DeSantis Gunhide Question of the Day: How concerned are you that you or someone in your family might be a victim of “gun violence”?

(courtesy chicagotribune.com)

Minus the scare quotes bracketing “gun violence,” that’s the questions GFK/AP asked some 1000 respondents in a recent poll. Nick’s doing the deep dive on the other stats, their import and reliability. Meanwhile, 24 percent said they were extremely/very concerned that they or someone in their family might be a victim of “gun violence.” Thirty-four percent were moderately concerned.

desantis blue logo no back 4 smallSo 58 percent of Americans are somewhat to very worried about themselves or a family member getting shot. That’s WAY out of whack with the odds of it actually happening. Still, as Nick points, small probability + enormous consequence = understandable concern.

How about you? How concerned are you that you or someone in your family might be a victim of “gun violence?” Extremely, very, moderately, not very or not at all? And how does that correspond with the dangers you face?

comments

  1. avatar Alex waits says:

    More likely to be killed by a unicorn.

  2. avatar jwtaylor says:

    My family and gun violence? I’m not concerned. Everyone in my family knows how pissed I’d be if they hurt one of the guns.

    1. avatar Tom in Oregon says:

      I laughed. Then realized my house is the same….

  3. avatar pwrserge says:

    Moderately at best for my household. We live in a very low-crime area and don’t have reason to be in stupid places at stupid times. Some of my extended family are not quite as lucky. I have a family member who lives in a town bordering Newark, NJ. Overall, she lives in the part of the town furthest from the Newark border, but Newark “youth” stupidity does sometimes spill over into the town she lives in. Unfortunately, living in NJ, she can’t have firearms for self-defense. I offered to help her file the paperwork and give her one of my guns, but the old soviet anti-self-defense indoctrination is very hard to break.

  4. avatar jwm says:

    Not very. Thanks to the arming of the American citizen(props to barry for his help) the crime rate has plunged in America. Avoid stupid people, places, things and your chances of being shot are really low. You’re in more danger from vehicles than guns.

    I don’t own guns just for protection. I would own guns if crime was at 0%. I just like guns.

    1. avatar Bruce Webb says:

      I agree, I’m not really concerned. Maybe about the same level as being struck by lightning, being in a tornado, or shark attack, and I live in Missouri.

      1. avatar Cliff H says:

        Sharknados are often accompanied by lightning, even in Missouri.

  5. I don’t fear it will happen. I am concerned enough that it may happen. I know for a fact that people who are victims of murderers using guns had no thoughts of it happening right before it did.
    I don’t carry a gun every day because I think the chances are that I will need to use it. I carry a gun every day because I am 100% positive that I won’t know when I will need to use my gun for defense.

    1. avatar Stu in AZ says:

      I carry a gun every day because I’ve seen the stats on places with higher concealed carry vs otherwise. Doubt I’ll ever need it, just doing my part to support positive results.

      1. That’s a perfect example of the meme,
        “If you are not part of the solution, you’re part of the problem”.

  6. avatar Rusty Chains says:

    Not especially. I carry whenever I leave the house and always have at least a pistol close to hand. My daughter needs to carry more often, but that is impeded by the state since her university forbids carry concealed or open.

  7. avatar Giao Nguyen says:

    Might? Too late. Let’s try past tense.

    1. avatar TTACer says:

      Sorry to hear that. If you don’t mind me asking did it happen before or after 1975?

      1. avatar Giao Nguyen says:

        September 22, 1990. Alexandria Virginia.

        1. avatar TTACer says:

          Ouch. Sorry to hear that, although I guess it sucks either way. That was pretty much the zenith of the leaded gasoline, pre-roe v wade (according to freakonomics) violence.

  8. avatar JAlan says:

    I’m worried about any kind of violence that might happen to my family. I know that they are more likely to commit suicide than get shot, but that’s why you have to be more cognizant of what is going on in people’s lives. If you’re in any doubt, just ask. Most people don’t really want to die, and if you ask, they will tell you. I’ve had a friend tell me that he was really planning to kill himself. We got him treatment and he’s doing fine now. Suicide is a bigger problem than any kind of “gun violence” will ever be.

  9. avatar LarryinTX says:

    Not really. But that does not affect my everyday carry, even at home.

  10. avatar Chip in Florida says:

    On a scale of 1 to 10, where 10 is a guarantee of being shot…. I place me and mine at a solid 3. Our neighborhood is not the good side of town so we do occasionally hear gunshots and hear them from close enough nearby that I worry more about stray bullets than actually being targeted.

    Other than that, like was said above, I avoid stupid people in stupid places doing stupid things as much as possible.

  11. avatar CGinTX says:

    My concern isn’t regarding “gun violence” but just plan “violence” – our family has experienced it in our “low-crime” neighborhood. But I just don’t get the meaning of the “gun” distinction for anyone who doesn’t have an axe to grind and an agenda to pursue.

    1. avatar notalima says:

      Right there with you. I make no distinction between ‘gun violence’ and just plain ‘ol vanilla violence. Hands, feet, sticks, screwdrivers, bricks, hammers, etc…they all maim and kill.

