Surprise, surprise, surprise: More guns = more shootings.

[Gulo Blue]

This study is a great example of how people use data to fool lazy and/or stupid people.

FYI, 61% of deaths were suicide on the wikipeida firearm-related death link and 63% on the concealed carry website.

It should also be made clear what the website actually is. It's a survey of news articles. Any bias found in reporting (and I'm not suggesting what that bias might be) would be reflected in the numbers.

 

[Spartanmack]

FYI, 61% of deaths were suicide on the wikipeida firearm-related death link and 63% on the concealed carry website.

It should also be made clear what the website actually is. It's a survey of news articles. Any bias found in reporting (and I'm not suggesting what that bias might be) would be reflected in the numbers.

I didn't read the Wiki page, just the article and study that Champ posted. I also didn't see the "concealed carry website" is that a third source or were you referring to the study Champ posted?

I'm also in no way trying to downplay the tragedy of suicide or deny that guns are one of the most effective means to commit suicide. I also don't know how much higher the "success" rate is for suicide by firearms vs. other methods but I do believe that people who want to kill themselves are going to try to kill themselves one way or another. My only point there is it's misleading to attribute those deaths to concealed carry.

 

[Gulo Blue]

I didn't read the Wiki link, just the article and study that Champ posted - is that the "concealed carry website" you refer to or is that a third source?

I'm also in no way trying to downplay the tragedy of suicide or deny that guns are one of the most effective means to commit suicide. I also don't know how much higher the "success" rate is for suicide by firearms vs. other methods but I do believe that people who want to kill themselves are going to try to kill themselves one way or another. My only point there is it's misleading to attribute those deaths to concealed carry.

Yeah, when I said "website" I meant Champs link.

 

[Spartanmack]

Yeah, when I said "website" I meant Champs link.

Got it. Unless I did the math wrong I think it's the reverse - 36% suicides, 64% other on the VPC study.

 

[Michchamp]

well, kinda the point made by all the advocates of CCW is that it prevents crime, but of the hundreds of shootings cited, only 16 (so far) have been justified.

and the number of shootings by CCW holders will only grow, as the practice so far is relatively new. In Illinois, I think it was just last year or '13 you were allowed to apply.

so is CCW really necessary and ju'stified? If you want to thump your chest and pretend the "good guy with a gun" myth is real, it's probably better not to look at the numbers here, OR ask the loved ones of the other 706 people killed that question (though I'm sure the 16 justifiable homicide guys would tell you it was worth it, and how sweet it was to be Dirty Harry for a day. "Society" can go F themselves...)

 

[Spartanmack]

well, kinda the point made by all the advocates of CCW is that it prevents crime, but of the hundreds of shootings cited, only 16 (so far) have been justified.

and the number of shootings by CCW holders will only grow, as the practice so far is relatively new. In Illinois, I think it was just last year or '13 you were allowed to apply.

so is CCW really necessary and ju'stified? If you want to thump your chest and pretend the "good guy with a gun" myth is real, it's probably better not to ask the loved ones of the other 706 people killed that question (though I'm sure the 16 justifiable homicide guys would tell you it was worth it, and how sweet it was to get to be Dirty Harry for a day. "Society" can go F themselves...)

So you're sticking with that 706 number and you still think only 16 were cases of self defense? And you have no problem with the lack of context to show a trend in either direction?

Anyone who questions this presumably peer reviewed study is just thumping their chest and pretending the "good guy w/ a gun" is real because this obviously flawed study proves it's a myth?

By the way, have you bought yourself any property on the shores of Lake Confirmation Bias in the soon-to-be-tropical Yukon?

 

[Michchamp]

So you're sticking with that 706 number and you still think only 16 were cases of self defense? And you have no problem with the lack of context to show a trend in either direction?

Anyone who questions this presumably peer reviewed study is just thumping their chest and pretending the "good guy w/ a gun" is real because this obviously flawed study proves it's a myth?

By the way, have you bought yourself any property on the shores of Lake Confirmation Bias in the soon-to-be-tropical Yukon?

their methodology may be off, but it may be under-reported, if anything, since they were only looking at CCW holders they can ID from state records.

