More Guns Means More "Gun Deaths"

I saw that someone posted this little bit of relatively useless information on facebook. Now, naturally, many folks will interpret this to mean that anyone having a gun is likely to use it to kill someone else. But, let's look a little deeper into this bit of folk 'wisdom'.

Firstly, I would note that if in fact there are more 'gun deaths' and also an increase in the number of guns, it is logical that an increasing number of people killed by the gun were shot by a legal gun owner defending his or her life and or property. That is a good thing.

It is also logical to think that many of the possessors of "more guns" are bad guys, criminals and crooks who are busy doing each other in. This is also a good thing.

A good argument can also be made that with an increase in the number of citizens owning and legally carrying guns for self defense, the number of citizen (read: good people) deaths have decreased since criminals are less likely to rob, assault and try to kill someone whom they suspect is armed. This fits nicely with the notion that the bad guys are doing themselves in more frequently.

On the other side, let's say that there were far fewer guns, that citizens were prohibited from owning or carrying guns. Then, I'd agree that the number of "gun deaths" might decrease overall, but would definitely increase for the poor, defenseless public.

Making bald, unsupported and ambiguous statements like "more guns equal more gun deaths" is like saying "more cars equal more car deaths". Maybe, but getting to what that really means, if it is true at all, requires honesty, research and an unbiased desire to get at the truth.


Like Mark Twain said, there are "Lies, Damn Lies and Statistics".

Here are a few facts, not biased in one way or the other, just facts that can be checked for accuracy. From "Gun Control Facts." By James D. Agresti and Reid K. Smith. Just Facts, September 13, 2010. Revised 12/28/12.

A note about the research by Agresti and Smith:

This research is based upon the most recent available data in 2010. Facts from earlier years are cited based upon availability and relevance, not to slant results by singling out specific years that are different from others. Likewise, data associated with the effects of gun control laws in various geographical areas represent random, demographically diverse places in which such data is available.

Many aspects of the gun control issue are best measured and sometimes can only be measured through surveys, but the accuracy of such surveys depends upon respondents providing truthful answers to questions that are sometimes controversial and potentially incriminating. Thus, Just Facts uses such data critically, citing the best-designed surveys we find, detailing their inner workings in our footnotes, and using the most cautious plausible interpretations of the results.

Particularly, when statistics are involved, the determination of what constitutes a credible fact (and what does not) can contain elements of personal subjectivity. It is our mission to minimize subjective information and to provide highly factual content. Therefore, we are taking the additional step of providing readers with four examples to illustrate the type of material that was excluded because it did not meet Just Facts' Standards of Credibility.

See the link below for the source of the facts to follow and to see more for yourself:
 http://justfacts.com/guncontrol.asp:


In 2011 the US had a murder rate of 4.7 per 100,000. Chicago alone (known for their strict gun laws, even banning handguns) had a murder rate of 15.9. The last time our murder rate was below 4.7 was in 1963. State of Vermont allows anybody who can legally own a firearm to be able to carry it without a permit. Their murder rate is .4 per 100,000

According toBureau of Justice Statistics numbers, each year between 1987 and 1992 about 62,200 victims of violent crimes used guns to defend themselves, while another 20,000 annually used guns to protect property. According to the National Self-Defense Survey conducted by criminology professor Gary Kleck of Florida State University in 1993, Americans used guns 2.3 million times a year to defend themselves between 1988 and 1993.

A 1982 survey of male felons in 11 state prisons dispersed across the U.S. found:[21]

• 34% had been "scared off, shot at, wounded, or captured by an armed victim"
• 40% had decided not to commit a crime because they "knew or believed that the victim was carrying a gun"
• 69% personally knew other criminals who had been "scared off, shot at, wounded, or captured by an armed victim"[22]

A 1993 nationwide survey of 4,977 households found that over the previous five years, at least 3.5% of households had members who had used a gun "for self-protection or for the protection of property at home, work, or elsewhere." Applied to the U.S. population, this amounts to 1,029,615 such incidents per year. This figure excludes all "military service, police work, or work as a security guard."[19]

A Defensive Shooting - What Happens to You After?

Legally carrying a gun, training how and when to use it, understanding of your legal and social responsibilities are all prerequisites for the responsible citizen. Knowing what may happen after one must use a gun in self defense, understanding your legal rights and what you should, and should NOT do, are just as important. The best way to get this vital information is to take a quality class taught by someone with experience, knowledge and your interests at heart. I took such a class offered by Colorado Handgun Safety and wrote about it on this blog:

http://sdcarry.blogspot.com/2012/03/legal-aftermath-of-defensive-shooting.html

This class is being offered again and I urge all of my Colorado readers to attend. Read my blog entry to see why.

