Real world examples of guns preventing crime and saving lives.

Here are some real world events, not based on surveys or studies, about guns saving lives and preventing crime.

Concealed carrier stops a mass stabber - If guns were illegal, this still would have happened. If guns were illegal, that armed citizen couldn't have stopped it. Who knows how many more would have been hurt before it could have been stopped.


Woman defends her home from home invaders - no shots fired, intruder ran at the sight of the gun.

Home owner shoots and kills an intruder.

Store clerk attacked with a cattle prod, store owner scares him off with gun.


15 year old boy uses father's AR15 to defend his home - Who says AR15s aren't good for self-defense?

Robber armed with firearm is stopped by the store owner with a firearm

Threatening man with a gun shot by one of the people he was threatening

Business owner detains thieves with shotgun.

Pharmacy owner shoots and kills one intruder armed with a firearm

Another case of an armed civilian defending himself against an armed attacker

Father defends his child in self-defense, nothing is more heat-warming than that. - This was is particularly interesting. Everyone says if you're robbed at gun point, do what they say. Apparently that wasn't enough for this robber. After the robber began to run off, he turned around and again pointed his gun at the father and his son. So much for the cooperation defense.

Armed citizen shoots and kills attacker at a gas station.

Homeowner shoots two intruders in home invasion.

Two intruders again shot by a homeowner

Man defends himself against psychotic neighbor.

Neighbor holds burglars at gun point.

Simulation of armed school personnel appears to be effective.

Mother shoots home invader 5 times, he lives. - If this mother had faced more than one attacker, she might be dead right now. This is why I'm opposed to magazine capacity limits.

Father shoots and kills intruder trying to break into his daughters' bedroom. - Another instance of a parent defending his child's life.

Concealed carrier shows restraint, does not open fire on his attacker

Man shoots and kills attacker with knife.

Woman holds fugitive at gun point after her husband was beaten

Gun carrying employee stops robbery attempt

Another person who detains a criminal with a gun.

I've only scratched the surface of these reports and most of them have happened within the past month. Feel free to add to this list, there are plenty more.

 

Interesting. This almost makes a point.

So the person tried to knock to see if anyone was home, and the homeowner didn't respond. So the "bad guy" breaks in, and runs away as soon as he sees her holding a gun. What if she'd been holding a bat, or a knife? Did he run partly because he is a thief (more cowardly than violent, as offenders go) and wasn't prepared to deal with a resident? Did the gun really have anything to do with this?

So someone is trying to get into the guy's residence (he hasn't gotten in yet, according to the story) and the homeowner shoots him? Was it a drunk coming home from a party who had the wrong apartment (I noticed some pot was found on the scene)? At what point were the police called? Without clarification, all this story says is that someone shot someone else in a public place (apartment building common area) before the police could arrive. If anything, this is in support of gun control.

Some idiot expected a cattle prod to knock out the target like a taser, and ran when it didn't work... The same result could arguably have happened with ANY weapon the clerk pulled, or perhaps without a weapon. Again, the gun is of little consequence in this story.

Link appears to be broken...

People willing to pull guns have good reason to believe that most people will suddenly decide to listen to them... That's why some people become braver about fulfilling their crime fantasies when they have access to firearms. If the robber in this case hadn't had a gun, would there have been an incident in the first place? Because this story starts of with a "bad guy with a gun", isn't it a story in support of gun control?

After looking at the first few, I can see that these are questionable at best and choose not to look through them all at this stage.

You'll need to have 11,458 examples of lives clearly being saved by the presence of a gun. That's how many gun deaths (not including accidents) there were in the US last year. If guns have saved fewer lives than this, your point is moot.

 

this country's business isn't any of yours, subject. Go fix your knife violence first

 

-10 Internet troll points.

 

Guns deter countless crimes from taking place. If rapists knew that every woman alone in her own home was vulnerable and defenseless...
The chance that even 1 out of 10 of them have have a gun, and could shoot the rapist dead, is enough to make them think twice.

Many businesses in really bad neighborhoods are finding that security cameras do not do a thing to stop shoplifting. The shoplifters are so blatent they just waltz in and grab whatever they want. The criminals are rarely caught by police, who are overburdened with investigations, and have much higher priorities, because of all the violent crime happening all around them. In some cases, the only way these little businesses can survive is to have a shotgun behind the counter.