If the 706 number is wrong, or overstated, I think it's still okay to say "An overwhelming % of the shootings by CCW holders were not justifiable" unless you think there's enough confirmation bias there to swing the number by a few hundred or more.

 

[Michchamp]

They do at least link to PDFs detailing each shooting they reference here.

if their numbers are that off, include a lot of duplicate incidents, etc., I doubt it will take gun nuts/NRA nuts more than a day or two to refute these numbers. You KNOW they have people just sitting around looking to shoot holes (no pun intended) in anything that smacks of a person doing less than going off on an unhinged rant about how great guns are, right? If there are errors in the data, they'll find it, and we'll read banner headlines from them about it.

if not, they'll just throw out the usual tropes... communism, socialism, tyranny, gun seizure, 2nd amendment absolutism, etc.

 

[Michchamp]

Other than those who were victims of a mugging (directly or indirectly), I suppose many who CCW are often looking for any reason to flash their piece, no matter how flimsy.

 

[Gulo Blue]

Got it. Unless I did the math wrong I think it's the reverse - 36% suicides, 64% other on the VPC study.

You're right. I read it wrong.

 

[Spartanmack]

their methodology may be off, but it may be under-reported, if anything, since they were only looking at CCW holders they can ID from state records.

If the 706 number is wrong, or overstated, I think it's still okay to say "An overwhelming % of the shootings by CCW holders were not justifiable" unless you think there's enough confirmation bias there to swing the number by a few hundred or more.

This is absolutely not true. Even using the lower number of 460, the conviction rate is 38%. That is NOT an overwhelming %. And there are 198 cases they make no mention of - could it be that these cases or most of these cases are so cut-and-dry that no charges were filed? Probably but we don't know so I emailed that question to the VPC. I will share their response if I get one.

And again, the bigger point is the context. Are these numbers out of line with prior data? Is crime up or down as a result of increased concealed carry, has concealed carry increased significantly? This study sucks and is proof of nothing. And I'm not a gun owner, have no intentions of buying one or applying for a CC license. But I'm not going to call my congressman demanding stricter gun control or a ban on concealed carry based on an obviously flawed and biased study.

 

[Gulo Blue]

Either way. Concealed carry is like assault rifles in terms of scale. If we're not talking about regular, non-concealed handgun ownership, then we might as well be talking about rounding errors with respect to those stats about firearms related deaths per capita in each nation.

 

[Michchamp]

Either way. Concealed carry is like assault rifles in terms of scale. If we're not talking about regular, non-concealed handgun ownership, then we might as well be talking about rounding errors with respect to those stats about firearms related deaths per capita in each nation.

but the myth about self-defense and deterrence is being used to sell more guns generally...

 

[Spartanmack]

but the myth about self-defense and deterrence is being used to sell more guns generally...

Myth? what if the 198 unmentioned instances turn out to be obvious self-defense cases where no charges were filed? Will it still be a myth?

 

[Gulo Blue]

but the myth about self-defense and deterrence is being used to sell more guns generally...

Has it? I don't see a lot of gun advertisements. It's been used a lot in the BS political arguments over rules nobody is really trying to change but people like to argue over instead of the things politicians are actually going to do when in office. They found a way to scare people that are both for and against guns while doing nothing about the issue. Gun violence isn't up and nobody is taking your guns away.

Don't get me wrong. It's bad. But we're not doing anything about it. Nobody's even talking about doing anything about it. Even the most anti-gun politicians are only talking about concealed carry and automatic weapons...and that's not really the issue.

 

[Gulo Blue]

Myth? what if the 198 unmentioned instances turn out to be obvious self-defense cases where no charges were filed? Will it still be a myth?

That's something to consider. Is it normal for a court to rule on whether or not something is lawful self defense or do they typically just do nothing in those cases?

 

[Spartanmack]

That's something to consider. Is it normal for a court to rule on whether or not something is lawful self defense or do they typically just do nothing in those cases?

Hey, that's like the 3rd time I've made that point - I guess my first two posts were too long for even the most thorough readers...

