Statistics don't kill people. But statistics show you are less safe with a handgun in your home.

[Brihaha]

"People who live in a home with guns are at a higher - not lower - risk of homicide."

This conclusion was derived from two research projects. One study was a survey of gun owners and why they buy firearms. The other was a lengthy study of California homicides.

"The study also didn't find any evidence that living with a gun owner makes one safer from armed burglars."

"But the Stanford study and others indicate the best way to protect a family from gun violence is not to possess a gun in the first place."

"Owning a handgun is associated with a dramatically elevated risk of suicide."

Apparently the argument that guns don't kill people only applies if people are not present....with a gun in their possession.

An inference can be made that if we had fewer guns in America we would suffer fewer gun deaths. The executive director of the 97Percent organization Mathew Littmann says the answer lies in encouraging both sides of the gun debate to talk civilly and negotiate earnestly with each other and timid politicians will follow. And somehow convince people they don't need a home arsenal.

Anyone believe those with home arsenals will negotiate to reduce unnecessary gun deaths in America?

Column: Live with a gun owner? Researchers say that makes you less safe

 

[Goonie]

"People who live in a home with guns are at a higher - not lower - risk of homicide."

This conclusion was derived from two research projects. One study was a survey of gun owners and why they buy firearms. The other was a lengthy study of California homicides.

"The study also didn't find any evidence that living with a gun owner makes one safer from armed burglars."

"But the Stanford study and others indicate the best way to protect a family from gun violence is not to possess a gun in the first place."

"Owning a handgun is associated with a dramatically elevated risk of suicide."

Apparently the argument that guns don't kill people only applies if people are not present....with a gun in their possession.

An inference can be made that if we had fewer guns in America we would suffer fewer gun deaths. The executive director of the 97Percent organization Mathew Littmann says the answer lies in encouraging both sides of the gun debate to talk civilly and negotiate earnestly with each other and timid politicians will follow. And somehow convince people they don't need a home arsenal.

Anyone believe those with home arsenals will negotiate to reduce unnecessary gun deaths in America?

Your forgetting it does not matter how many children accidentally shoot themselves, or how many take show and tell to far…

the point of the second amendment is to ensure that if you think the government has become tyrannical you have the means to rebel, at least that’s how many on the right see it.

 

[iluvatar5150]

"People who live in a home with guns are at a higher - not lower - risk of homicide."

This conclusion was derived from two research projects. One study was a survey of gun owners and why they buy firearms. The other was a lengthy study of California homicides.

"The study also didn't find any evidence that living with a gun owner makes one safer from armed burglars."

"But the Stanford study and others indicate the best way to protect a family from gun violence is not to possess a gun in the first place."

"Owning a handgun is associated with a dramatically elevated risk of suicide."

Apparently the argument that guns don't kill people only applies if people are not present....with a gun in their possession.

An inference can be made that if we had fewer guns in America we would suffer fewer gun deaths. The executive director of the 97Percent organization Mathew Littmann says the answer lies in encouraging both sides of the gun debate to talk civilly and negotiate earnestly with each other and timid politicians will follow. And somehow convince people they don't need a home arsenal.

Anyone believe those with home arsenals will negotiate to reduce unnecessary gun deaths in America?

I think you're missing a link.

 

[Brihaha]

I think you're missing a link.

Thank you my friend. My Internet went out just before posting and I completely forgot to add it. It certainly is necessary for the thread haha.

 

[Blade]

Thanks but.. yahoo news.. for me not a source I would trust. Then the org story from LA times.

That being said part I would agree with. I can't say why most get a gun. To add to Goonie said when some in congress want to just get rid of the second amendment. To me thats scary. "A Supreme Court justice’s solution to gun violence: Repeal Second Amendment"

 

[Lost4words]

you think the government has become tyrannical you have the means to rebel,

Just lol. Only in the USA!

 

[Goonie]

Just lol. Only in the USA!

I know, the second amendment has not aged well.

 

[Brihaha]

Thanks but.. yahoo news.. for me not a source I would trust. Then the org story from LA times.

That being said part I would agree with. I can't say why most get a gun. To add to Goonie said when some in congress want to just get rid of the second amendment. To me thats scary. "A Supreme Court justice’s solution to gun violence: Repeal Second Amendment"

Is there a gun control measure you could agree with? Statistics came from the research, not yahoo or LA Times. Since we can't seem to regulate people, perhaps we can regulate firearms somewhat to mitigate the mess people leave in their wake.

 

[disciple Clint]

Is there a gun control measure you could agree with? Statistics came from the research, not yahoo or LA Times. Since we can't seem to regulate people, perhaps we can regulate firearms somewhat to mitigate the mess people leave in their wake.

Any one want to make a guess of who paid for the research grant? They no doubt got what they paid for.

 

[Nithavela]

Thanks but.. yahoo news.. for me not a source I would trust. Then the org story from LA times.

Any one want to make a guess of who paid for the research grant? They no doubt got what they paid for.

Anything not to engage with the actual data, hu?

 

[Brihaha]

Any one want to make a guess of who paid for the research grant? They no doubt got what they paid for.