      I treat it the same way other possible threats may happen, take precautions, be alert, be smart, avoid stupid situations, ‘carry’ insurance and make sure all in the family are prepared to deal with it appropriately if it arrives.

      I too live in one of those ‘low crime’ areas. Bad guys make no distinctions and neighbors still do stupid things.

  12. avatar DrewN says:

    No,not at all and both I and my wife work on a street where drive-bys are routine. Even gang bangers can tell the difference between Latino teenagers and the middle aged white people who work at the group home.

  13. About as worried as I am about my house suddenly burning down. – As in “not very, but I’m taking precautions none the less.”

    1. avatar Katy says:

      This and maybe even less so. On the other hand, I do worry a little more for myself – I work in the Houston core-area, and figure Dallas and Baton Rouge aren’t so very far away. All it take is being in the wrong place at the wrong time…

  14. avatar formerwaterwalker says:

    Not terribly worried about my immediate family.Grown son living wherever(?) and black in-laws living in or near Chicago-yeah but I can’t do anything about it.

  15. avatar bawb says:

    Not very. There are more and less fashionable things to worry about. It’s a serious issue, but I think worry about guns is overreported.

  16. avatar Karl says:

    I am becoming more concerned every day for my wife and daughter. I am concerned about terrorism and government inspired violence by blacks. This in addition to the usual crime threats.

    Notice I did not mention guns. That is simply one means of inflicting harm on another. It may not be the most prevalent, particularly against women, just the most reported.

    As for me, I’m not really personally concerned. Given even a sliver of a chance, there will be a fight. Win or lose I will resist. That said, I have become much more blunt with strangers approaching me in parking lots, etc. I am protecting my distance more. So I guess I am more alert, and yes, more concerned, but not just about guns.

    1. avatar Bob says:

      “government inspired violence by blacks.”

      Can we at least make an attempt, and say “…by certain sections of the black population that are predisposed to violence”? I know its easier to type “blacks” and we all hope that we know what you meant, but by typing “blacks” it really comes across as incredibly racist. You can even type it as an acronyms CSotBPtaPV. Its the little efforts that will make POTG not look like OFWG a$$holes.

      Of course, if you meant it to be racist, than by all means, carry on. You are allowed your own opinion.

      1. avatar Karl says:

        A young, white DNC staffer was killed in DC recently. A real Democrat believer. Probably a decent guy. My bet is his violation of BLM acceptable speech on Facebook got him killed.

        Call me a racist if you want, but it will not change the truth that the hatred and violence is coming from within Islam and within the black “community.” I can’t fix that. They have some house cleaning to do.

        I analyze the real threats I see around me and I will protect myself and family regardless of race or reason.

    2. avatar TTACer says:

      If your daughter is between 15-25 and going to college she is much more likely to get raped by a white frat’ bro than shot by a black person. Jesse Matthew notwithstanding.

      1. avatar Karl says:

        Did I specify black shooter as the highest risk? I did not. In fact, guns are probably far less likely than hands, knives or other weapons. Some here seem to read what they want to read.

        1. avatar TTACer says:

          “violence by blacks”

          is what you said. Just going by what you posted, but I guess some here seem to read what they want to read.

  17. avatar ADM says:

    “Gun violence” specifically, no, because that’s a ridiculous term. General violence, yes. I have a trans relative, and as trans people are far more likely to be victims of violent crime, I have a concern there.

  18. avatar ActionPhysicalMan says:

    My family is almost as reclusive as I am. I am way more worried about car accidents and diseases than violence for them.

  19. avatar Anonymous says:

    4 people out of 100,000 for the US as a whole and ~1.5 for the area we live in. So – not really at all.

    1. avatar uncommon_sense says:

      Anonymous,

      I touched upon numbers in my comment below. Here is a little more detail:

      During recent years, more than 1 million victims of violent crimes reported their attacks to police agencies … and a significant number of additional victims never reported their attacks. With something like 330 million people in the U.S. and well over 1 million violent crimes, that means at least 1 in 300 people will be victims of violent crime this year. Now consider your odds over a typical adult life between the ages of 21 and 71 (a reasonable age span to carry concealed handguns) … that 50 year time span means your odds of being the victim of a violent crime are about 50 in 300 which equals 1 in 6. Finally, add in the additional odds of animal attacks and the additional statistical burden of anyone under your care (e.g. children or spouse) and your odds of facing an attack against you and anyone under your care is at least 1 in 6 … and could well be closer to 1 in 4.

      In my world even a 1 in 6 chance of facing a violent attack is enough reason to tool-up and be armed. Of course your odds will be higher if you live in urban centers and lower if you live in an isolated rural location … although we could probably argue that your odds of facing a violent animal attack in rural locations increases significantly, especially if you spend a lot of time outdoors, which would increase your overall probability of facing some sort of violent attack in your lifetime.

      1. avatar jwm says:

        In rural WVA we had periodic rabies outbreaks and occasional dog packs. I’ve fired shots twice at aggressive dog packs in my youth.

        People are really not the only threat.

      2. avatar 80 D says:

        @uncommon_sense
        Not a statistician, nor am I trying to be confrontational, but I don’t believe statistics work that way (that 1:100,000 means 1:2,000 over 50 years). I believe the 1:100,000 remains the same regardless of time. Perhaps someone more learned than I can offer insight. Still, I wouldn’t take a 1:million bet if my loved ones’ safety is on the line. Carry on!

