How to debunk this.

Discussion in 'Gun Control' started by Maccabee, Aug 5, 2016.

  1. Maccabee

    Maccabee Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2016
    Messages:
    8,901
    Likes Received:
    1,062
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    In another forum I'm debating with a pro gun control advocate and she was saying that guns don't offer any advantage in self defense and provided this link.

    http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0091743515001188

    Not quite sure how to debunk it though.

    If you want context of the discussion here it is.

    https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=67073.0

    Yes, it's a flat earth site but both me and the one I'm debating are round earth advocates. The link she gave is on page 10.
     
  2. vman12

    vman12 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2015
    Messages:
    66,645
    Likes Received:
    46,476
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I bet if this woman in NYC had a gun, the outcome would have been different.

    http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime...ut-up-a-ferocious-fight/ar-BBvicCx?li=BBnbfcL

    Ask her which she would rather have if a guy attacked her and tried to rape her: a gun, or her fists.
     
  3. DoctorWho

    DoctorWho Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2016
    Messages:
    15,501
    Likes Received:
    3,740
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I know that My life experience is proof that Guns are a necessary part of life for Defensive purposes, Anti Gun advocates routinely discount life experience as anecdotal evidence yet quote blind meaningless statistics that lump all shootings together, justified shootings with Criminal acts, this serves the purposes of Gun Ban advocates as they wish to blur the lines between self Defense and Crime in an effort to ban firearms.
     
  4. An Taibhse

    An Taibhse Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2016
    Messages:
    7,238
    Likes Received:
    4,819
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The study was conducted by the continually debunked Hemingway who has tried to make a career out of a poorly constructed, bad statistical study Where the 2013 CDC report discounted his studies. It is, as you know, the one based on a sampling of 127 GDU incidence?

    Regardless, I could go into detail why the study is flawed and even show in the article that the authors reveal their limitations, but it doesn't matter. The following is the elephant in the room that none of these these anti-gun ownership so called scientific studies address and is the knife in their studies...

    In 2008 there were about 225 million guns in the US. In 2013, the ATF figured there were 357million guns.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...and-then-some/

    In 2014, we added another nearly 21million guns.

    https://www.fbi.gov/file-repository/...ort-050115.pdf

    In 2015, we added another 23 million guns

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...ord-high-2015/

    And so far in 2016, we have added another 16 million guns

    http://www.breitbart.com/big-governm...ground-checks/

    Bringing us to a potential total of around 417 million guns (new numbers represent FFL background checks for transfers of mostly new guns and does not take in account the estimates of an additional 30-70% of private transfers of existing guns)

    So, from 2008 to July of 2016 we have increased the number of guns in the US by 50-53%. The number of suicides annually by gun has remained around the same, about 20,000 per year. Gun related deaths in all other categories has been declining annually and are about 1/2 what they were in the 90's. So, for all the BS about correlations, that is the elephant in the room. If there were a direct correlation that would indicate causation, the increase in guns would have caused a massive correlating increase in suicides and gun deaths in general and that is just simply not the case.

    So all the studies showing the correlations of the dangers of gun ownership are bunk unless they can account for the common sense numbers. This simple show of numbers debunks the article that was shared...
     
  5. Pardy

    Pardy Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2013
    Messages:
    10,437
    Likes Received:
    166
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Guns aren't necessary for survival.

    Gun worshipers can't imagine a world without guns.
     
  6. Maccabee

    Maccabee Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2016
    Messages:
    8,901
    Likes Received:
    1,062
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    In some cases yes it is essential but that's not what I'm arguing about. I'm contending that owning a gun is beneficial.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Thanks, although she'll write it off as an anecdote.
     
  7. An Taibhse

    An Taibhse Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2016
    Messages:
    7,238
    Likes Received:
    4,819
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Visit Alaska with that attitude and you will end up bear poop.
     
  8. vman12

    vman12 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2015
    Messages:
    66,645
    Likes Received:
    46,476
    Trophy Points:
    113
    It was necessary for this police officer 6 days ago.

    http://bearingarms.com/bob-o/2016/07/29/concealed-carrier-saved-officer-attack/

    - - - Updated - - -

    Her death would also be an anecdote.
     
  9. Befuddled Alien

    Befuddled Alien Member

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2016
    Messages:
    447
    Likes Received:
    10
    Trophy Points:
    18
    This would be true only if a saturation point was not reached. It could be that a point was reached beyond which an increase in firearm ownership will not increase suicides. This also assumes that all gun sales are going to new gun owners. I would imagine that a large percent of those gun sales are going to people who already own guns. So there would not be an increase in suicide rate for those arms.

    Generally speaking, studies do NOT have to account for any "common sense" numbers. It is amazing how often so called 'common sense' logic is scientifically wrong. That's why they don't use 'feelings' in science.

