Two million defensive gun uses per year

pilot25 said:

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.

Click to expand...

Just curious, what numbers have been out there quite a while? I'm asking because I'm trying to educate myself on this and did some searching without finding anything about the latest CDC revelations prior to Kleck's paper from mid-February of this year.

Also, are you talking about the 700k or the 2 million figure? I looked at Crowder's website and while I found an article on CDC firearm data, it was on another issue, not this.

Yes, Kleck's estimate of 2 million DGUs a year has been on the books since 1995 but the antis have produced their own cherry-picked data to counter it and it has been ridiculed by them and the fellow traveler media. (Again, see the NPR article linked above for a fine example.)

It's the CDC survey data from 1996, 1997 and 1998 that is the focus here. It shows results similar to Kleck's and was covered up by the CDC until he accidentally stumbled across it while researching other topics.

If you know of anything that reports this CDC data prior to February, please share it.

Can't say I've looked up the CDC info but Louder With Crowder youtube segments, "I'm pro gun change my mind" he states over and over CDC data 31,000 gun deaths vs. 200k - 3mil DGUs per year. He explains the discrepancy between the low and high estimate with the DGUs.

He has gone into detail breaking down the 31k deaths as a high estimate given 20ish thousand are suicides but always uses the most liberal number of 31k. Contrasting it with the most conservative estimate of DGUs of 200k. Using just those numbers alone blows out the argument liberals use. Using more realistic numbers of about 11k gun deaths scraping out suicides and somewhere between 200k - 3 million DGUs and the gun control argument is just epic stupid.

Personally I think arguing numbers is nonsense but since libs quote them all the time you have to use their sources against them.

Additionally, I have to say I have heard him quote these stats at least a dozen times on his podcast. His latest youtube video was a live audience at some college and he went into a little bit how he debates the 2A topic using data the libs quote all the time. Its pretty fascinating if you like debating. I don't because it just leads nothing. Most people who quote data are entrenched into their beliefs and aren't going to change. You have to have a life changing experience, as I did, to move the needle.

pilot25 said:

Can't say I've looked up the CDC info but Louder With Crowder youtube segments, "I'm pro gun change my mind" he states over and over CDC data 31,000 gun deaths vs. 200k - 3mil DGUs per year. He explains the discrepancy between the low and high estimate with the DGUs.

He has gone into detail breaking down the 31k deaths as a high estimate given 20ish thousand are suicides but always uses the most liberal number of 31k. Contrasting it with the most conservative estimate of DGUs of 200k. Using just those numbers alone blows out the argument liberals use. Using more realistic numbers of about 11k gun deaths scraping out suicides and somewhere between 200k - 3 million DGUs and the gun control argument is just epic stupid.

Personally I think arguing numbers is nonsense but since libs quote them all the time you have to use their sources against them.

Additionally, I have to say I have heard him quote these stats at least a dozen times on his podcast. His latest youtube video was a live audience at some college and he went into a little bit how he debates the 2A topic using data the libs quote all the time. Its pretty fascinating if you like debating. I don't because it just leads nothing. Most people who quote data are entrenched into their beliefs and aren't going to change. You have to have a life changing experience, as I did, to move the needle.

Click to expand...

Thanks for that info, Pilot25.

I read an article on his website about exactly what you're describing. I agree with Crowder's points using the statistics he cites but that's a different CDC study from the topic here.

This is about survey data from 1996-98 which supported Kleck's earlier results of DGUs, but that the CDC buried for about 20 years. It found around 2 million DGUs a year, which means that people legally used guns to protect themselves and others around 3.6 times the amount that criminals used guns illegally.

Think about that - 3.6:1 ratio of legal versus illegal use of guns.

Numbers are important when the anti crowd are using the blood of innocents to say that there is no reason for law abiding citizens to own firearms. Saving possibly hundreds of thousands of lives every year from criminals is a huge benefit of civilian gun ownership and it needs to be bounced off Bloomberg's forehead repeatedly.