"I grew up in Los Angeles when gun laws were few and crime was low. Now, 40 years and many gun laws later.. detectives complain that the caseload is too great to conduct the thorough investigations that were common in the 40;s and 50’s. It is far worse for lesser crimes, Merchants complain that customers brazenly walk out of their stores without paying for merchandise because they know that the police will not respond (at least in a timely fashion) to a call reporting shoplifting. the police are simply overwhelmed by the sheer volume of crime and are kept fully occupied by murder, armed robbery, and rape. When police arrive at the scene of the crime, the crime has already taken place — the victim has already been murdered, robbed, or raped."
Roger D. McGrath 2003


This friendly Korean family who run a neighborhood convenience store has a gun behind the counter to defend both the merchandise in their store, and themselves. Their store is a constant victim of shoplifting, and robberies on a fairly regular basis.





Yeah, just take away all these store owner's shotguns, and make them completely reliant on the police for protection — police who are 15 minutes away.

 

((((((((((((((((((((sigh)))))))))))))))))) Statistics - why are not more Americans familiar with the BASICS of research and statistics? I mean Heinlein said it when he said “What are the facts? Again and again and again – what are the facts? Shun wishful thinking, ignore divine revelation, forget what “the stars foretell,” avoid opinion, care not what the neighbors think, never mind the unguessable “verdict of history” – what are the facts, and to how many decimal places? You pilot always into an unknown future; facts are your single clue. Get the facts!"
(Time enough for Love R.A. Heinlein)

So, for a start this is anecdotal evidence - in other words without some form of collation it is worthless. And interestingly an American phenomena. Here we are more likely to hear of the person who has defended themselves without a gun
http://www.kolotv.com/home/headlines/103078984.html
http://mikeb302000.blogspot.com.au/2011/10/elderly-unarmed-man-stops-armed-robbery.html
http://penigma.blogspot.com.au/2011/10/unarmed-12-year-old-foils-armed-robbery.html
http://www.eyetheticker.com/my_journalfile/2008/10/unarmed-waitress-foils-bank-robbery.html
http://www.shalomlife.com/news/18118/jewish-group-stops-bank-robber-holds-him-for-police/

And just to balance this on the "armed" side
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/24/u...tal-montana-shooting.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

 

I do not believe justice was done in that case (although I do not know the exact details). And perhaps the Montana's self-defense law is open to abuse, so needs to be more specific about when shooting someone is justified. But this does not have anything to do with whether someone has the right to defend themself. The question in this case was in what exact situation does one have the right to shoot another man to defend oneself.

 

Yes, let's talk about facts, it does not take a genious to know and understand, THE BAD GUYS ALREADY HAVE THE GUNS. Sometimes I feel as though people are just so stuck in little "studies" or "statistics" dancing around in their heads like looney tunes. Tell me what you suggest my wife to do when 3 armed criminals (wether it be guns or another weapon) kicks my door in while I am away? Please answer me this, I am just dying to hear what your super intelligent "gun control" type mentality answer is going to be.

 

A) I am not for gun control but gun safety
b) you must not think much of your wife if you think she is not resourceful enough to find a way out - even if that way is running away as is suggested by police
c) Why do you not have adequate safety measures on your dwelling to prevent this in the first place?
D) stopping a home invasion with a gun is only successful about 5 times out of thousand - so what are you going to do the other 995 times?

 

My wife is 115lbs' we have 3 children, now you are talking about the minute someone kicks the door in, she has to go from room to room get the kids up and out. Not the timliest of circumstances considering to get to the childrens room in my apartment, you must first go through my dining room which is where the door that got kicked is.

 

My point is, when something happens like this, which has been shown to increase when gun control gets too strict, you can't always escape in time, police will never be able to get there in time, you have to be able to defend yourself and your loved ones. Back to the situation at hand, 3 criminals against my tiny wife who wouldn't be able to run because she would have to go by the individuals to get to the children, the ONLY thing she could get to level the playing feild would be a firearm. Anything else would not suffice. A firearm will stop a home invasion 999 times out of 1000 in the correct hands.

