Two million defensive gun uses per year

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

  • No ad networks!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • ComeGet

    Ultimate Member
    Sep 1, 2015
    5,911
    This should be the bedrock of our offense against the antis -

    http://www.breitbart.com/big-govern...confirms-2-million-annual-defensive-gun-uses/

    An unpublished Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) study confirms Florida State University criminologist Gary Kleck’s findings of more than two million defensive handgun uses (DGUs) per year.

    Yeah, I know, the Second Amendment should be enough, but the fact is, it isn't. Too many on the left weasel word its meaning and brush it aside.

    Over two million citizens defending themselves a year is a tangible benefit to gun ownership and carry that has no counter argument.
     

    Jim12

    Let Freedom Ring
    MDS Supporter
    Jan 30, 2013
    33,790
    Then why are we constantly told by the media and the Left, without any pushback from the NRA or others that a gun owner in a crime situation is X times more likely to have the gun used on him/her than successfully using it for defense?

    The NRA magazine has a page or two every issue of stories about successful self defenses with a gun, but it's just preaching to the choir.

    Where's the NRA?
     

    wabbit

    Ultimate Member
    Apr 29, 2010
    5,185
    Then why are we constantly told by the media and the Left, without any pushback from the NRA or others that a gun owner in a crime situation is X times more likely to have the gun used on him/her than successfully using it for defense?

    The NRA magazine has a page or two every issue of stories about successful self defenses with a gun, but it's just preaching to the choir.

    Where's the NRA?

    we're all the NRA, and we have to individually do our part to get the truth out. It's no surprised this CDC study was not published.
    "In 1996, 1997, and 1998, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) conducted large-scale national surveys asking about defensive gun use (DGU)."
    Those were the Clinton years, during which the Clinton Gun Ban was in effect, and the wouldn't want the facts to dispel their lies about guns used in self defense.
     

    Jim12

    Let Freedom Ring
    MDS Supporter
    Jan 30, 2013
    33,790
    we're all the NRA, and we have to individually do our part to get the truth out. It's no surprised this CDC study was not published.
    "In 1996, 1997, and 1998, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) conducted large-scale national surveys asking about defensive gun use (DGU)."
    Those were the Clinton years, during which the Clinton Gun Ban was in effect, and the wouldn't want the facts to dispel their lies about guns used in self defense.

    The NRA has a bigger media budget than we do. Speaking for myself, anyway.
     

    ComeGet

    Ultimate Member
    Sep 1, 2015
    5,911
    The reason.com article and Kleck's paper on the CDC study, both linked in the Breitbart article, are worth a read.

    https://reason.com/blog/2018/04/20/cdc-provides-more-evidence-that-plenty-o

    From it -

    He concludes that the small difference between his estimate and the CDC's "can be attributed to declining rates of violent crime, which accounts for most DGUs. With fewer occasions for self-defense in the form of violent victimizations, one would expect fewer DGUs."

    It would be reasonable to conclude that DGUs since the CDC study have fallen because of the general lowering violent crime rate, but that's conjecture at this point.

    Kleck's response to the CDC study -

    https://poseidon01.ssrn.com/deliver...3001096009107123014066125007011122123&EXT=pdf

    If doubts about the validity of these findings cannot justify their suppression, why did CDC personnel decide not to report them? One obvious explanation would be that they recognized that their own surveys’ finding of a high DGU prevalence was unfriendly to gun control efforts - efforts repeatedly endorsed by CDC-financed researchers (Kates 2001). Such a decision could have been made at the level of administrators who supervise the BRFSS, or perhaps just lower-level personnel who understood that these findings would be unwelcome news to their bosses. Regardless of how the decision was made, it was a disservice to the American people, who paid for the survey and the information it yielded, but who were not allowed to see it and judge its worth for themselves.

    John Lott's Crime Prevention Research Center lists more current DGUs -

    https://crimeresearch.org/tag/defensive-gun-use/
     

    MDFF2008

    Ultimate Member
    Aug 12, 2008
    24,730
    Honestly it can't come from the NRA. Think about it:

    If Mom's Demand Action told you that a handgun is more likely to kill a family member than an intruder, would you believe them? Or would you laugh them out of the room?