This is important!

The Legal Aftermath of Defensive Shooting: Taught by an attorney - A great follow-up for concealed carry permit holders.

This class is three and one-half hour presentation of Colorado concealed carry and firearms law, taught by a practicing attorney. This class will include a review of Colorado use of force case studies both justified and unjustified, legal definitions, and the "Make My Day Law" as well as question and answer opportunities with the attorney. If you wondered, "What is Next?" after your concealed handgun class, this is it. The Legal Aftermath of Defensive Shooting class will detail how there are only two outcomes to a defensive shooting: Complete Justification or the loss of your freedom.Your concealed handgun class gave you a basic overview of concealed carry law. The Legal Aftermath class provides you the opportunity to ask an attorney all of the "What-IFs" you have wondered about. Presented by Colorado Handgun Safety Inc. and our Attorney, The Legal Aftermath class is designed to give you a greater understanding and peace of mind about your abilities and responsibilities when carry a concealed firearm and defending yourself or your home.
This class is designed for gun owners who have their concealed handgun permit or have attended a concealed handgun permit class.

View Class Schedule and  Reserve your class now

Visit     http://www.coloradohandgunsafety.com for more information.

A Few Facts About Carrying a Gun for Self Defense

There is a source available on the internet for facts concerning many important topics and issues. Gun Control is one of these. The source is Just Facts. This is a valuable and important source for all gun owners and self-defense carry people to know about and be familiar with because, in the current gun debate, facts are the best tools you can have.

What distinguishes this resource from many other internet "fact sources" is the site's care to be unbiased and to avoid skewed and inaccurate data.

In JustFacts introductory note they say:

"This research is based upon the most recent available data in 2010. Facts from earlier years are cited based upon availability and relevance, not to slant results by singling out specific years that are different from others. Likewise, data associated with the effects of gun control laws in various geographical areas represent random, demographically diverse places in which such data is available.

Many aspects of the gun control issue are best measured and sometimes can only be measured through surveys, but the accuracy of such surveys depends upon respondents providing truthful answers to questions that are sometimes controversial and potentially incriminating. Thus, Just Facts uses such data critically, citing the best-designed surveys we find, detailing their inner workings in our footnotes, and using the most cautious plausible interpretations of the results.

Particularly, when statistics are involved, the determination of what constitutes a credible fact (and what does not) can contain elements of personal subjectivity. It is our mission to minimize subjective information and to provide highly factual content. Therefore, we are taking the additional step of providing readers with four examples to illustrate the type of material that was excluded because it did not meet Just Facts'Standards of Credibility."

Justfacts.com is one research source I can rely upon to provide fact-based information from which I can draw my own conclusions. To that end, I present some interesting facts gleaned from their site relevant to those who carry for self defense, and also to those who oppose self-defense carry out of ignorance, or because they don't understand the, well... facts.

Number of gun owners in the US

According to private firearms manufacturers data in 2010, there are between 40 and 45 million adults who own handguns.

A 2005 Gallup poll indicates there are 100 million adults who own guns of different types. In the same poll, 67% said they owned guns for self protection.

Why is having a gun for self protection necessary?

Some facts (from the Justfacts.com website. See the site for additional references and support for the information listed below.):

1. A 1993 nationwide survey of 4,977 households found that over the previous five years, at least 0.5% of households had members who had used a gun for defense during a situation in which they thought someone "almost certainly would have been killed" if they "had not used a gun for protection." Applied to the U.S. population, this amounts to 162,000 such incidents per year. This figure excludes all "military service, police work, or work as a security guard." 
2. Based on survey data from the U.S. Department of Justice, roughly 5,340,000 violent crimes were committed in the United States during 2008. These include simple/aggravated assaults, robberies, sexual assaults, rapes, and murders. Of these, about 436,000 or 8% were committed by offenders visibly armed with a gun.
3. Based on survey data from a 2000 study published in the Journal of Quantitative Criminology, U.S. civilians use guns to defend themselves and others from crime at least 989,883 times per year.
4. A 1993 nationwide survey of 4,977 households found that over the previous five years, at least 3.5% of households had members who had used a gun "for self-protection or for the protection of property at home, work, or elsewhere." Applied to the U.S. population, this amounts to 1,029,615 such incidents per year. This figure excludes all "military service, police work, or work as a security guard."
5. A 1994 survey conducted by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found that Americans use guns to frighten away intruders who are breaking into their homes about 498,000 times per year.
6. A 1982 survey of male felons in 11 state prisons dispersed across the U.S. found:

• • 34% had been "scared off, shot at, wounded, or captured by an armed victim"
• • 40% had decided not to commit a crime because they "knew or believed that the victim was carrying a gun"
• • 69% personally knew other criminals who had been "scared off, shot at, wounded, or captured by an armed victim"

The last, number 6, should be especially relevant to those who support self-defense carry.

