Another shot at the case against gnus

[Hermit]

[Svartalf]

Izzat from Jackass? God, the stupid, it burns.

[Gallstones]

Open Letter to President Obama Nick Adams

Dear Mr. President,

You recently hailed “Australian gun laws”.

In doing so:

you praised a government for forcefully removing all semi-automatic firearms from its populace,
you admired the banning and confiscation of guns.

We expect to hear that from a European leader. But not you.
...
I am an Australian and I must set the record straight.

The “success” of the 1996 Australian gun reform is a myth.

The only thing achieved was to take away the guns of the law-abiding, leaving only the criminals armed. Is this what you wish for America?

In Australia, if a citizen has firearms, the police have a right to search their property without a warrant any time. Does that sound like America?

The laws you praise outlawed the Daisy Red Ryder BB Gun that my father played with as a child. Now you need a special permit, gun safe and serial number.

For what?

There are just as many guns on the street today. Gun crime is no lower. In Australia, mass shootings have been a rare event. If strict gun laws mean no massacres, explain Britain’s Cumbria shootings, Monkseaton and Dunblane. Or Anders Breivik of Norway?

Gun laws achieve very little.

Mass shootings are about illness, not guns. Any other so-called “gun issue”, if there are any, is related to the breakdown of the family, cultural decline and the age of entitlement.

The Second Amendment defines American exceptionalism. It speaks to the character of America, and reflects why America is America.

Civilian disarmament is based on the assumption that people are irresponsible (unless they work for the government). America was founded on the opposite premise.
...
Forget guns.

Focus on: ending the waste, paying back the debt, limiting the government and axing political correctness. That’s how you’ll get America to boomerang.

[piscator]

Every time Obama opens his mouth about guns, the wackaloon hoarders jack the price of ammo up. Who can afford to shoot anymore?

[Seth]

Every time Obama opens his mouth about guns, the wackaloon hoarders jack the price of ammo up. Who can afford to shoot anymore?

Those who have the ammo.

But you are correct, Obama is the best gun and ammo salesman in the history of the United States.

[Gallstones]

Is a Gun an Effective Means of Self-Defense?

Florida State University criminologist, Gary Kleck, analyzed data from the Department of Justice's National Crime Victimization Survey (1992-1998). Describing his findings on defensive gun use,
...
Contrary to myth that using a gun in self-defense is more likely to result in injury or death to the victim or innocent bystanders and fail to successfully thwart the crime rather than the criminal, the evidence, as opposed to selective anecdotes, suggests the opposite. (Of course this doesn't mean that all people should have a gun, or a gun should be used in all life-threatening situations.)
...
"In general, self-protection measures of all types are effective, in the sense of reducing the risk of property loss in robberies and confrontational burglaries, compared to doing nothing or cooperating with the offender. The most effective form of self-protection is use of a gun. For robbery the self-protection meaures with the lowest loss rates were among victims attacking the offender with a gun, and victims threatenting the offender with a gun. For confrontational burglarly, attacking with a gun had the second lowest loss rate of sixteen self-protection measures, bested only by another mode of armed self-protection, threatening the offender with a nongun weapon."

More at the link.

[Gallstones]

Resistance to Violent Crime: What does the Research Show?

Most “experts” and police authorities advise crime victims to never resist their attackers under any circumstance. This type of blanket advice is at best misleading and at worst, life threatening. No one knows your abilities, your fears, your motivations, and your situation better than you do. That means that no one should presume to tell you what you should do in any given situation. There are just too many variables involved. Although the decision to resist an attacker is a complicated one, examining the relevant academic research will provide some guidance.
...
Resistance to crimes of violence is more common than most people realize. Overall 71.4% of victims of violent crime took some type of self-protective measure. Such measures include screaming, running, physically fighting the attacker, and using a weapon, among other things (12). Resisting a crime by using a firearm generally reduces your chance of being hurt or killed, especially for women. A study by Gary Kleck found that the probability of serious injury in a criminal attack is two and a half times greater for women offering no resistance than women resisting with a firearm. Men are also safer if they resist with a firearm than if they do not resist at all, but the difference is smaller (1.5 times less likely to be injured) (13).
...
Almost all studies indicate that women who resist sexual assault are more likely to be injured (beyond act of rape itself) than women who do not resist (17). When you include the rape act itself as an injury, however, the difference in injury rates between compliant victims and resisting victims is only about 10% (18). This is partially due to the fact that resisting victims are less likely to be raped than passive victims.

More at the link.

