Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

jmg257

(11,996 posts)
15. Not sure - they are often posted here, when it makes the news.
Fri Jul 15, 2016, 12:38 PM
Jul 2016

I would guess though that someone getting killed by a gun is much more news-worthy then someone not getting killed because of a gun. {On edit: unless its a bit unique, like a woman, or an old person etc...quite popular self-defense stories then}


"So what are the estimates as to how many more people would die if homeowners weren't so eager to display a firearm? Would the lives saved REALLY outnumber the tens of thousands currently killed? "

No idea - since in most areas 70-80% of the 10,000 killed by gun violence are killed by less then 1% of the population (and often known to police) and typically unrelated to homeowners defending themselves, it would be hard to come up with a number.


"In fact, reading the linked report, I see no justification that owning a firearm saves lives. Especially when we already know that the chance of someone dying from a firearm in the home is substantial."


Justification isn't really the issue - millions of people choose guns for their defense and other lawful uses...that's what justifies owning them (and is supported by the USSC).


"And yet, every single day people die from guns, and there's apparently no number of these deaths large enough to make very many people seriously reconsider the level and kind of gun ownership in this country. Well, a week ago the murder of some police officers almost got that conversation started, but not really."


If everything that can be done is being done to remove the threat from the less then 1% that cause 70-80% of the gun violence*, I think then a reasonable next step would be to start having lawful peoples' rights/ownership evaluated.

*Richmond, Calif: among America’s highest per capita rates of gun violence: 70 percent of their gun violence in 2008 was caused by fewer than 1 percent of the city’s residents.

Cincinnati: less than 1 percent of the city’s population was responsible for 74 percent of homicides in 2007.

Chicago: a city of 2.7 million people, about 1,400 are responsible for much of the violence, all of them are on what the department calls its Strategic Subject List.

Newark: Shootings have increased by nearly half in 2015, drug trafficking, particularly of marijuana and prescription pills, is the main cause of the uptick in gun violence, said the director of the Newark Police Department. Initiatives require police and prosecutors to focus on the small number of lawbreakers responsible for most violent crimes. In Newark, that’s 1,470 people, less than 1 percent of the city’s 277,000 residents

etc. etc.

As Chicago says: “We are targeting the correct individuals,” Mr. Johnson said. “We just need our judicial partners and our state legislators to hold these people accountable.”



Until that time comes, and people are REALLY serious about spending the $$ and instituting the programs they know work, the numbers will be what they are.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

What would be the number? [View all] needledriver Jul 2016 OP
How would you substantiate the number of lives saved just based on the number of DGUs? jmg257 Jul 2016 #1
I don't. needledriver Jul 2016 #3
Yes, agreed that any lives saved count - figuring it as the main purpose of self-defense. jmg257 Jul 2016 #6
Even though I believe that guns result in a "null effect" w/regard to violence......... pablo_marmol Jul 2016 #2
People talk about throwing out the 2nd Amendment. JonathanRackham Jul 2016 #4
If it saves one life, it's worth it. ileus Jul 2016 #5
Total propaganda Uponthegears Jul 2016 #7
You may call it bull puckey needledriver Jul 2016 #12
See #18 Uponthegears Jul 2016 #19
Somehow I find the claim that there are 50,000 defensive gun uses SheilaT Jul 2016 #8
Its actually a bit low - Check with the VPC... jmg257 Jul 2016 #9
Then why don't I read about these things every single day, SheilaT Jul 2016 #10
Don't like facts, huh? DonP Jul 2016 #11
Your viewpoint is based in a false assumption. beevul Jul 2016 #14
Not sure - they are often posted here, when it makes the news. jmg257 Jul 2016 #15
The reason you do not sarisataka Jul 2016 #16
Two things- needledriver Jul 2016 #17
Perhaps because they don't get reposted by the sites you visit? LongtimeAZDem Jul 2016 #26
because the media doesn't choose to report them, gejohnston Jul 2016 #28
Will you folks stop at nothing?????? Uponthegears Jul 2016 #18
Sorry - VPCs numbers are hardly mis-leading - quoted very specific DGU values as THEY provided them. jmg257 Jul 2016 #20
Please, please, you're killing me . . . Uponthegears Jul 2016 #21
"I have a problem with you trying to claim they represent the number of instances where a defensive jmg257 Jul 2016 #22
That would be real embarrassing Uponthegears Jul 2016 #23
He he - No worries...Cheers! I do hear you! jmg257 Jul 2016 #24
I am not a statistician needledriver Jul 2016 #25
"How many additional deaths per year of people unable to defend themselves would you be willing to jmg257 Jul 2016 #27
Sorry- that was not for you. needledriver Jul 2016 #29
All Guns Matter SCantiGOP Jul 2016 #13
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Gun Control & RKBA»What would be the number?»Reply #15