        1. avatar uncommon_sense says:

          80 D,

          No offense taken … and certainly no harm in asking questions in a genuine quest for the truth!

          First of all, you should note that I cited the number of all serious violent crimes (armed robbery, aggravated assault, rape, and murder — regardless of what weapon the attacker used) because most people would want to have a firearm to defend themselves from all such attacks.

          Regarding your specific question, yes, probabilities add up. To illustrate, imagine a “magic” full deck of cards that dictates your fate. Every year you have to draw a card out of this “magic” full deck. If you draw any ace, you will be the victim of a violent crime that year. (All other cards mean you will NOT be the victim of a violent crime that year.) Since there are four aces in a full deck of 52 cards, your odds of drawing any ace on any given year is fairly low at 1 in 13. However, avoiding any ace for a single year is not enough. You want to avoid drawing an ace every year of your entire life that you can legally possess a self-defense firearm, which I portrayed as 50 years from age 21 to 71 for discussion purposes. That means you have to draw from a full deck 50 times and never draw an ace.

          I hope you can see that you are virtually guaranteed to draw an ace at least once if you draw from a full deck 50 times … even though your odds of drawing an ace on any single draw is only 1 in 13. That is because the odds add up.

          And so it is with violent crime. In that case, the “magic” full deck of cards has 300 cards in it and you have to avoid drawing one specific card every time throughout your entire life. If we limit our concern only to the years that we can legally carry self-defense firearms in public and figure that is something like 50 years, that means we have to draw from that deck of 300 cards 50 times and avoid that one “violent crime” card every time. If you repeat that experiment over and over and over, you will draw that “violent crime” card once every 6 times that you repeat the experiment. Thus, your odds of being the victim of a violent crime over your adult life is about 1 in 6.

        2. avatar SteveInCO says:

          @Uncommon, you’re right in general, but technically there’s a nit to be picked. Adding is a good approximation if the probability is *extremely* low, but it’s not quite correct,

          The odds have to be multiplied, not added. But…in this case it’s the odds of NOT drawing an ace (or NOT being a violent crime victim) that must be multiplied, to see what the odds of NEVER ONCE drawing an ace (or never once being a violent crime victim) are. You end up multiplying 12/13ths by itself 50 times to compute the chances that you will never draw an ace; then subtract from one. According to my calculator, that’s 1 – (12/13)^50 = 98.17 percent chance that you will not NOT draw an ace, or rather, a 98.17 percent chance that you will draw at least one ace during the fifty draws (you could draw more than one; in fact, I suspect it’s quite likely you’d draw more than one).

          Similar math for a 1:100000 chance of a violent crime (or 99999:100000 chance of no violent crime) yields 49.98 chances out of 100000 that you’ll be a victim. Which is not quite 50 but close enough for government purposes. (However, the violent crime rate is in fact a bit higher than this.)

    2. avatar Craig says:

      Statistical probabilities are all well and good for the security of society as a whole, BUT,……

      The statistical probability of being attacked (or hit by a meteor) may in fact be low, but the consequences for the INDIVIDUAL in that situation can really SUCK if the statists leave them no options to defend themselves.

      There are TWO components to a risk analysis; Probability and CONSEQUENCES. The statists always leave out the latter.

  20. avatar Xanthro says:

    I’m about as concern about physical violence as I am about my car or house catching fire, the probability of those occurring is very low, less likely than being injured or killed driving my car, that stated, I have fire extinguishers in my car and house and I have certain firearms that are strictly self defense related.
    Not because these will likely ever be needed, but because a little preparation can prevent a much greater tragedy.

  21. avatar Ralph Humphrey says:

    Not very.. Anything is always possible but first and foremost I don’t put myself in dangerous circumstances or my family’s, in a high risk zone to begin with…

  22. avatar strych9 says:

    Is it possible? Yes. Am I concerned? Well, yes but it barely registers on my “concerned” meter. With the people in my family I’d be more worried about the mess and paperwork than the safety of a family member.

  23. avatar Justin says:

    Not at alll concerned, unless out shooting, where I watch like a hawk for any safety concerns.

    I am actually more concerned with gov’t tyranny than a shooting at all.

  24. avatar zorro says:

    I grew up shooting rifles and shotguns, but when I left home I left the guns there and ultimately got away from shooting. In the last few years I’ve become concerned about the continuing deterioration of the economy. Things have actually been pretty desperate for the bottom third of the population for some time, and I see this desperation growing. Desperate people do desperate things. Our area also has a serious meth problem and some of these deranged people will kill for a fix. So I felt it was appropriate to re-arm, harden the perimeter, and prepare for the worst. Statistically I agree that right now my risk is very small, but it’s not a risk I am willing to take. The FBI’s statistics for the year 2000 stated that there were 8000 home invasions in the US every day. Reading a couple accounts of really brutal home invasions pushed me over the edge. I cherish my family and I will do everything in my power to keep them safe.