    The same concept applies. If an anti-gun person hears the NRA saying there were two million defensive gun uses, they wouldn't believe it.
     

    ComeGet

    Ultimate Member
    Sep 1, 2015
    5,911
    This is in Kleck's study of the CDC survey data -

    CDC’s results, then, imply that guns were used defensively by victims about 3.6 times as often as they were used offensively by criminals.

    That is huge.

    That is coming directly from the survey that the CDC buried for about 20 freakin' years. And it's only come to light in the last couple of months.

    I can see not having the NRA champion this as a tactical point. But, this needs to get out, needs to be a top talking point of everyone who represents the rights of firearms owners and supports the Second Amendment. It doesn't matter who leads the charge, it needs to get out there so much that the filtering and spinning efforts of the anti-gun press and organizations can't cover it up.

    Just for fun, take a peek at this NPR article. If is doesn't sicken you and piss you off...

    https://www.npr.org/2018/04/13/602143823/how-often-do-people-use-guns-in-self-defense
     

    DanGuy48

    Ultimate Member
    Kleck’s numbers have been around a long time, long enough that many antis will have their arguments lined up, if they’re that bright. Many reports will include Kleck’s numbers on the high end but also include low end numbers of around 700,000.This is still a very impressive number. Anyway, just be forewarned to know the arguments since you will run into some (documented)resistance on Kleck’s numbers.
     

    Uncle Duke

    Ultimate Member
    MDS Supporter
    Feb 2, 2013
    11,627
    Not Far Enough from the City
    Honestly it can't come from the NRA. Think about it:

    If Mom's Demand Action told you that a handgun is more likely to kill a family member than an intruder, would you believe them? Or would you laugh them out of the room?

    The same concept applies. If an anti-gun person hears the NRA saying there were two million defensive gun uses, they wouldn't believe it.

    And if they did secretly believe it, I'm not at all sure they'd care. Not even a litttle. I rather doubt they'd care at all.

    When facts and logic go out the window, we're dealing with an entirely different (and wholly unpredictable) animal.
     

    Jim12

    Let Freedom Ring
    MDS Supporter
    Jan 30, 2013
    33,790
    Honestly it can't come from the NRA. Think about it:

    If Mom's Demand Action told you that a handgun is more likely to kill a family member than an intruder, would you believe them? Or would you laugh them out of the room?

    The same concept applies. If an anti-gun person hears the NRA saying there were two million defensive gun uses, they wouldn't believe it.

    It's not coming from the NRA. The NRA would only be communicating a third party's research, and should cite the source. Are you saying the NRA shouldn't ever support the 2A using facts and research, just because of who it is???

    The opposite is true, and when the facts are on our side, they should be broadcast far and wide.

    Maybe NRA ought to do a series of "mythbuster" TV spots to dispel the propaganda and lies.
     

    Buckeye_Nut

    Member
    Jun 15, 2017
    77
    Waldorf
    Breitbart, not a really reliable source. Then we have Breitbart quoting an UNPUBLISHED study from supposedly 20 years ago. I'm calling BS.
     

    Jim12

    Let Freedom Ring
    MDS Supporter
    Jan 30, 2013
    33,790
    Breitbart, not a really reliable source. Then we have Breitbart quoting an UNPUBLISHED study from supposedly 20 years ago. I'm calling BS.

    Are you saying the study doesn't exist and Breitbart fabricated it?
     

    jonnyl

    Ultimate Member
    Sep 23, 2009
    5,969
    Frederick
    One of the best aspects of Kleck’s study was that he was an anti. His starting assumption was that the 2A crowd’s claims of needing firearms for self defense was BS. He set out to prove it. His expectations were totally disproven by the data. He invited others to find flaws in his methodology but none did. He had enough integrity to publish the truth.

    His study showed more than just the raw numbers of DGU’s. It’s been a while since I’ve looked at the details, but he basically shows that deploying a firearm early in a potentially violent situation offers the best chance of coming out of the confrontation unharmed.

