Guns in America: For every criminal killed in self-defense, 34 innocent people die

[Rob L 3,811]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2015/06/19/guns-in-america-for-every-criminal-killed-in-self-defense-34-innocent-people-die/

By Christopher Ingraham June 19 at 1:34 PM

"The only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is with a good guy with a gun."says Wayne LaPierre, the vice president of the National Rifle Association.

That's become the kernel of the NRA's response to recent mass shooting tragedies -- if only more people carried guns for protection, the thinking goes, then they would be less likely to be victimized by gun-wielding criminals.

“The only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is with a good guy with a gun,” LaPierre said

The challenge to that argument is that, data show, guns are rarely used in self-defense -- especially relative to the rate at which they're used in criminal homicides or suicides. A recent report from the Violence Policy Center, a gun control advocacy group, put those numbers in some perspective, and I dug up the raw numbers from the FBI's homicide data. Take a look:

In 2012, there were 8,855 criminal gun homicides in the FBI's homicide database, but only 258 gun killings by private citizens that were deemed justifiable, which the FBI defines as "the killing of a felon, during the commission of a felony, by a private citizen."

That works out to one justifiable gun death for every 34 unjustifiable gun deaths.

Or, look at it this way. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention data shows that in 2012 there were 20,666 suicides by gun. That works out to one self-defense killing for every 78 gun suicides. CDC data show that there were more than twice as many accidental gun fatalities as as justifiable killings.

There are, of course, plenty of solid arguments for robust 2nd Amendment protections. Millions of people use guns for sport and recreation every day. The vast majority of gun owners are responsible citizens, not criminals.

But, though some people certainly use guns for self-defense, the data suggest that overall, guns are used far more often for killing then self-defense. As a result, it's may be thinking twice about arguments for more guns in schools, churches and other public places.

Christopher Ingraham writes about politics, drug policy and all things data. He previously worked at the Brookings Institution and the Pew Research Center.

[Sousuke 1,214]

I'm pretty sure this is a dup. post.

Anyway, we've been over these stats ad nauseam.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

And they stand. Guns cause much more damage than should be tolerable. The benefits are few, the losses are plenty. Close to one and a half million casualties over the last 50 years. Any society that was pro life would act. And fast. Alas, we'll do nothing at all around here because in America guns > life.

[Rob L 3,811]

I'm pretty sure this is a dup. post.

Anyway, we've been over these stats ad nauseam.

Article just appeared today in the Washington post

[Penny Lane 8,159]

Worth it. Freedom!

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Worth it. Freedom!

Watering the tree of liberty and all that jazz?

[spookyturtle 9,465]

But these stats don't show the outcome of when good guy with gun encounters bad guy with gun. I will guarantee that 90%+ of the 8855 homicide victims were unarmed. These stats prove nothing about the effectiveness of owning a gun for self defense.

[Rob L 3,811]

But these stats don't show the outcome of when good guy with gun encounters bad guy with gun. I will guarantee that 90%+ of the 8855 homicide victims were unarmed. These stats prove nothing about the effectiveness of owning a gun for self defense.

Good point, does anyone have that data?

[spookyturtle 9,465]

Good point, does anyone have that data?

I don't think those stats exist. I wish they did. In this article that you posted, there is a good chance that there would have been at least an additional 258 deaths if those individuals were not armed.

[lostinblue 1,989]

And none of the people in that church shooting had a gun with some training under their belt. ... It was against the law. Again the police just show up to take names and write the report. .. All these mass murders take place in "gun free " zones ... Ever wonder why?

[spookyturtle 9,465]

And none of the people in that church shooting had a gun with some training under their belt. ... It was against the law. Again the police just show up to take names and write the report. .. All these mass murders take place in "gun free " zones ... Ever wonder why?

An armed citizen with proper training would cut down the carnage is many of these incidents. The cowards always go places were they know they will not face any resistance.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

But these stats don't show the outcome of when good guy with gun encounters bad guy with gun. I will guarantee that 90%+ of the 8855 homicide victims were unarmed. These stats prove nothing about the effectiveness of owning a gun for self defense.

Where is the proof that many - or for that matter any - armed victim would actually be able to fend off the perp? What we do know is that guns that are meant to protect a household are more likely to harm a member of that household than to protect it. We know that women in households with guns are more likely to die as a result of domestic disputes. We know that guns are used to snuff out some 30-35 thousand lives annually in this country. That's what we know. All this stuff about the armed citizenry driving down and preventing crime is wishful thinking based on watching too many movies and not much else.

[Teddy B 17,252]

But these stats don't show the outcome of when good guy with gun encounters bad guy with gun. I will guarantee that 90%+ of the 8855 homicide victims were unarmed. These stats prove nothing about the effectiveness of owning a gun for self defense.

In Vermont a gun is 100% effective all of the time.

[spookyturtle 9,465]

Where is the proof that many - or for that matter any - armed victim would actually be able to fend off the perp? What we do know is that guns that are meant to protect a household are more likely to harm a member of that household than to protect it. We know that women in households with guns are more likely to die as a result of domestic disputes. We know that guns are used to snuff out some 30-35 thousand lives annually in this country. That's what we know. All this stuff about the armed citizenry driving down and preventing crime is wishful thinking based on watching too many movies and not much else.

Nothing to do with watching movies.. The huge majority of homicide victims are not armed, but the people who murder them are.

I'd rather be the one with the gun and take my chances.

In Vermont a gun is 100% effective all of the time.

Vermont has no crime because everyone is afraid of Gary and OriZ.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Nothing to do with watching movies.. The huge majority of homicide victims are not armed, but the people who murder them are.

I'd rather be the one with the gun and take my chances.

Of course it does. In real life, one lives safer without a gun in the house. That's just a simple fact.