    1. avatar neiowa says:

      The “bottom 1/3”??? The “bottom 1/3″ is sucking on the welfare teat. And have a higher net income that their neighbors who are PAYING FOR IT. While sitting on their butts watching The View on their 55” TV with cable tv in a house they “OWN”. RIchest most spoiled “poor” the world has ever known.

      1. avatar Swilson says:

        I would have to almost-100% agree. My father worked nearly 35 years for Mecklenburg Co. DSS (Charlotte NC) as a welfare fraud investigator and hearing him talk about welfare cases (some fraudulent, some not) having nicer things that we did was pretty shocking. During the holidays, my brother and I would volunteer with DSS taking groceries and such to some of these places. Many of the homes were destitute but too many were also living quite well for someone who was supposed to be poor and “ain’t got nothin'”. People know how to work the system, especially if their family has been doing it for generations. Of course this population is going to vote (D) in elections because that is the party that continues to want to provide these people a parasitic living. I’ve also come across many “welfare cases” out in more rural areas and they typically do have a tougher time than their inner-city and urban cohort. Of course there are plenty of them taking advantage as well.

      2. avatar RidgeRunner says:

        Agree. The people getting hammered are the ones like my daughter, who works at a net loss as a medical professional because of the high costs of day-care. Her husband is an HVAC pro, makes good money, but they struggle because child care costs more than their house payment and car note combined. Of course, if she were a single mom and hadn’t gotten married and worked part-time at some minimum wage job the government would pick up the tab for childcare and throw in a EBT card for good measure. Today people who do it right—train, work, get married (as opposed to having children out of wedlock—get penalized and the lowlifes are rewarded for what society a generation ago scorned. That’s “progressive,” we’ve progressed our way right outta morals and ethics.

        1. avatar Swilson says:

          A co-worker of mine was telling me how disappointed she was with her sister. The sister is a single mother of 3 school-aged kids (2 different fathers) who occasionally has part-time employment. However her status means that even if she works just a little bit throughout the year, her tax refund is quite large because of the children (the co-worker said $3K/child FWIW). Because of this, the sister doesn’t aspire to anything greater b/c, apparently, she can live off of $9K per year due to all the other assistance she gets. Why would she anyway? With no sense of independence, ambition or decency and with the government rewarding her lifestyle, there is zero inclination for her to do better.

  25. avatar Jack says:

    If you count some federal goon squad busting my door because Hillary ordered that my guns be confiscated as “gun violence”, then yes, I am kinda concerned. Otherwise no.

  26. avatar Chrispy says:

    I’m not concerned about being a victim of gun violence, but I train like it’s going to happen.

    Far more likely I’ll be attacked by some wild critter than some wild human in my neighborhood.

    1. avatar Chrispy says:

      Auto-link… really?

  27. avatar Swilson says:

    Practically zero concern- I understand there is an ever-present danger/possibility of being the victim of crime/violence, however my wife and I take reasonable safety precautions; no sense in making things easy for bad guys. That being said, I believe the Left loves painting POTG as paranoid freaks and I feel it is important not to play into that stereotype. I’m naturally someone who doesn’t worry too much about the statistically negligible dangers that lurk behind every corner. That doesn’t mean I don’t keep an eye on things, I just don’t worry too much about them either. Besides, if it is truly “your time”, nothing will prevent it from happening no matter what you do.

  28. avatar waffensammler98 says:

    Death by “gun violence” is no different than any other form to me. I’m a very old soul, and thankful for simple things. If I die tomorrow, I’ll die happy. If someone dear to me passes, be it by gun, truck, or heart attack, I’ll weep, celebrate his/her time on earth, and eventually get over it.

    Am I now slightly more worried that I might die by the hands of a certain religious or activist group? Yeah, but I don’t focus all my attention on them. Spend all your days avoiding X people, and you ignore the very real possibility that Y or Z people could unexpectedly rob you blind.

    1. avatar Swilson says:

      I like your reasoning- as a matter of fact, if I must fall victim to violence, I’d prefer it be by gun- a nice clean shot to the head.

      1. avatar Geoff PR says:

        I’d prefer to die on the down-stroke by gunshot from a jealous husband for me…

        🙂

  29. avatar Justsomeguy says:

    I’m much more concerned about us being injured in car or motorcycle accidents. We don’t swim a great deal, but I would be more concerned with swimming in lakes, creeks and rivers than being shot. All of that is considering that I’m at the range fairly regularly and I carry daily.

  30. avatar Yellow Devil says:

    How about “all or any forms of violence”, not just “gun violence”?

  31. avatar anonymoose says:

    My grandpa threatened to shoot my dad once when he was drunk, but that was back in the 70s and my grandpa died of cancer 30 years ago. Also, a friend of mine was nearly shot twice in college. That’s about as close as anyone I know has been to being shot (not counting veterans).

  32. avatar uncommon_sense says:

    I do not concern myself with whether or not a criminal attacker would have a firearm.

    I am seriously concerned about all violent attacks: from violent criminals (whether or not they have a firearm) as well as dangerous animals … especially integrated over a lifetime.

    In my lifetime alone I managed to prevail over two dog attacks that would have at least been grossly disfiguring and life threatening if not outright fatal. I also prevailed over two human encounters that could have easily involved great bodily harm or death.