    The common anti “stat” that you’re more likely to be killed by your own gun than use it to kill a criminal may be “technically” true for a couple reasons. Although the common interpretation is that a criminal will take your gun from you and kill you that is very rare and not shown to be significant in Klecks study. But most DGUs don’t involve firing a shot, a subset of those involve a hit, and a smaller subset involve the criminal dying. That number might be less than the number of people who choose to commit suicide with a firearm.

    Unfortunately the debate in the media has become Safety vs 2nd Amendment Freedom. While the truth is that a strongly supported 2A helps increase safety. These facts should be used in every debate.
     

    ComeGet

    Ultimate Member
    Sep 1, 2015
    5,911
    Kleck’s numbers have been around a long time, long enough that many antis will have their arguments lined up, if they’re that bright. Many reports will include Kleck’s numbers on the high end but also include low end numbers of around 700,000.This is still a very impressive number. Anyway, just be forewarned to know the arguments since you will run into some (documented)resistance on Kleck’s numbers.

    The problem was he was a voice crying in the wilderness with the entire forces of the antis aligned against him. Now, there is irrefutable data from an unimpeachable institution that backs him up. That's huge, folk. Also, the fact that the CDC covered it up for 20 years is a major talking point.

    For the antis' argument, I'll refer back to the NPR hit piece linked earlier. It would be a hilarious read (alien abductions, anyone?) if it wasn't such a serious issue. In it, they say that there are only 100,000 DGUs each year. Only? The potential saving of 100,000 lives each year is dismissable? What if we found a way to reduce traffic deaths by 100,000 a year? Or opioid deaths? Would that be an "only?"

    Breitbart, not a really reliable source. Then we have Breitbart quoting an UNPUBLISHED study from supposedly 20 years ago. I'm calling BS.

    Did you bother to read any of the linked articles? If not, do so, it might change your mind on this. I agree Breitbart needs to be taken with a grain of salt, but no more than any other media outlet.

    ...Unfortunately the debate in the media has become Safety vs 2nd Amendment Freedom. While the truth is that a strongly supported 2A helps increase safety. These facts should be used in every debate.

    I couldn't agree more.
     

    DanGuy48

    Ultimate Member
    Personally, I don’t have a problem with Kleck’s numbers and that’s after reading a number of the criticisms. I also like the fact that he went into this topic oblivious to any predertermined conclusion and just went where the data took him. I respect that.

    It’s just that if one gets into a discussion about the DGUs, be prepared to respond to the blowback. I don’t think quickly on my feet so I want to know what responses I am most likely to get before I get into it.
     

    ComeGet

    Ultimate Member
    Sep 1, 2015
    5,911
    Personally, I don’t have a problem with Kleck’s numbers and that’s after reading a number of the criticisms. I also like the fact that he went into this topic oblivious to any predertermined conclusion and just went where the data took him. I respect that.

    It’s just that if one gets into a discussion about the DGUs, be prepared to respond to the blowback. I don’t think quickly on my feet so I want to know what responses I am most likely to get before I get into it.

    I was unaware of Kleck's research until this came out. I doubt I would have had any problems with his results, either, but the CDC data just nail it that he was on to something.

    I'm in the same boat with debating skills and so I'm quickly educating myself and reaching out to some others for information and ideas.
     
    Last edited:

    pilot25

    Ultimate Member
    Jul 13, 2016
    1,822
    Kleck’s numbers have been around a long time, long enough that many antis will have their arguments lined up, if they’re that bright. Many reports will include Kleck’s numbers on the high end but also include low end numbers of around 700,000.This is still a very impressive number. Anyway, just be forewarned to know the arguments since you will run into some (documented)resistance on Kleck’s numbers.

    Yes, this isn't news. Louder with Crowder uses this number and quotes the CDC all the time.

    I don't understand why all the sudden its hitting more the of well known conservative media outlets.
     

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Latest posts

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    274,704
    Messages
    7,249,079
    Members
    33,310
    Latest member
    Skarface

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom