Home Gun Control Incendiary Image of the Day: What Did I Tell You Edition Gun Control Incendiary Image of the Day: What Did I Tell You Edition By Robert Farago - March 21, 2013 36 Facebook Twitter Pinterest WhatsApp Email ◀Previous Post Next Post▶ As I said yesterday, if the civilian disarmament industry wants to argue facts, they will lose. Simple as that. [h/t DrVino] ◀Previous Post Next Post▶ RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR Killadelphia: Gas Station Owner Hires Heavily Armed Security to Protect Customers Americans Aren’t Buying More Gun Control…They’re Buying More Guns Oregon Attorney General Concedes Measure 114 Permit to Purchase Gun Control Provision Isn’t Ready for Prime Time 36 COMMENTS Niiiiiice. Reply I’m not sure the source of the figure, but the actual number is probably far higher than this. Gary Kleck wrote in the 90s that Americans defended themselves with firearms 1.5 to 2.5 million times every year, often without firing a shot. So even on the very low end following Kleck, since 1968, we’re talking more around 45 million Americans defending themselves with firearms. Reply my thought exactly. Reply And you ACCEPT that as a reasonable estimate? Is that a genuine check our beleaguered asses can cash? In all honesty, it’s an absurd figure, and we ought to have nothing to do with it. Reply “In all honesty, it’s an absurd figure, and we ought to have nothing to do with it.” Well would being highly conservative help your/our “Beleagured Asses”? Just asking you brought it up. OK then let me try some math. At the end of this year since 1968 it will have been 45 yrs. Now we’ll take the low end of Kleck’s analysis, 1.5 millions DGU’s (defensive gun uses) per year. But instead let’s say he was way off base, missed a digit or something, and we’ll say he was inaccurate by 70%. So using 450k (k=thousand) DGU’s per year times 45 yrs. gives us a total of 20.250m (m=million) total DGU’s since 1968, being highly conservative. Since the number of deaths includes suicides and LEO’s killing criminals, I’ll use the best (though highly debatable) number I’ve heard. I’ll be using 9,600 deaths per yr due to firearms. Yes I know that some yrs. it’s higher or lower than others but I want to be highly conservative. So I’ll not just round up to 10k, but then I’ll double that and use 20k deaths per yr. Times 45 yrs. and we get 900k firearm deaths since 1968. Dividing 20.250m DGU’s by 900k Deaths and you get a 22.5:1 ratio. Or you’re 22.5 times more likely to be saved by a firearm every yr. since 1968. So maybe my numbers here will help you out. These are very skewed numbers to the conservative side of the argument. The actual number and ratio is likely to be substantially higher (at least twice as high). And BTW the figures have everything to do with it. My.02 Reply Why? There are a lot of incidents that fall under the umbrella of “defensive gun use” even if the anti-rights people don’t like them. Say you scare off a mugger by mentioning your possession of a firearm you in fact do not possess. This is a successful defensive gun use, even if the defender does not and indeed never owned any guns. Reply +1,000,000 Reply Lol, this version rocks!!! Reply NEWS FLASH ::: Florida Update :: Concealed Carry Permits Up, ( most CCW in any state in the country) Violent crime down!!! MORE GUNS LESS CRIME…. stop crime buy a gun ! Reply Now if only something could be done about this Florida humidity… Reply We just want sensible controls on salt. No more black salt shakers with more than 7 holes in the top. Well, you can have 10 holes, but only hold the salt shaker at less than a 35° angle. Unless you’re a cook at the Capitol cafeteria. The sea-water loophole will have to be closed, just as effectively as the British did in India. (/wiki/Salt_March) Random checkpoints will be established only to check for illegal salt shakers. We still respect your right to cook as you want. 1 in 10 U.S. Deaths Blamed on Salt | ABC News If there’s just one life we can save, we have an obligation to try. #SaltControl Reply I like that. A LOT. Reply Love the post make more posters like that. Reply I will….. 😀 Reply I’m sure more than a few children accounted for some of those numbers. “If only saves one child”, well.. legal gun ownership does that. My children are defended. Reply Yes, it is as simple as that. The truth will ultimately win out. We shall overcome. Reply Very good! Reply Ha! Straight to Pinterest! Reply Does the “defended themselves with firearms” statistic include the prevention of theft or property crimes (when there is no intention to harm the victim, and/or the perps were unarmed)? If so, then it’s not an apples to apples comparison. The pro-gun control agit-prop dealt specifically with deaths. If they had included those injured by guns or had property stolen at gunpoint, then that 1.3 million figure they cite would be much higher. Reply More than all what? Reply Data is inaccurate. The number of Americans defending themselves IAW the Center for Disease Control AND the Center for Injury Prevention and Control came up with 2.5 million cases of self defense gun use JUST LAST YEAR!!! Since January 1st of 2013 at 8:45p.m. central time the number of cases is around 435,719. Almost a half a million and its still March. These self defense cases include brandishing a weapon and scaring off an attacker as well as shooting the bad guy. I think everyone agrees that brandishing a gun and avoiding the unfortunate consequense of actually having to discharge your weapon, is a HUGE WIN. Unfortunately these cases are rarely reported on. Even when someone shoots in self defense it isn’t reported on even by local news. I am sceptical of the statistic of 2.5million cases in a year, but I am even more sceptical of the statistic of 2.4 since 1968. I believe the real number is closer to the CDC stat. Either way. People using firearms for self-defense far outweighs those who use guns for ill purposes Reply Then number I used was the conservative total presented in Farago’s original post (to which he links here). In either case, our number is higher. Reply Even assuming defensive gun uses are a relatively new phenomenon (devil’s advocate), going back to 1968 the real number would easily be in the tens of millions — I’m looking at 31 million just based on some very rough estimates. It’s hard to back that up with studies because the data doesn’t exist, but it’s easy to extrapolate. I guess you covered that by saying “more than” 2.4 million. 