 

Citation? I know - some TV show

No a firearm is NOT the only thing she could get - she has something far far better - a brain

and it has NOT shown to stop a firearm 999 out of 1000 - where did you get THAT number - don't tell me please it has the smell of orifice about it

Even the gun sites will tell you that it works 0.5% of the time which sounds great until you realise that is only 5 out of 1000

 

Given my years of active duty service in the USMC infantry, and the fact that my family is scattered across the US, I believe I have as much right to an opinion as you do. The fact that I make arguments that you can't dispute is reflective of the validity of your position, not my qualifications to express an argument.

In other words, suck it up.

 

Let's say I accept that as true...
What is the likelihood of your home being targetted for a home invasion?
What is the likelihood of a member of your family being injured as a direct result of your decision to have a gun in the house?
What is the likelihood of your gun being stolen and used by a criminal to commit further crimes?

Even if the above scenarios have the same likelihood, would you want YOUR DECISION to be the one that caused the death/injury of someone else, possibly a loved one?

In my mind, the DAILY risk to your family that someone could make a mistake outweighs the very remote possibility that the gun could prove useful once.

 

If the academics over at Harvard regularly discuss their research papers on tv, then sure, we can go with that.
http://theacru.org/acru/harvard_study_gun_control_is_counterproductive/

 

http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/early/2012/10/15/peds.2012-2481.full.pdf

You may not be safer without a gun but your kids certainly are

 

It would appear that something is reducing the homicide rate in the last 20 years. If death rates of any other cause had fallen that drastically you would have at least heard promising when addressing the decline. I will agree more needs to be done to further reduce the rate. The economy is worse than 1994 and guns are available in far greater numbers. I would suspect if tough gun control laws had been passed you would have heard promising just need further restrictions to solve the problem. Instead since their has been a lessening of controls since their last report they attempt to save face. It is obvious something has reduced the rate without gun controls. That needs to be explored to continue the drop. Their bias on this issue still shows.

 

Seriously, is this even English?

 

Punctuation could be better but I can understand it. Insults all you got? I was addressing the link BowerBird had posted. If you have issues with my language use not my concern.

 

Read the post again, I stated that a gun in the CORRECT HANDS. My wife DOES have a brain, but I can tell that obviously from your reply to my unanswered question, you are dodging the circumstance. Your views are obtuse and you seem to rather my wife and children become victims instead of being able to stand tall. How could you possibly tell me if three men burst through my door, my wife would be able to run past them, get 3 children up and out and be unharmed. Instead, she could go to the gun safe, grab the M&P 9, and confront who is endangering my family.
I am NOT saying that nothing has to be done about firearms. I DO think it is obsurd that you need no training(except a 4 hour training course). Under the new ban being proposed by Feinstein, many of these guns she wants to ban would indeed save lives. Banning certain weapons will not do anything. If anything, I think training and a way to ensure safe keeping is more in order.

 

My guns are kept in a safe which needs a key and combination. My children are in fact more safe with my firearms in the house. I do not have them lying around in the open. It does not matter the LIKELYHOOD of this situation, it only matters that it takes only one time. Wether that time is likely or not, MY family will be ready for it. This situation would be MORE LIKELY if criminals think my home is unarmed, defensless and an easy target.

 

Crack Cocaine use has dropped off


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-13799616
The article gives 10 possible reasons

 

Good - you are being responsible - now look at how common that is without legislation driving safety as a requirement of firearm ownership

http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/early/2012/10/15/peds.2012-2481.full.pdf

 

Which is why I stated in another thread that you should not ban or restrict guns, you should be required to take classes on self defense with a firearm, safe handling of a firearm and safe keeping of a firearm when you receive an LTC and everytime you renew it. Banning firearms has proved too many times that it creates more victims.

 

The crack issue was the only logical possibility given by the The American Academy of Pediatrics.

The second link was excellent. Far superior to the reasons listed by the other organization. As I said I believe the bias still shows.

Since you are a nurse and more familiar with these things. Are drops of over 60% in the rate of deaths common within a selected age range over a twenty year period? Do medical organizations always appear so unenthusiastic when progress is made? What was your country's gun homicide rate change amongst the same group in that time frame?