ComeGet said:

Thanks for that info, Pilot25.

I read an article on his website about exactly what you're describing. I agree with Crowder's points using the statistics he cites but that's a different CDC study from the topic here.

This is about survey data from 1996-98 which supported Kleck's earlier results of DGUs, but that the CDC buried for about 20 years. It found around 2 million DGUs a year, which means that people legally used guns to protect themselves and others around 3.6 times the amount that criminals used guns illegally.

Think about that - 3.6:1 ratio of legal versus illegal use of guns.

Numbers are important when the anti crowd are using the blood of innocents to say that there is no reason for law abiding citizens to own firearms. Saving possibly hundreds of thousands of lives every year from criminals is a huge benefit of civilian gun ownership and it needs to be bounced off Bloomberg's forehead repeatedly.

Click to expand...

The Kleck data is extrapolated however. Anytime a statistician does some sort of extrapolation there is a red flag that goes up by the opposing side. Additionally, since the violent crime rate has been in decline then DGU will also decline. That decline is bastardized by the left too. They don't correlate the decline in crime.

They don't care about the truth, that is why they bend the numbers to their narrative. They want a 2A repeal via judicial fiat.

If everyday, conservative media highlighted a few DGUs a day there would be less people on the fence jumping on the libs side. Unfortunately, I have heard FOXNews commentators say the stupidest stuff trying to defend 2A. I guess they are, at least, trying.

I applaud your efforts.

Buckeye_Nut said:

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

Click to expand...

While I applaud this study...if it is real...we have to keep in mind that the CDC has been forbidden by law for conducting firearms research. Whether that ban was in effect during that time period I can't say but we need to be sure it's a genuine study and not some hoax before spreading it publicly. Opening ourselves up to ridicule by the antis without first checking its authenticity is not good policy.

Pretty sure they can study it but no more money will be allocated for it. So if there is CDC budget money currently for the study they can do it but that is it.

TheOriginalMexicanBob said:

While I applaud this study...if it is real...we have to keep in mind that the CDC has been forbidden by law for conducting firearms research. Whether that ban was in effect during that time period I can't say but we need to be sure it's a genuine study and not some hoax before spreading it publicly. Opening ourselves up to ridicule by the antis without first checking its authenticity is not good policy.

Click to expand...

Read Kleck's response to the CDC study--linked in post #8--and then please come back and explain why you still think this is a hoax.

Where did I say it was a hoax? I simply said we need to be sure it's real and not a hoax. I wasn't passing judgement on it...just don't want to spread incorrect information like the antis do.

TheOriginalMexicanBob said:

Where did I say it was a hoax? I simply said we need to be sure it's real and not a hoax. I wasn't passing judgement on it...just don't want to spread incorrect information like the antis do.

Click to expand...

We can be assured that if a researcher like Gary Kleck--who has the antis breathing down his neck for previous studies--is putting out this information, it is not a hoax.

I am confident in the validity of the study because I've done some research on it on my own. If you, or anyone else is not, and does not want to take the time to educate yourself on it, then don't spread anything about it publicly.

Problem solved.

Jim12 said:

Where's the NRA?

Click to expand...

The NRA is being outspent by the gun ban lobby at over 20:1 now

TheOriginalMexicanBob said:

While I applaud this study...if it is real...we have to keep in mind that the CDC has been forbidden by law for conducting firearms research.

Click to expand...

stop spreading the lies of the gun ban lobby. the CDC wa snot fobidden and spends millions a year on firearms related data and study.

They were forbidden from giving ot third party researchers who had conducted junk studies (EG those claiming household with a gun had more violence, when parsing criminals, which the junk studies commission by the CDC did not do out shows households with a gun were safer from violence than those without guns). Three different CDC had stated directly they wanted to create research with an aim to decrease gun ownership and right to firearms -- that was congress forbade: CDC using taxpayer funds to argue against gun ownership.