    When you look at the numbers over a lifetime, something like 1 in 4 people will have a violent encounter with man or beast. Even if the numbers were as low as 1 in 10 people, I am not willing to throw the dice.

    1. avatar Geoff PR says:

      It was a dog sicced on me by a hick that inspired me to carry.

      That dog tried, but couldn’t catch me.

      You have been caught and know the consequences of getting caught again…

  33. avatar Pascal says:

    Gun Violence in terms of Chicago style gun violence, the chances are 1%. Terrorism attack 1% They only time that percentage goes up is if/when we have another Storm Sandy type of event. I live 30min from a large city and the natives go nuts and try to loot during those times. Then I say the it goes up to 30%

    The town I live in last had a murder in the 50’s. Many of my neighbors are gun owners. Local PD is 5 miles away.

    Because of the amount of travel I do, I am more likely to be in fatal car, train or aircraft accident than being shot and same for the rest of my family.

  34. avatar neiowa says:

    AP? That’s even less reliable than Politico.

    They conduct a phone survey only to Obumer phones?

  35. avatar Mecha75 says:

    i am very concerned about Gun Violence. With all the news stories and focus Gun Violence is getting, it makes me happy that I keep a close watch on my guns. I do not want them to go off half cocked. My guns know they only have 2 rights. The right to exist in my vault or on my hip. So far they appear to be happy and haven’t done anything to me and my family. Well except for my new RAP 45, that one took a bite out of my palm because it didn’t like the way I was handling it. But that is to be expected, I suppose. None the less, i occaisionally give them a good message with RemOil and routinely take them out to play. Letting them do what they were made to do. Perhaps, that is the key to preventing Gun Violence, letting them shoot off some steam from time to time. After all, that is what they were made to do and it is what makes them sooo happy. Or atleast they are happy with me. All those other gun owners who’s guns perpetrate violence, the onus is on them for not taking better care of their guns and keeping their guns happy.

  36. avatar Ralph says:

    Since I resigned my Benefactor Membership in the Crips, my chances of being shot have declined greatly.

    But just to be safe, I’m stocking up on carpet stain remover. I’ll need it in the unlikely case that some fool tries to break into my home. Gotta protect those carpets.

  37. avatar mk10108 says:

    Not very likely I’ll be a victim of gun violence. I don’t go to bars or do drugs, love my wife and kids and don’t cheat on them…so no love triangles, I’m tall and would give slight pause for a solo criminal. The concern I have is traveling and seeing clients (processing facilities), many in rough neighborhoods and while refueling. Although major truck stops are ok, it’s the smaller fueling stations (when I stretch the fuel range) which gives concern. If I see a group just hanging out, I go to the next station. When anyone approaches me I say no and give a low wave-off, if they persist I’ll place my hand on my hip and angle off creating distance, that usually gets the message across. I constantly practice close quarter multiple assailant drills and can center mass 3-4 baddies in 2-3 seconds.

    Sweep your radar, know when you’re getting deep and always plan an exit.

    1. avatar Geoff PR says:

      ” If I see a group just hanging out, I go to the next station.”

      That can’t be emphasized enough, be aware of your surroundings…

  38. avatar Andrew Lias says:

    Not really. Statistics are against it since my relatives or myself are not in the drug/gang business.

  39. avatar LeavingCali says:

    How afraid am I of them being a victim of gun violence? Very little.

    How afraid am I of one of my family members/loved ones of being hurt because they don’t have a gun (for employment or legal purposes) to protect themselves? More than I am comfortable being.

  40. avatar More Dead Soldiers says:

    I am concerned they will be victims of police gun violence.

  41. avatar Vitsaus says:

    Several of my extended family have been victims of gun violence. What is often overlooked, after the grieving period is that in each case, the choices they had made with their lives led them to that point. Gun violence is quite often very much like the health problems that result from a life of drinking to excess or smoking daily. People live their lives they way they want to, for good or bad, and sometimes those choices catch up with them. My grandfather was very fond of cigars and pipes, and he spent his last days in agony, devoured by cancer. Certainly there can be random violence, just like a heart attack can happen to a person who exercises and eats right.

    1. avatar Oxygenthief says:

      These relatives of yours, were they shot in the back while praying at church in a low crime neighborhood? I ask because when someone uses the phrase “victim of gun violence” the first thing that pops into my head is “victims of poor personal decisions”. If your relatives were law abiding citizens, that avoided conflict and chose to avoid unsavory locations/people and was somehow still on the receiving end of violence via gun… well then they were truly victims.

      However, I’d wager this isn’t the case for either of your relatives. The fact that there was two suggests some of your family play it fast and lose with the rule of law. If that’s the case, then they weren’t victims at all, just thugs reaping what they sew.

  42. avatar Oxygenthief says:

    How concerned am I regarding “Gun Violence”, otherwise known to non-liberals as criminal activity? Not very much at all, actually.

    I live in a low crime neighborhood, my kids go to a good school, and my family and I don’t engage in activities that put us in unsavory locations. There may be times where we travel to a previously undiscovered location for whatever reason. In those situations, I always carry to reduce the potential risk.

    Oh, and last but not least I respect the rule of law and demand that those I associate with (neighbors, co-workers, friends) do as well. “Gun Violence” only exists in inner-city Democrat controlled utopias.