[Gallstones]

Rape

Peer reviewed, and deemed especially valid, as Drs Wright and Rossi were opposed to gun ownership and use, but concluded their positions were not supportable by fact. Conclusion: Guns are very effective as a means of self defense:
...
Florida State University criminologist, Gary Kleck, analyzed data from the Department of Justice's National Crime Victimization Survey (1992-1998 ). Describing his findings on defensive gun use, in Armed: New Perspectives on Gun Control, New York: Prometheus Books (2001), Kleck writes:

"In general, self-protection measures of all types are effective, in the sense of reducing the risk of property loss in robberies and confrontational burglaries, compared to doing nothing or cooperating with the offender. The most effective form of self-protection is use of a gun. For robbery the self-protection meaures with the lowest loss rates were among victims attacking the offender with a gun, and victims threatenting the offender with a gun. For confrontational burglarly, attacking with a gun had the second lowest loss rate of sixteen self-protection measures, bested only by another mode of armed self-protection, threatening the offender with a nongun weapon." (p. 291):
...
One study correlated the victim’s success in avoiding rape during an attack with the methods she used to resist:

- Women who resisted with knives or guns were raped less than 1% of the time
...
When outmassed, Sun Tzu advises, "On deadly ground, fight." If you cannot run, and cannot match, then the choices are to surrender to the attack, or fight a last ditch battle. This 3000 year old advice is still taught, because in extremis, it is usually the only response that MIGHT succeed. When ambushed, counterattack, fast, viciously, and with no remorse. Attempt to tear a hole through the attacker using any weapon at hand.
...
those who don't understand this field are bleating the myth of the gun "Being taken away from you."

Please provide a cite on this happening. I'm not going to say it's never happened, but it's a vanishingly rare occurrence. And, even if it were true, if the proven most effective means of defense could be bypassed so easily, then no means of less effect would be of any value at all.
...
The solution to violence is almost always more violence, escalated to the point where the attacker decides to disengage. This is how wars are won, how battles are won, how fights are won, how business competitions are won. When the aggressor finds the payoff to be worth less than the effort engaged, the behavior stops.
...
...if you will hire an expert [law enforcement or armed security] to commit violence on your behalf, you should have no qualms against committing it yourself. If you will refuse to do so, demanding others do it for you, you have surrendered your independence and made yourself a ward and…dependent. And a hypocrite.

The other problem with that is that your minders can't be everywhere, unless you're really rich and hire your own.

[Gallstones]

Armed Resistance to Crime: The Prevalence and Nature of Self-Defense with a Gun, Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology

It's pdf, you have to use the link to go there and read.

[Hermit]

What do you do when a 95 year old man with a urinary tract infection refuses to go to hospital? You shoot him of course. With a shotgun. Five times. That's gun culture for you. Link

[Svartalf]

What do you do when a 95 year old man with a urinary tract infection refuses to go to hospital? You shoot him of course. With a shotgun. Five times. That's gun culture for you. Link

and the surviving relatives launching a $5M civil lawsuit is litigation culture for you.

[Hermit]

What do you do when a 95 year old man with a urinary tract infection refuses to go to hospital? You shoot him of course. With a shotgun. Five times. That's gun culture for you. Link

and the surviving relatives launching a $5M civil lawsuit is litigation culture for you.

There'll be a Hollywood Movie in this, directed by Steven Spielberg. That's entertainment industry for you.

[Gallstones]

Anti-gun nuts, here's one of your spokespersons.

So At What Point Do We Actually Stand Up To The Gun Nuts? ~Susie Madrak

...the big honkin' elephant in the room: Namely, at what point does the federal government literally go to war with its own citizens? Because we're not talking about bank robbers here, we're talking about (mostly) non-criminal cranks -- scofflaws and political malcontents. So what line has to be crossed in the good old U.S. of A. before we start mowing them down to make our point?

Let me restate some pertinent comments from the above in case an anti-gun nut skimmed and missed it while they orgasmed in agreement.

"...we're not talking about bank robbers here"
"...(mostly) non-criminal cranks"
"...what line has to be crossed...before we start mowing them down to make our point?"

The horror of a political malcontent.
Wouldn't Ms. Madrak be first in line?

Highlights mine.


You guys are far more violent and unhinged than us firearm aficionados.
You are dangerous, perhaps the government should be investigating you.

[Gallstones]

What do you do when a 95 year old man with a urinary tract infection refuses to go to hospital? You shoot him of course. With a shotgun. Five times. That's gun culture for you. Link

Those were--all hail the almighty saviors--police.
What has that got to do with legal possession by law abiding citizens?

[JimC]

What do you do when a 95 year old man with a urinary tract infection refuses to go to hospital? You shoot him of course. With a shotgun. Five times. That's gun culture for you. Link

Those were--all hail the almighty saviors--police.
What has that got to do with legal possession by law abiding citizens?

It's got to do with an absurd gun culture in all sections of US society.