 

[zyxt9]

Lots of negatives to gun ownership, mainly increased risk of killing yourself or someone you love. Suicide is an epidemic in America, particularly veterans. Most suicide attempts fail but not when using a gun, men are much more likely to be successful because they're more likely to own a gun.

The second amendment was enacted for maintaining a militia to fight wars, I don't know if the founding fathers were thinking about 20 round clips for ordinary citizens.

Regardless were the gun country and that won't change, well continue to shoot each other at rates similar to brazil, Columbia, and Mexico.

Since it was enacted as a means to maintain a militia to fight wars, if assault weapons and 20+ round clips or belts were available back then, they would not have altered the amendment to exclude them. They would not have said citizens have the right to bear arms only if they are single shot weapons.

Furthermore, there was a considerable number of revolutionary war fighters who carried pistols with them that they brought from their own home. I do not think it unreasonable to assume that the percentage of people who had pistols and even carried them around back then was much higher than today.

One of the multiple reasons the 2nd Amendment was even created was due to the 1774 laws enacted by the British that placed embargoes on guns, gun powder, and ammunition. It is important to grasp that as one of the motivators for this specific amendment. These laws resulted in many Americans obtaining metal from various sources in order to melt them down and create their own bullets. Not a big fan of the movie The Patriot, but appreciated the scene where he is making his own bullets because that was often done back then, in part because of the embargoes.

Another reason they would not likely have opposed multi-shot weapons is because they often had to use multiple guns per shooter, with at least one person behind the shooter with the responsibility of reloading a gun after it was fired and quickly pass it back to the shooter in a rotation. Having a multi-round capable weapon would have been welcomed by the Founding Fathers.

So please, before reciting what you did, consider the actual facts of the time. Again, I'm not suggesting the Founding Fathers were perfect and their laws should never be tweaked. After all, they did not have enough support to ban slavery and look at how screwed up things got as a result, so they obviously were neither All Knowing nor perfect, but if we are doing a hypothetical exercise like putting multi-round weapons in their hands, it is wise to actually understand their lifestyles and context before saying they would have opposed them to the point of exclusion from the 2nd Amendment.

 

[Michchamp]

That's something to consider. Is it normal for a court to rule on whether or not something is lawful self defense or do they typically just do nothing in those cases?

typically, the DA would not press charges if it was an obvious self-defense case, or accidental. and obviously if the shooter was dead, or it was a suicide, there wouldn't be anyone left to charge, so the case would just be a police record.

if it wasn't clear, and they were charged and not convicted, there wouldn't be a ruling on whether it was self-defense or not... the jury would acquit.

here's what the study says. seems more or less clear to me that most of these incidents are as they say they are, and there's not like 100's of self-defense cases up in the air, as spartanhack/racist alleges:

In 84 percent of the incidents (455) the concealed carry killer committed suicide (218), has already been convicted (177), perpetrated a murder-suicide (44), or was killed in the incident (16). Of the 69 cases still pending, the vast majority (60) of concealed carry killers have been charged with criminal homicide, four were deemed incompetent to stand trial, and five incidents are still under investigation. An additional 20 incidents were fatal unintentional shootings involving the gun of the concealed handgun permit holder.
​

 

[Gulo Blue]

typically, the DA would not press charges if it was an obvious self-defense case, or accidental. and obviously if the shooter was dead, or it was a suicide, there wouldn't be anyone left to charge, so the case would just be a police record.

if it wasn't clear, and they were charged and not convicted, there wouldn't be a ruling on whether it was self-defense or not... the jury would acquit.

here's what the study says. seems more or less clear to me that most of these incidents are as they say they are, and there's not like 100's of self-defense cases up in the air, as spartanhack/racist alleges:

In 84 percent of the incidents (455) the concealed carry killer committed suicide (218), has already been convicted (177), perpetrated a murder-suicide (44), or was killed in the incident (16). Of the 69 cases still pending, the vast majority (60) of concealed carry killers have been charged with criminal homicide, four were deemed incompetent to stand trial, and five incidents are still under investigation. An additional 20 incidents were fatal unintentional shootings involving the gun of the concealed handgun permit holder.
​

Which leaves about 200 unaccounted for.