  43. avatar PaulD says:

    I’m between “moderately” and “not very.” It’s a bit less concerning than being involved in an automobile accident. I wear my seat belt every single time I get into an automobile, keep fire extinguishers in my house, and arm myself at all times where permitted by law. I sincerely hope to live the rest of my life without ever having needed to use of any of the above, but you never know.

  44. avatar MLee says:

    Not worried. We are many more times likely to die from heart disease, falling, choking and Alzheimers, to name a few.

  45. avatar Jonathan - Houston says:

    Anything is possible, that’s why she carries, but overall I’m not edge-of-my-seat concerned about that prospect.

    The statistics just aren’t there. Her gender, age, and lifestyle all work in her favor to virtually eliminate the probability. It’s only the catastrophic magnitude of such an attack that makes this an issue. Probability of occurrence has a decimal point and a whole lot of zeros.

  46. avatar Chris Morton says:

    I choose to avoid places where criminals congregate, and especially those places where they congregate to become mentally impaired and hit, stab or shoot each other.

    That having been said, I’m completely unaware of any sort of force field or magic spell which keeps them out of either my town, my neighborhood or my home.

    More importantly, I am well of three VERY important facts:
    1. Police have no legal duty to protect individuals.
    2. Police have no legal liability when they fail to protect individuals.
    3. 1 and 2 are moot, since police not assigned as bodyguards to specific individuals have virtually no physical ability to protect individuals.

    Police don’t protect individuals. They draw chalk outlines around individuals who don’t protect themselves. Anybody who tells you differently is a LIAR.

    That being the case, I recognize that the only person likely to protect me is ME. To that end, I arm myself.

  47. avatar PeterK says:

    I have nearly always lived in very safe communities, the last one notwithstanding. And even there the risk was for the druggies, not so much me.

    So no I very realistically realize that I will never face down the barrel of a gun. I am grateful for this. Gun rights are still important to me. Not everyone is able to live in safe places.

    1. avatar Chris Morton says:

      The “safest” place in the world can become VERY dangerous in an instant. It only takes ONE person who wants to make it so.

      Most of us don’t generally consider Lane-Bryant clothing stores especially “dangerous”. I imagine that the seven women in the Tinley Park, Illinois store didn’t either… until somebody shot them in the head, execution style. The lone survivor probably has a different attitude today.

      1. avatar Arkansas kurt says:

        My older brother pulled into a parking lot at a fairly nice restaurant in little rock. As he opened his car car door he was grabbed by a couple of “youths” He was held at gunpoint and put face down on the ground next to his car and robbed. He carries now, as do I.

        On a lighter note, the “youth” tried to steal his car. As he was laying on the ground the perps got into car and he heard one of them say, “ah shit dawg, it’s got one of those shifty things. I can’t drive this.” They ended up with a wallet with no cash and my brothers keys. They were caught doing a home invasion later that night. As I understand they were both charged as adults and are doing decade plus prison terms.

        I guess the moral of the story is, one can be attacked anywhere. The other moral is, drive a stick, because gangbangers can’t steal them.

        1. He was held at gunpoint and put face down on the ground next to his car and robbed. He carries now, as do I.

          Hopefully, he also learned how to be situationally aware.

  48. avatar JR_in_NC says:

    Not very.

    Much more concerned about the busy intersection I drive through regularly with 3-4 blantant runs at 60 mph+ well past the all-red period.

    Both that intersection and the possibility of violence finding me or my family helps encourage situational awareness.

    I EDC not because I think a violent encounter is likely, but because the possibility exists and the consequences are high.

    1. avatar Swilson says:

      JR- there’s a few stretches of road around your vicinity where one must be literally a billion times more likely to become a victim of “car violence” than they are to be a victim of “gun violence”.

      1. avatar JR_in_NC says:

        Indeed. I used to drive Hwy 17 three times a week, and HATED the stretch between Bridgeton and Vanceboro.

        Months would go by that I would not myself or see someone else have to take evasive action to avoid collision from dangerous passing in curves over hills, or even just blatant passing with oncoming traffic coming, etc.

        (For those that might care, it’s a two lane road that meanders a bit through mostly farmland and some swampy woods).

        Talk about keeping you on your toes behind the wheel.

        1. avatar Swilson says:

          Especially during those Saturday trips to the beach.

  49. avatar Andrew says:

    Worried? Yes. Prepared? Yes. Avoid “Gun Violence” areas? Yes.

  50. avatar Curtis in IL says:

    I’m concerned enough to tool up, stay aware and be prepared.

    I do not live in fear.

    There are neighborhoods less than 1/2 hour away that I will not venture into because of my concern.

  51. avatar tdiinva (Now in Wisconsin) says:

    Unless you live in close proximity to one of Obama’s sons, which I don’t, it is highly unlikely.

    By the way Hillary now openly supports black criminal gangs. She has invited the mother’s of Trayvon Martin, Michael Brown and Eric Garner to address her coronation instead of Tamir Rice’s mother. She is signaling to young black men that they should emulate thugs and gangbangers.

