising the right of self defense, because they don't have whatever training you deem mandatory. The mention of permits was just additional commentary.


Ray

I was generalizing when I made that statement. The difference in cross state carry requirements (mentioned in the article) was what I referring to, and I pointed out a real life situation where lack of training hindered the LE. You are right (as a veteran) I doubt the competence of an individual who did no more than do an online course in order to carry a gun and hasn't continued training, because if you don't train and prepare yourself you will bubblegum up. I do agree with you to some degree concerning permits, but there are just to many bad guys, and to many paranoid people out there for that to be safe.

 

[Caveman Jim]

Describing the opposition as "they" makes up sound like paranoid crazies. Worse it makes us sound the same with the bubblegum traveling in the opposite direction. At no point does this article make political references I fail to see why nobody can see how such studies can be turned to our advantage and start saying crazy bubblegum. I know plenty of liberals who do shoot and plenty who don't but also don't want to stop us from going do "they" are not necessarily the enemy.

Really? I am no paranoid crazy because I know who wants total control of American citizens (subjects).
THEY; progressive liberal politician puppets controlled by Bloomberg, Soros & the like.

 

[nammac]

Really? I am no paranoid crazy because I know who wants total control of America citizens (subjects).
THEY; progressive liberal politician puppets controlled by Bloomberg, Soros & the like.

Exactly... There's a ruling class that wants to make the rest of us their subjects... The only thing standing in their way is 330+ million guns... Period...

They will continue to chip away at our rights while they protect themselves with the exact devices they want taken from our hands.

 

[Caveman Jim]

Exactly... There's a ruling class that wants to make the rest of us their subjects... The only thing standing in their way is 330+ million guns... Period...

They will continue to chip away at our rights while they protect themselves with the exact devices they want taken from our hands.

Follow the $$$$$ to just who finances these "gun ownership studies".