Besides what the Bloomberg groups and the Soros groups spend the antis have tons of free messaging from the mainstream media. The NRA has to work hard to fight all that.

TheOriginalMexicanBob said:

Besides what the Bloomberg groups and the Soros groups spend the antis have tons of free messaging from the mainstream media. The NRA has We have to work hard to fight all that.

Click to expand...

I agree, with a slight alteration.

pilot25 said:

Can't say I've looked up the CDC info but Louder With Crowder youtube segments, "I'm pro gun change my mind" he states over and over CDC data 31,000 gun deaths vs. 200k - 3mil DGUs per year. He explains the discrepancy between the low and high estimate with the DGUs..

Click to expand...

The discrepancy is no different than the over order of magnitude discrepancy between estimates on flu or virus infections prevented by vaccines.

when the antis say the discrepancy "proves" the data is invalid, ask them if they are anti-vaccine nuts, since there are similar discrepancies with vaccine and disease prevented numbers as well.


The point is a dozen researchers have used a variety of valid methods and come up with a range of 500,000 to three million. the average is about 2 million.

We know why lots of them are not going to be self reported, and why some in fact maybe denied. One reason is the firearm possession may not be legal. In DC there have been cases of illegal owned firearms being used to prevent crime or harm. We had a guy used his gun to stop pit bulls that was mauling a a kid. https://www.washingtonpost.com/loca...f6e6f6-f2e4-11e2-bdae-0d1f78989e8a_story.html
Now that already involved cops because it was not used to deter, but fired, and EMS had to come. But there are probably dozens of times a month a person in DC legitimately defends themselves from imminent harm by brandishing that they won't report or admit to anyone.

By the way, none of the numbers, the 2 million or three million include future crimes prevented though DGU. We had a woman near us use her firearm to hold for arrest a guy. His DNA form the arrest showed he had committed a prior sexual assault that had not been solved. since rapists tend to repeat, crime til caught, the fact is she not only prevented her own rape, but a virtually certain subsequent future one if she had not been able to stop him and facilitate his arrest.

same thing when a store owner prevents a robbery by using his.her gun but also manages to hold the person for arrest, they are undoubtedly preventing future crimes by that criminal not being on the streets. None of the studies, not even the 3 million DGU ones, count those crimes prevented

rascal said:

The discrepancy is no different than the over order of magnitude discrepancy between estimates on flu or virus infections prevented by vaccines.

when the antis say the discrepancy "proves" the data is invalid, ask them if they are anti-vaccine nuts, since there are similar discrepancies with vaccine and disease prevented numbers as well.


The point is a dozen researchers have used a variety of valid methods and come up with a range of 500,000 to three million. the average is about 2 million.

We know why lots of them are not going to be self reported, and why some in fact maybe denied. One reason is the firearm possession may not be legal. In DC there have been cases of illegal owned firearms being used to prevent crime or harm. We had a guy used his gun to stop pit bulls that was mauling a a kid. https://www.washingtonpost.com/loca...f6e6f6-f2e4-11e2-bdae-0d1f78989e8a_story.html
Now that already involved cops because it was not used to deter, but fired, and EMS had to come. But there are probably dozens of times a month a person in DC legitimately defends themselves from imminent harm by brandishing that they won't report or admit to anyone.

By the way, none of the numbers, the 2 million or three million include future crimes prevented though DGU. We had a woman near us use her firearm to hold for arrest a guy. His DNA form the arrest showed he had committed a prior sexual assault that had not been solved. since rapists tend to repeat, crime til caught, the fact is she not only prevented her own rape, but a virtually certain subsequent future one if she had not been able to stop him and facilitate his arrest.

same thing when a store owner prevents a robbery by using his.her gun but also manages to hold the person for arrest, they are undoubtedly preventing future crimes by that criminal not being on the streets. None of the studies, not even the 3 million DGU ones, count those crimes prevented

Click to expand...