  52. avatar Next Pres picks the Supreme Court says:

    When I lived in downtown Akron, OH? Extremely.
    Now living in Rural, GA? Not remotely. Snakebites are a greater concern.

    Beyond that though, I am rarely “worried” about gun violence because I am PREPARED to defend against it.

    Just like I rarely “worry” about being killed in a car crash, because I drive defensively and wear my seat belt at all times.

    1. Been face to face with 7 copperheads in ten years. Only let one live. Took the last one out with my GLOCK. Neck shot from 8 yards. The rest met the most handy garden tool.

      1. avatar JR_in_NC says:

        Hope you ate ’em.

        Fresh copperhead dipped in corn meal and pan fried is quite yummy.

  53. As we continue down this road you will continue to see the pendulum swinging in that direction. The vast majority of Americans – who are not gun owners are sick and tired of losing their lives, their loved one’s and being maimed from guns. 80% of america doesn’t own guns. 20% do own guns and of those even 90% of them want some action to be taken, but because the Republican Congress is in bed with the NRA and their ignorant views, and are afraid of giving up anything + losing re-election, Congress will not introduce any bipartisan legislation to reduce gun violence. Congress is stymied of themselves This Congress is the worst in our countries 240 year history – PERIOD.

    I am reasonably sure the founding fathers would have been more specific about the 2nd amendment had they known the capability and carnage that has taken place over the past 238 years.

    No one is saying that the responsibility does not fall 100% on the person doing the shooting. The argument is that guns are very efficient at what they were designed to do, and we need to find better ways to try to keep them out of the wrong hands. This is a very complex issue, and there will not be a perfect solution, and the problem goes way beyond gun control as you indicate. However I do think we can do a better job while still respecting 2nd amendment. It starts first by not creating a straw-man argument and having truly open/honest ongoing discussions.

    How many times have the democrats unsuccessfully tried to get our Republican POS Congressmen to do anything. Pass any legislation. Too many times to count. The are too busy slurping it up with the 5% NRA. They keep f#$%^&*g around and the democrats will take back the house and senate majority and nominate supreme court justices and then you stupid SOB’s will wish you had done something.

    This country totally needs to go look at Great Britain and Australia. Amend the constitution and you ignorant 20 percent of the population can get in line with the rest of America.

    1. avatar tdiinva (Now in Wisconsin) says:

      Come on Robert, is that you just trying to gun up some discussion? Nobody could be as stupid as CA and be real. Even Bloomberg knows that at a minimum 1/3 of American households own a gun and that only certain groups commit most of the lawless acts of violence.

      1. avatar jwm says:

        If someone was actually as stupid as C-A he’d have to have someone counting cadence for him to keep breathing.

    2. avatar strych9 says:

      “It starts first by not creating a straw-man argument and having truly open/honest ongoing discussions.”

      Interesting how you throw this in to a bunch of conjecture that precludes a open/honest discussion because your statements ARE straw man arguments.

      If you’d like to try again go right ahead. Perhaps you should start with some useful suggestions rather than worn out talking points that are basically useless…

    3. avatar JustSomeGuy says:

      Wow, take a deep breath will you? You might want to go take a course in basic numbers and statistics somewhere, because you obviously don’t have a good handle on the problem.

    4. avatar tdiinva (Now in Wisconsin) says:

      Breaking news: 15 dead, many injured in a knife attack on Japan. But since it doesn’t involve a gun it doesn’t count.

      1. These people were in a ‘disabled’ facility. I doubt they had the ability to defend themselves. So yes a knife in this situation was enough to mimic the levels of a typical gun attack. Let’s consider all the facts before jumping on your “knives are just as deadly as guns” mantras.

        And let me know when stabbing sprees become an epidemic in japan. (Here’s a hint: They’re not.)

        It’s easier to run from a wackjob with a knife than with a gun.

        1. avatar tdiinva (Now in Wisconsin) says:

          We have had three spree killings in France Germany and now Japan in the last two weeks with over 100 dead. I thought this didn’t happen in Europe and Japan. Please explain.

    5. avatar SteveInCO says:

      Some mother, somewhere, has flatworms (planaria) breeding in her basement and we still don’t understand how they got onto the internet.

    6. This country totally needs to go look at Great Britain and Australia. Amend the constitution and you ignorant 20 percent of the population can get in line with the rest of America.

      This country took a look at Mexico, Brazil, and Jamaica and said, “No way”.

  54. avatar Avid Reader says:

    In my normal locale and daily activities, not at all. I’m more likely to be bitten by a rabid bat.

    OTOH, I have to spend time in a not-so-nice area of Chiraq from time to time, and I’m more concerned there. I also can’t carry there.

  55. avatar Jim says:

    I worry about my sister who is a police officer. A couple months ago several of her department members came under fire. When the guy was caught he was just doing some “target practice.” We were discussing a need for a change in tactics when approaching or leaving a car she has stopped. She said she is going to tell them to drive off after she gives ticket/warning etc. That way she won’t be shot in back like another officer just was in Dallas, I believe.

    I was at the local hospital today and felt so safe with all those no weapon signs at doors. Cause that will stop them.