    That said, here is a study on gun related suicide. Their conclusion from the abstract:

    "Data from a US mortality follow-back survey were analyzed to determine whether having a firearm in the home increases the risk of a violent death in the home and whether risk varies by storage practice, type of gun, or number of guns in the home. Those persons with guns in the home were at greater risk than those without guns in the home of dying from a homicide in the home (adjusted odds ratio = 1.9, 95% confidence interval: 1.1, 3.4). They were also at greater risk of dying from a firearm homicide, but risk varied by age and whether the person was living with others at the time of death. The risk of dying from a suicide in the home was greater for males in homes with guns than for males without guns in the home (adjusted odds ratio = 10.4, 95% confidence interval: 5.8, 18.9). Persons with guns in the home were also more likely to have died from suicide committed with a firearm than from one committed by using a different method (adjusted odds ratio = 31.1, 95% confidence interval: 19.5, 49.6)." - Guns in the Home and Risk of a Violent Death in the Home: Findings from a National Study, Linda L. Dahlberg et.al. Link

    I am NOT saying that guns should or should not be regulated based on this data or position but, the data itself is pretty clear.
     
  10. DoctorWho

    DoctorWho Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2016
    Messages:
    15,501
    Likes Received:
    3,740
    Trophy Points:
    113
    She likes to call those that give accounts of having used Guns for Defensive purposes Liars, however loves to use unsubstantiated web sites statistics to bolster her Anti-gun Agenda.
     
  11. Zorro

    Zorro Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    Messages:
    76,433
    Likes Received:
    51,246
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The police only need whistles.
     
  12. An Taibhse

    An Taibhse Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2016
    Messages:
    7,238
    Likes Received:
    4,819
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Completely baseless statement.


    Again, baseless...you have no data to support that. However, there are a number of sources that show numbers of guns are increasing.

    http://www.ammoland.com/2016/01/ma-7-8-increase-in-gun-ownership-in-2015/

    Aside from that article adedotal evidence from my are is showing a huge surge. The number of ranges have tripled in the last 5 years alone in my area. The number of gun classes has surged and virtually every class category from CCW, advanced classes, force on force, etc. has no only increased dramatically in numbers, but virtually every class is filled. Five years ago, I saw few women in gun classes, now there are significant numbers in every category, including all women classes, women's range nights, and a surge in products specifically for women. I have several friends that didn't have guns five years ago, including a few that are gun control advocates, that have had me help them select guns and train them. Gun ownership is increasing dramatically by the numbers we are seeing in the shops, but they aren't numbers you will likely see in polls because people are less willing to indicate to a pollster they own a gun.


    BS. What I provided was not 'feelings' but reliable numbers. Science must account for what is observed and the observation and numbers don't support the narratives for anti-gun biased studies, thus the studies are not accounting for all the variables, but doing junk science.

    Again, junk science... You cannot derive causation from the correlations they are attempting to extrapolate...

    http://www.michaelnielsen.org/ddi/if-correlation-doesnt-imply-causation-then-what-does/
    https://techxplore.com/news/2016-07-scientists-technique-combining-massive.html
     
  13. vman12

    vman12 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2015
    Messages:
    66,645
    Likes Received:
    46,476
    Trophy Points:
    113
    So your stance is that guns CAUSE people to kill themselves? If so, where is there no global correlation, in any country, on suicide and gun ownership?

    The countries with the highest suicide rates have low to zero guns per capita.
     
  14. vman12

    vman12 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2015
    Messages:
    66,645
    Likes Received:
    46,476
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yeah they should get rid of all their insurance, needing that is anecdotal too.

    If some fool wants to think they are in a better position being defenseless, then let them. The only reason we have so many of these people in society is because they've been protected and coddled their whole lives.

    In a dangerous situation they'll do exactly what the BLM protestors did in Dallas....run towards people that could protect their unarmed ***.
     
  15. DoctorWho

    DoctorWho Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2016
    Messages:
    15,501
    Likes Received:
    3,740
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Guns are necessary for Survival, for Defensive purposes, for hunting, to control predators, Rabid animals, escaped Zoo critters.

    I worship not Guns or any material object, or false gods or Idols or celebrities and I do know what a Country without guns is, We have them, Totalitarian Regimes, Dictatorships, Communist Countries, Monarchies, Countries like England / U.K. and Australia etc......
     
  16. Befuddled Alien

    Befuddled Alien Member

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2016
    Messages:
    447
    Likes Received:
    10
    Trophy Points:
    18
    I don't doubt that it is. I am only questioning your statement that ... "So, from 2008 to July of 2016 we have increased the number of guns in the US by 50-53%". Are you trying to say that all of those sales are first time gun owners? If not, then saying that "The number of suicides annually by gun has remained around the same, about 20,000 per year. Gun related deaths in all other categories has been declining annually and are about 1/2 what they were in the 90's." is ALSO a false correlation to make.[/QUOTE]

    I don't doubt that gun sales and gun ownership have increased. Not sure where you got that idea.