Yep. In the study, Kleck makes a strong case for DGUs being under reported, some of it similar to your comments. He also shows how it's unlikely for them to be over reported.

ComeGet said:

Yep. In the study, Kleck makes a strong case for DGUs being under reported, some of it similar to your comments. He also shows how it's unlikely for them to be over reported.

Click to expand...

Even I fell into the error of calling 500,000 to three million DGU a "Discrepancy." It is not. It is what is called a "range" and utterly normal for these kind of estimates.

TheOriginalMexicanBob said:

Besides what the Bloomberg groups and the Soros groups spend the antis have tons of free messaging from the mainstream media. The NRA has to work hard to fight all that.

Click to expand...

The thing is that today's media is 1/2 charity. When I say that I mean it literally. Vox, Vice, PBS & NPR stations, ProPublica, are literally 501c(3) fully tax deductible charities. They hold their cup out, and the gun control lobby pours the money in.

Look at our local NPR, WAMU. It was just among a half dozen stations that just last month got over $5 million dollars solely to report on US "gun violence" from a foundation (Kendeda) which is also a major donor to Bloomberg's gun control fronts:
https://wamu.org/guns/
That is $5.3 million to train mid career working journalists to report against the Second Amendment. This is not about student journalists, but grants to "mid-career" working journalists from an advocacy group, essentially bribes to reportrers laundered through WAMU.

Kendeda has given near $100 million to gun ban fronts in the few years couple of years. The are one of the the biggest donor to "the Trace" after Bloomberg.

They put $8 million into 501(c)3 "Gunsdown" devoted specifically to stigmatizing any corporate relationship with the NRA, ie into organizing social media and letter writing boycott threats into companies like Hertz, Yeti, whatever, to break any ties with the NRA:
https://kendedafund.org/grantee/coordinating-strategies-reduce-gun-violence-2/
whic goes directly to:
https://gunsdownamerica.org/


Here are other gun control/ban efforts they fund:

https://kendedafund.org/grantee/smart-legal-strategies-reduce-gun-violence/
https://kendedafund.org/grantee/reducing-gun-violence-in-the-u-s/
https://kendedafund.org/grantee/coordinating-strategies-reduce-gun-violence/
https://kendedafund.org/grantee/the-trace/
https://kendedafund.org/grantee/engaging-impacted-communities-to-prevent-gun-violence/

Kededa is billions of dollars in Home Depot stock. both the Home depot founder and his ex wife are hard core Democrats giving huge amounts to Democrat party associated 501C3s, 501C4s, 527s, candidates. Kendeda is the wife's and daughter's charity

People think the gun control "movement" and the fact that the press is against gun rights is some kind of natural organic thing. In fact it is over $100 million cash funding a year spent on buying members of the press and artificially creating fake "grassroots (astorturf) efforts that is increasingly sophisticated.

What of you think UPS or Hertz or Yeti will do when a group like "Gunsdown" comes to them and says they will spend millions coaching and organizing kids to call them child killers and blackmail them with a destruction of their brand name?

sgt23preston said:

2,000,000 divided by 52 States = Approximately 400,000 per State Per Year...

Bull Shit...

Click to expand...

Not 400,000, but 40,000.

TheOriginalMexicanBob said:

While I applaud this study...if it is real...we have to keep in mind that the CDC has been forbidden by law for conducting firearms research. Whether that ban was in effect during that time period I can't say but we need to be sure it's a genuine study and not some hoax before spreading it publicly. Opening ourselves up to ridicule by the antis without first checking its authenticity is not good policy.

Click to expand...

http://thefederalist.com/2015/12/15/why-congress-cut-the-cdcs-gun-research-budget/

https://www.nap.edu/read/18319/chapter/1

rascal said:

The NRA is being outspent by the gun ban lobby at over 20:1 now

Click to expand...

https://www.propublica.org/article/...ing-by-gun-rights-and-gun-control-interest-gr

That would be a huge change. Do you have some links?