  56. avatar D. From OR says:

    Not concerned for myself at all. I’m somewhat concerned for my family living in Germany tho — last year my brother was hold up at gun point in Hamburg while working as a clerk for a small convenience store… He refused to give the criminal any money and after a shot fired into the floor my brother grabbed a baton from behind the counter and chased the guy out ! Stupid, stupid, stupid. Fortunately he didn’t get shot…

    ( http://www.mopo.de/hamburg/s-bahnhof-rissen–mutig-und-toericht—kiosk-mitarbeiter-verjagen-bewaffneten-raeuber-1336184 )

  57. avatar Kendahl says:

    I don’t expect violence, gun or otherwise, but neither do I not expect it. As the philosopher said, “Shit happens.” We abide by the mantra, “Don’t do stupid things…..” which cuts down our exposure to danger. On the other hand, I am well aware that our control over evil people is limited to fighting them off if they attack us.

  58. avatar bob in IN says:

    Nore more or less than car, hammer, knife, swimming pool, or rope violence.

    1. Well let me know when they’re epidemics of violence with those objects you’ve listed. (Here’s a hint: They’re not.)

      Guns are for one purpose only, To kill.

      Gun’s have been used more in crimes than saving lives.

      1. avatar JustSomeGuy says:

        Citation please

      2. avatar Indiana Tom says:

        Cars are carnageful.

      3. Who told you there was an epidemic of violence?

        Donald Trump?

      4. avatar Ian in Transit says:

        “Guns are for one purpose only, To kill.

        Gun’s have been used more in crimes than saving lives.”

        It is impossible to have an honest conversation when it starts with two intentionally false statements.

  59. avatar Indiana Tom says:

    A lot less now that my youngest daughter is out of IUPUI in the craptastic location it is in.

  60. avatar Indiana Tom says:

    I usually am much more worried about Car Violence. I was a frog in a blender in one neato wreck where I was rear ended by a moron driving at 60 mph into my stopped car.

  61. avatar ATTAGReader says:

    Not worried about gun violence but about strong-arm violence, home invasion behavior by the drug addled. We have a retirement home in a nice community where the usual suspects for gun violence would be immediately hassled by the police, as they clearly would not belong, and there is only one way in or out of the community. Sorry if that offends anyone, but that’s how it is. OTOH a homeless guy (probably meth head) recently stabbed a maintenance worker at a nearby laundromat, kids are picked up for B&E’s, and when we were out walking the dog the local police pulled up to ask if we had seen a person of a particular description in the area, basically casing houses. There is no telling when any of these situations could turn violent. Fortunately, the dog is alert and part pit. The guns are there to back up the dog.

  62. avatar Adub says:

    Considering my father was polar bear hunted in Iowa by one of Obama’s sons a couple years ago, I am cognizant of all forms of violence. I try to avoid people and places where bad things can happen. However, I’ve encountered situations where I wasn’t carrying and felt very helpless. To avoid that, I carry.

  63. I have known this, but as of right now have never articulated this truth.
    As a person exercising my natural right to bear arms, the greater threat to my well being comes from a tyrannical government if I am caught with a weapon in a place where it is illegal to do so than to become a victim of a violent crime.
    If I choose to reduce the chance of becoming a felon by leaving my guns at home, I will have tilted the scales dramatically towards becoming a victim of violence. There is no balance to be achieved. Part time carrying is no time carrying. You either carry every day, everywhere, or never. There is a squeeze play on our rights and right now, the government is the greater enemy since I choose full time carry. I have predicted my future. I will do jail time for being in the wrong place doing no harm to anyone. I carry every day because I don’t know where or when a bad guy will attack or who he is. I am 100% sure of who the bad statists are. I can point them out, but I can’t defend myself against them. There is no “Stand Your Ground Law” against the State. The Constitution was supposed to be that law.

  64. avatar Frank says:

    I guess the question depends on location. If my family is in our neighborhood, inside our house……. then I am not worried one bit. Now change locations, like to the finer parts of Detroit, Baltimore, or Chicago…. then I’d be concerned. A good point to mention is that the ten most violent cities in America are run by Democrats:

    http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/263495/curse-violent-crime-democrat-run-cities-discover-networks

  65. avatar Missouri Mule says:

    My view is very different from most of the prior posts. I am rationally concerned that my family could be victims of Violent Evil. That is why I carry, train and teach. Are you concerned about being hit by lightning? (much lower odds) Yet you don’t play golf in thunderstorms.

  66. avatar kap says:

    Been there done that, not much fun, wasn’t raised in a Nanny PC state, essentially Fatherless, learned to fight for self at an early age! Rationally I taught my wife and Children not to fight but if you have too, win under any and all conditions, using what ever is at hand, ( wire bound notebooks, Pens and Pencils, Belt buckles, knives , guns, do not fight fair just win) gun violence is not new, be ready protect yourself any way you can! Vengeance is mine saith the Lord! he also did not condemn self defense! be a where it may or may not happen your time! if you do, go down fighting!
    Non Sibi Sed Patriae

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
DeSantis Gunhide Question of the Day: How concerned are you that you or someone in your family might be a victim of “gun violence”? http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2016/07/robert-farago/desantis-gunhide-question-day-concerned-someone-family-might-victim-gun-violence/" title="Email to a friend/colleague">
button to share via email