do you believe Kleck's numbers? - Page 2
Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 43

Thread: do you believe Kleck's numbers?

  1. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by thoricuncle View Post
    Those are hard numbers to get. First off, if someone displays a firearm and the bad guy runs off, there is usually no police report. Second, when people are polled with this question, they will tend to answer in the negative so as not to implicate themselves.

    ...do you know of anyone who falls into this category? My sister is one of them.
    3 Uses of my firearm. One landed a guy in prison. 2 others, no report, no fuss, no muss. Doubt my first one ended up in any stats anywhere either since I didn't shoot him.

  2.   
  3. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by CharlieK View Post
    Kleck conducted that study several years ago to counter the inconcievely poorly conducted study:


    Violent Death in the Home in Relation to Gun Ownership

    by Arthur Kellermann, M.D. at the National Center for Injury Prevention and Control in Atlanta.

    Kellerman looked at shootings in homes and concluded that "if someone has a gun in his or her home, the gun is 42 times more likely to be used to shoot a family member than an intruder."

    What Kellerman failed to consider is that the events that he "investigated" had a common thread: they involved families that contained people who were convicted felons, drug dealers, or those convicted of domestic violence, etc.
    How is this POSSIBLE??? It's against the law for those people to have guns...
    Lewis - NRA Life - Oregon Firearms Federation - National Assoc. for Gun Rights

    Gun control is NOT about guns, it's about CONTROL.

  4. #13
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Kalifornia & Idaho
    Posts
    1,052
    Quote Originally Posted by CharlieK View Post
    Kleck conducted that study several years ago to counter the inconcievely poorly conducted study:


    Violent Death in the Home in Relation to Gun Ownership

    by Arthur Kellermann, M.D. at the National Center for Injury Prevention and Control in Atlanta.

    Kellerman looked at shootings in homes and concluded that "if someone has a gun in his or her home, the gun is 42 times more likely to be used to shoot a family member than an intruder."

    What Kellerman failed to consider is that the events that he "investigated" had a common thread: they involved families that contained people who were convicted felons, drug dealers, or those convicted of domestic violence, etc.
    Kellerman has never been associated with an "honest" study.
    Maybejim

    Life Member NRA
    Life Member CRPA
    Life Member SASS

    What you say isn't as important as what the other person hears

  5. google is your friend. The annual crime survey and Uniform Crime report, on DOJ's website are my sources. do you really "think" that 1 million people a year are being SHOT committing crimes? :-) If it happened like that, there'd BE no more attacks on people, after one year, cause the punks whio do such things would all be dead or in wheelchairs! of COURSE they only get shot 1 time in 100 attacks. They don't even face a gun 1 time in 10 such crimes.

  6. Quote Originally Posted by yuppor View Post
    google is your friend. The annual crime survey and Uniform Crime report, on DOJ's website are my sources. do you really "think" that 1 million people a year are being SHOT committing crimes? :-) If it happened like that, there'd BE no more attacks on people, after one year, cause the punks whio do such things would all be dead or in wheelchairs! of COURSE they only get shot 1 time in 100 attacks. They don't even face a gun 1 time in 10 such crimes.
    Here's the way I've heard it explained by Kleck:

    The UCR is going to be pretty close to spot on with murders. Why? Because the UCR can only know REPORTED crime. Well it's kinda hard to not report a murder. Although many go unsolved, the death itself and the cause of death are usually always discovered.

    Self defense by gun is almost a whole other issue. See you assumed that Kleck is referring to self defense by actually shooting the attacker or robber. Watch some of his interviews and he will blatantly say that isn't the case at all, and in fact, almost all cases in which guns are used for self defense, it is done without firing a single shot. In most cases the armed citizen just shows the gun and then verbally communicates that they have a gun and will use it.

    So knowing what you know or at least should have seen plenty of times about the police arresting law abiding citizens for defending themselves with a gun but violating some BS technicality...if you just stopped a crime just by brandishing your gun, and even though you're pretty sure you were in the right, there is still that doubt in the back of your mind that you may have done something wrong and it just takes one cop with a bad attitude to mess your whole life up. So bearing that in mind, how likely are you to report it to the police? I know I wouldn't. It's not like they're going to solve any case or help in any way. They can only potentially make it worse for you.

    So according to Kleck, people know this and so it mostly goes unreported. So his numbers come from actually going out and performing MASSIVE surveys and then scaling them in proportion to the US population.

  7. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by yuppor View Post
    do you really "think" that 1 million people a year are being SHOT committing crimes? :-) If it happened like that, there'd BE no more attacks on people, after one year, cause the punks whio do such things would all be dead or in wheelchairs! of COURSE they only get shot 1 time in 100 attacks. They don't even face a gun 1 time in 10 such crimes.
    Same thing is true for gun owners though. If we are all shooting our selves there would be no need for gun legislation... Has any one considered, the results of this study may be useless from a practical sense?

  8. #17
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Saginaw, Michigan
    Posts
    3,352
    Quote Originally Posted by yuppor View Post
    google is your friend. The annual crime survey and Uniform Crime report, on DOJ's website are my sources. do you really "think" that 1 million people a year are being SHOT committing crimes? :-) If it happened like that, there'd BE no more attacks on people, after one year, cause the punks whio do such things would all be dead or in wheelchairs! of COURSE they only get shot 1 time in 100 attacks. They don't even face a gun 1 time in 10 such crimes.
    Without my trying to be a jerk....

    Providing cites and/or links to sources shows a willingness to stand behind the statements made.
    It also is a way of being considerate by making it easy for others to check your sources.

    So Sir... if the DOJ annual crime survey and Uniform Crime report are your sources all that is necessary is to use your friend google to find, and then provide, a link to those sources and add a snippet (a cite) of the pertinent sections that uphold your statements. Doing so does a service for all because folks can go directly to your sources, and the pertinent sections, and learn something.

  9. #18
    ezkl2230 Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by thoricuncle View Post
    Those are hard numbers to get. First off, if someone displays a firearm and the bad guy runs off, there is usually no police report. Second, when people are polled with this question, they will tend to answer in the negative so as not to implicate themselves.

    CDC numbers put it between 800,000 and 1.2 million depending on the research methodology used. So I would think 1 million is not too far off.

    A good test of this number is do you know of anyone who falls into this category? My sister is one of them.
    Kleck's number was derived by applying statistical analysis to a nationwide survey of individuals who indicated they had used a firearm in self defense at some point in time.

  10. #19
    ezkl2230 Guest
    Pair Kleck's numbers with Constitutional lawyer and criminologist Don Kates' research that determined that civilians using their firearms in self defense kill nearly three times more criminals each year than do police (between 2,000 - 3,000), yet police, who are supposedly highly trained to handle such events, are 5- times more likely to kill an innocent person than the civilian (11% for police versus 2% for civilians). The combination of statistics makes a compelling case for armed civilians.

  11. Quote Originally Posted by yuppor View Post
    google is your friend. The annual crime survey and Uniform Crime report, on DOJ's website are my sources. do you really "think" that 1 million people a year are being SHOT committing crimes? :-) If it happened like that, there'd BE no more attacks on people, after one year, cause the punks whio do such things would all be dead or in wheelchairs! of COURSE they only get shot 1 time in 100 attacks. They don't even face a gun 1 time in 10 such crimes.
    And like I said previously, 1 million times a year may sound high, but that's only about 1 out of every 350 people. Get 350 people together and ask them if any of them have ever had to prevent themselves or someone else from being the victim of a crime by showing their gun or actually shooting it. I'm sure you'll have at least 1 hand raised, if not several.

Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Quantcast