It seems they did find evidence that flies in the face of reasons people keep guns in their homes. 58% of those gun owners surveyed said they keep guns in their homes to ensure their families' safety, when statistics directly refute that argument. I myself keep guns in the house and I happen to agree with the research from this and other studies. It is common sense to think more guns equates to being less safe. Most research illustrates the evidence of this unfortunate fact. In 2018 75% of suicides used these weapons to kill themselves.
I can't understand the need to deny the reality of the facts and numbers. They are informative and give clues as to what drives and enables gun violence in America. I do understand bias and denial are not conducive to finding compromise on solutions to our gun violence problem in America. If we collectively continue to deny reality our problems continue progress. Just like all addictions. Chronic and progressive.

 

[trophy33]

"People who live in a home with guns are at a higher - not lower - risk of homicide."

This conclusion was derived from two research projects. One study was a survey of gun owners and why they buy firearms. The other was a lengthy study of California homicides.

"The study also didn't find any evidence that living with a gun owner makes one safer from armed burglars."

"But the Stanford study and others indicate the best way to protect a family from gun violence is not to possess a gun in the first place."

"Owning a handgun is associated with a dramatically elevated risk of suicide."

Apparently the argument that guns don't kill people only applies if people are not present....with a gun in their possession.

An inference can be made that if we had fewer guns in America we would suffer fewer gun deaths. The executive director of the 97Percent organization Mathew Littmann says the answer lies in encouraging both sides of the gun debate to talk civilly and negotiate earnestly with each other and timid politicians will follow. And somehow convince people they don't need a home arsenal.

Anyone believe those with home arsenals will negotiate to reduce unnecessary gun deaths in America?

Column: Live with a gun owner? Researchers say that makes you less safe

There is a difference between causality and correlation.

What if people who have guns in their homes are people living in dangerous areas, therefore they are statistically more prone to be part of the homicide statistics anyway?

Such research would have to be both carefully balanced and randomized and I am afraid such good ones do not exist yet.

 

[Brihaha]

There is a difference between causality and correlation.

What if people who have guns in their homes are people living in dangerous areas, therefore they are statistically more prone to be part of the homicide statistics anyway?

Such research would have to be both carefully balanced and randomized and I am afraid such good ones do not exist yet.

This research seems carefully balanced focusing on two separate studies, one of gun buyers and one of California homicides. Where is your evidence or motivation to say "I am afraid such good ones do not exist"?

 

[bèlla]

A person determined to end their life will do so. Whether they own a gun or not. The studies are devised to reach a specific conclusion as are think tanks. What they don’t reveal is the proliferation of guns in wealthy homes. They aren’t turning them in and they have security.

Keep your guns. Ignore the propaganda and scare tactics.

 

[trophy33]

Where is your evidence or motivation to say "I am afraid such good ones do not exist"?

The lack of good randomized, placebo controlled and double blinded studies even in biotech area (which is area I am interested in) leads me to be skeptical about politicized statistics. Authors like to play with numbers to create the result they want.

I think the question Americans should ask themselves is not "what weapons the mass shooters used and what people with guns use for their suicides" but rather "why do we have mass shooters and why do we have suicides".

 

[Brihaha]

The lack of good randomized, placebo controlled and double blinded studies even in biotech area (which is area I am interested in) leads me to be skeptical about politicized statistics. Authors like to play with numbers to create the result they want.

"Despite widespread perceptions that a gun in the home provides security benefits, nearly all credible studies to date suggest that people who live in homes with guns are at higher- not lower- risk of homicide."

I agree we should be skeptical about research and studies claims. Yet at some point if all research points in the same direction it should be acknowledged as at least correlation if not causation.

 

[trophy33]

"Despite widespread perceptions that a gun in the home provides security benefits, nearly all credible studies to date suggest that people who live in homes with guns are at higher- not lower- risk of homicide."

I agree we should be skeptical about research and studies claims. Yet at some point if all research points in the same direction it should be acknowledged as at least correlation if not causation.

Depends on what were the criteria for the credibility and if they took into consideration also other factors than just having a gun - more broader context of it, why did even people needed to have a gun at home.

 

[Larniavc]

Any one want to make a guess of who paid for the research grant? They no doubt got what they paid for.

Why not tell us?

 

[Brihaha]

Depends on what were the criteria for the credibility and if they took into consideration also other factors than just having a gun - more broader context of it, why did even people needed to have a gun at home.

The first study was all done with gun owners and why they felt the need to have guns at home. 58% said the biggest reason was for protection. The second biggest reason was 24% said they don't trust police to keep them safe. Your point made was exactly why they brought the two studies together.

 

[Larniavc]

A person determined to end their life will do so.

True. But for the people who have a fleeting suicidal thought and a gun it’s over very quickly.

For the same person without access to a suicide machine the time it takes to stock pile meds or to drive to a bridge may let that fleeting thought pass and the person to seek help.

In my profession working with clinically depressed patients the biggest red flag for suicide after past behaviour is impulsivity. Any that speeds up the suicidal activity increases the likelihood and impulsive person who had a bad day will kill themselves.

It’s the same for angry people. Unarmed they are a nuisance: armed they are a bomb waiting go off.