😛 Either way, nicely done. Reply I lived in a not so nice place in town when I was young. Some clown tried to come in through the 2nd story window at night by climbing up a drain off the deck. the dog woke us, I grabbed the .357 and send the dog. The guy fell. I let the dog out who chased him to the back fence and I shot off “a blast” (.357 at night is loud)Just like the VP suggested (except I was 20 and didn’t know better). Cops came, but no report. Was told not only would he never come back, none of his thug friends would either. He was right. Every neighbor was broke into multiple times, several while they were home. We were never bothered again. The fact the thug neighbors knew we had a big dog and a big gun saved us. I call that a win as well. Not just that night, but the two years after when no one dared try again. Reply I think the biggest mistake we’re making is te fact that the only place I’m seeing this poster is on this website or those like it. We need mainstream publicity to change minds. We need prime time commercials. Why is this not happening with all the money being sent to pro 2a groups? How much does it cost to buy a spot on a billboard in a city center or off the interstate? Reply We’re working on that. And I think you are free to share and link to this on your social media and email…. Reply For one month, depending on volume of traffick and medium to large size, anywhere from $800 to $2,000 per month! Reply I’ve just bought the Kindle version, and skimmed some- its pretty good writing, IMHO. I dont “get” that he’s taking sides, just telling stories about the people he meets, and his own experience with buying and carrying concealed, by the way, in a pretty fair and humble fashion. There’s a lot of practical “stuff” thats interesting to other noobs, like me, about what its like, beyond “what caliber, what sight, whats the best holster, etc etc” and I would guess that process of becoming comfortable and aware will be familiar to others with a lot more experience. And maybe, since its coming from a self-acknowledged liberal, it will help other liberals or those considering becoming part of the Armed Intelligentsia, to get over their concerns, societal and practical. This is the kind of book I’d give to my friends of that political persuasion, if they are curious and not closed-minded, to help them be safer, and more aware, and more tolerant, once they become better informed. And, after all thats what the Truth About Guns is about, in one respect- a culture of respect and curiousity, and being a welcoming place for all points of view, with respect for the experience and expertise that “speaks truth to power”…. 😉 Reply oops – moderator – that reply above belonged under the “Exclusive Pre-Review” post for the Gun Guys by Dan Baum book- my bad. Reply Was looking at the CATO website and see since Sept 14, 2012 that the only ones are averaging 59 incidents of complaints of crimes against them per week, 1,180 total up to 3/20/2013. That would make a good comparison against all those people who defended themselves. Reply Weapons work. I call open carry – of a gun OR a knife – a continuous defense through deterrence. How many s#!+s have seen my six inch pokey thing and wandered off in search of easier game? More’n a few, certainly. Reply A nit-picky question: Does the stat still hold true if you tweak the language to support a much more succinct argument? For example, “2,475,000 Americans protected themselves from criminals and madmen” as opposed to “gun violence”? Leaves a lot less room for doubt that the gun owners were the ones being accosted and we were justified in our use of force in those instances. The reason I raise this distinction is the anti-gun community will want to know specifics or they’ll just say that most of those protection scenarios wouldn’t have involved a gun (hence gun violence) if the defender didn’t have one to begin with. It’s a silly argument, but that doesn’t mean they’ll try to use it. Reply Please learn how to hotlink youtube videos instead of embedding them inline. Comment-embedded videos break many mobile browsers. Reply -if the civilian disarmament industry wants to argue facts, they will lose. Simple as that.- Which is why they never do argue fact, and why they continue to work toward a society based on emotion and subservience rather than critical thought. Reply March 23, 2013 9:40 AM EDT The idea that gun grabber politicains are open to reason is a dead end srteet. They are not open to reason or facts. They are only open to how many people they can deceive with emotional cries that will further their own careers. The real issue at hand is the 2nd Amendment. If we are to be able to resist a tyrannical government we need weapons commensurate with the common American soldier. That would start with military select fire common issued rifles, M4 and M16. That would include body armour, available armourd vehicles, and granades. Any other discussing is kabukee theather. Either we have a 2nd Amendment or we don’t. “Keep”, means I own it and you can’t have it. “Bare”, means I have it right here on me and its loaded. “Not be infringed” means not in any way be limited. Its simple. We have let the so called ” national conversation” be controlled by the grabbers. Political correctness will be the death of this nation. Reply “Bare” means unclothed. Reply LEAVE A REPLY Cancel reply Please enter your comment! Please enter your name here You have entered an incorrect email address! Please enter your email address here Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment. Notify me of follow-up comments by email. Notify me of new posts by email.