Those are some facts pertaining to the usefulness of a gun in preventing violent crime. How vulnerable are we? Consider this:

 At the current homicide rate, roughly one in every 240 Americans will be murdered.

A U.S. Justice Department study based on crime data from 1974-1985 found:

• 42% of Americans will be the victim of a completed violent crime (assault, robbery, rape) in the course of their lives

• 83% of Americans will be the victim of an attempted or completed violent crime

• 52% of Americans will be the victim of an attempted or completed violent crime more than once

A 1997 survey of more than 18,000 prison inmates found that among those serving time for a violent crime, "30% of State offenders and 35% of Federal offenders carried a firearm when committing the crime."

Justfacts goes on to show interesting charts describing the effects of various anti-handgun legislation passed in different locations. You can see these yourself on their site, but the summary is that where anti-handgun legislation is passed that inhibits the citizens from owning and carrying a gun for self protection, the incident of violent crime increases. When those restrictions are struck down, not surprisingly, the incidents of violent crime perpetrated against citizens goes down. Not a big surprise to most of us.

Why this information is important.

In the continuing national debate over gun control, which I think should be about violence control, it is important to have a good grasp of the facts. Every time I have argued this issue with someone opposed to guns, I have found that they do not know the basic facts about guns and self protection. They are working from rhetoric, falsehoods and, in many cases, just plain fear of guns. 

My response is usually to point out that it is a free country, that they don't have to own or carry a gun, but in fact, they depend upon someone for their protection who does carry a gun when thing go bad. As they frequently do, facts tell us. And, given this, all law-abiding citizens of the United States have the right to keep and bear arms in self defense in order to assist us in our constitutional rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. And, conversely, no one has the right to prevent me from exercising those freedoms.

When the criminals and crazies can no longer have guns, or knives, or baseball bats, or screwdrivers, cars, explosives, ice picks, poisons or any other implement that can be turned into a deadly weapon, I might consider giving up my guns.

Not likely....

Elsie Pea; Block Training; Police Chief; Lasers again

My Moderator's Logo from the old Elsie Pea Forum

Not too long ago, last year, the old Elsie Pea Forum (LCP) was sold off to an organization that runs forums. Many of them. The Elsie Pea Forum had grown to over 10,000 members and it was all five of us could do to keep things in check. We prided ourselves in stopping spam before it got started, keeping the atmosphere polite, if not cordial, preventing flame wars and keeping posters to the topic: no religion, no politics, no hatred. I will admit that there were times when this was trying, but if truth be told, the members themselves were very good about policing the forum and keeping troublemakers in line. If the members couldn't reign them in, the moderators did.

I was a big fan of Have Gun, Will Travel when I was as kid. I still think it was a TV show ahead of it's time, so I picked the logo, above, as my moderator calling card. I still moderate, but a much smaller forum where many of the Elsie Pea refugees hang out. http://www.compactcarryforum.com

Have Gun. Will Carry

Of course, it is more than that as anyone who has carried a concealed handgun for any time will tell you. Lately, I've been around the block more than once over dealing with the extra baggage that comes along with concealed carry. Like many of you, I have a drawer full of holsters (and I only have three carry guns), extra magazines, laser sights, night sights, special springs and recoil rods, gun safes, various cleaning do-dads and storage and carry boxes.

Now, the entire picture is complicated by my use and evaluation of laser sighting devices. Saving the topic of the utility and usefulness of laser sights on a concealed carry handgun for another time, one big factor became apparent right away. When I received a Laserguard from Crimson Trace for my LCP I was faced right away with the fact that, other than a Versacarry rig, I had nothing to carry it in.

At this point, over the last two months with the CT, I have had it on and off the gun three or four times. I do now have a Jeff Hays cross draw OWB holster, which is very nice indeed and works better than any cross draw holster I've found so far, and I have acquired a Remora with attached mag pouch for it. However, my other holsters, carefully pared down from many I tried that fit right, work right and will last a long time do not work with the Laserguard. Hence, off with the laser and, like today around the house, on with the Bullard Bodyguard and LCP.