    I didn't say that what you provided was 'feelings'. What I said was, "Generally speaking, studies do NOT have to account for any "common sense" numbers. It is amazing how often so called 'common sense' logic is scientifically wrong. That's why they don't use 'feelings' in science"[/QUOTE]


    At this point I have to just assume you didn't actually read any of the paper I cited. Nowhere does the study imply a correlation other than "Those persons with guns in the home were at greater risk than those without guns in the home of dying from a homicide in the home" and "The risk of dying from a suicide in the home was greater for males in homes with guns than for males without guns in the home"

    Please explain why you consider this to be 'junk science'. It was published in a peer reviewed journal. Do you disagree with those statements?

    You seem to think that I am trying to make an argument that 'GUNS = BAD' ... I'm not, and said as much
     
  17. An Taibhse

    An Taibhse Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2016
    Messages:
    7,238
    Likes Received:
    4,819
    Trophy Points:
    113


    I don't doubt that gun sales and gun ownership have increased. Not sure where you got that idea.

    I didn't say that what you provided was 'feelings'. What I said was, "Generally speaking, studies do NOT have to account for any "common sense" numbers. It is amazing how often so called 'common sense' logic is scientifically wrong. That's why they don't use 'feelings' in science"[/QUOTE]

    No worries... I will respond... For now I am off to do a bit of fly fishing for trout for a couple days to test a few bamboo fly rods with experimental tapers I just finished building... There's a science to that as well...



    At this point I have to just assume you didn't actually read any of the paper I cited. Nowhere does the study imply a correlation other than "Those persons with guns in the home were at greater risk than those without guns in the home of dying from a homicide in the home" and "The risk of dying from a suicide in the home was greater for males in homes with guns than for males without guns in the home"

    Please explain why you consider this to be 'junk science'. It was published in a peer reviewed journal. Do you disagree with those statements?

    You seem to think that I am trying to make an argument that 'GUNS = BAD' ... I'm not, and said as much[/QUOTE]
     
  18. Guyzilla

    Guyzilla Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2016
    Messages:
    13,230
    Likes Received:
    2,062
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Guns are an accident waiting to happen, that is more likely to get you dead from your own means etc, till you need one.
     
  19. DoctorWho

    DoctorWho Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2016
    Messages:
    15,501
    Likes Received:
    3,740
    Trophy Points:
    113
    My guns have already saved my life more times than I can count, and ended the Careers of many hardened Criminals, there is no Parole from the Cemetery.....
     
  20. DoctorWho

    DoctorWho Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2016
    Messages:
    15,501
    Likes Received:
    3,740
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Says a guy that knows absolutely nothing about firearms save an irrational fear of firearms.


    Trollzilla
     
  21. vman12

    vman12 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2015
    Messages:
    66,645
    Likes Received:
    46,476
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Statistically false.

    There are only around 500-600 accidental gun deaths per year, and even from liberal sources a projected 100k+ defensive uses, which makes your statement patently false.

    The people who tend to die in gun accidents are people like this

    [​IMG]
     
  22. OrlandoChuck

    OrlandoChuck Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2013
    Messages:
    6,002
    Likes Received:
    1,313
    Trophy Points:
    113
    People with swimming pools have an increased chance of drowning.
    Women with prescription medication in the home are less likely to use a gun to committ suicide.
     
  23. dadoalex

    dadoalex Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2012
    Messages:
    10,645
    Likes Received:
    2,059
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Uh-huh...

    But where were the the group she jogs with? If she'd gone with only one more person she'd have been safer. All the presence of the gun guarantees is that the bad guy probably ends up with the gun. It doesn't stop the attack, doesn't imply she'd have an opportunity to use the weapon, doesn't imply she'd use it successfully.

    Safety in numbers.
     
  24. Greataxe

    Greataxe Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2011
    Messages:
    9,400
    Likes Received:
    1,348
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I see no logic in your statement. If guns are going to be more likely taken away by the bad guys before they can be used by the rightful gun user, then there would be thousands and thousands of dead cops each year who died from their own weapons during arrests in the US alone. (only a few are).

    Also, our infantry would have little chance of using their arms in combat as the Taliban and ISIS would simple just walk up to them and take them away.

    Also, you must have some sort of hard data on the numbers of the millions of concealed carry private citizens who (according to you) would naturally be disarmed most of the time during criminal encounters.
     
  25. OrlandoChuck

    OrlandoChuck Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2013
    Messages:
    6,002
    Likes Received:
    1,313
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Self defense gun uses happen every day.... So yes, they do save innocent lives.

    http://www.politicalforum.com/gun-control/438886-2016-what-armed-self-defense-looks-like.html

    Here is nearly 500 pages of successful instances of firearm self defense.

    https://www.nraila.org/gun-laws/?pa...Date=&search=&contentBuckets=8176#latest-news
     

Share This Page