Having a laser on my gun is pretty nifty, although the jury is still out as to whether a Crimson Trace or LaserMax will find it's way on one of my carry guns permanently. But not being able to carry it as I wish, in the style and quality of holsters that I require, is a big stumbling block. But, I'll report more on this after the LaserMax units arrive for testing alongside the Crimson Trace.

Block Training

I got an email, and later a follow up phone conversation, with a small group nearby composed of experienced former LEO and NRA Firearms Trainers who have come up with a very good idea. I call it Block Training. It works like this. They have essentially taken a general two-day intensive handgun and self-defense training class and broken it down into 2 to 2 1/2 hour blocks. This way a person can afford to begin improving his or her real-world handgun self-defense skills without having to pony up a few hundred dollars for the course, lodging, meals and a thousand rounds of ammo all at once.

I hope to be able to attend one of the first class blocks and report on this concept in more detail here.

Police Chief

The Chief in one of the local towns nearby is leaving after a long military and police career. One of the more interesting things he had to say was that he, along with many other in law enforcement, support the 2nd Amendment right to keep and bear arms. To walk the talk, he is planning to set up and conduct concealed carry classes in our area. Now, if you want to take one, it is at least a two hour drive, and if you don't want to wait until they get around to holding a class within that range, you can drive another hour or two. I'm looking forward to that and it's got me thinking about getting my instructor qualifications and helping out.

Lasers Again

I've already whined about lasers and holsters, so I'll spare you that. The update is that I am waiting on what I have been assured by LaserMax is a package with at least one laser sight evaluation unit, plus other materials. If I don't see it this week, I'll be following up with them. Once that arrives, and the snow melts and the ground dries, I will be able to get some range time with both models and have some  personal experience that I can hopefully translate into useful information.

Actual Facts

I have been in correspondence with many of my state and national legislators, and have written my views directly to the White House. In response, and in some stories I have read in various media, people who are pushing an agenda often quote supposed "facts" in order to substantiate their claims and viewpoints. Now, there is nothing wrong with using facts to oppose or support a given topic, but often what are presented as "facts" are not objective and real. Many statistics and so-called facts are not without bias, sometimes extreme. One example I have seen references a study that if a certain measure were to be passed by the legislature, it would cost the average person over $700 per year more to pay their basic expenses - food, utilities, rent, etc. While this may be true in the aggregate, the study failed to take into consideration a projected $300 per year general cost of living increase, whether the measure under discussion passed or not. The real fact was a $400 increase, not $700.

There is an organization of researchers who find and publish actual factual data, regardless of whether anyone agrees with them or not. It is really not a matter of debate, but of provable fact derived from actual data. Studies with a high degree of objectivity and integrity. Statutes. Laws. Regulations. See them at http://www.justfacts.com

The, of course, have a section on gun control. It is quite extensive, even containing relevant state and federal statutes. At the beginning, there is a very interesting section of facts that anyone engaging in reasonable and rational discussions about firearms and violence should be familiar with. There are frequently 'facts' quoted in the media that seem to indicate that guns in the hands of citizens don't deter crime. However, the statistics and facts compiled by this organization speak otherwise.

I encourage you all to visit www.justfacts.com and see for yourself, but I am also quoting the beginning part of their section on gun control that I think can serve as good information to educate those who are opposed to gun ownership out of fear, misunderstanding and reliance on biased 'facts'.

From www.justfacts.com

"Gun Control Facts." By James D. Agresti and Reid K. Smith. Just Facts, September 13, 2010. Revised 12/28/12. http://justfacts.com/guncontrol.asp Finding What You Want » Click on the footnote numbers for meticulous documentation of each fact. Introductory Notes This research is based upon the most recent available data in 2010. Facts from earlier years are cited based upon availability and relevance, not to slant results by singling out specific years that are different from others. Likewise, data associated with the effects of gun control laws in various geographical areas represent random, demographically diverse places in which such data is available. Many aspects of the gun control issue are best measured and sometimes can only be measured through surveys,[1] but the accuracy of such surveys depends upon respondents providing truthful answers to questions that are sometimes controversial and potentially incriminating.[2] Thus, Just Facts uses such data critically, citing the best-designed surveys we find, detailing their inner workings in our footnotes, and using the most cautious plausible interpretations of the results. Particularly, when statistics are involved, the determination of what constitutes a credible fact (and what does not) can contain elements of personal subjectivity. It is our mission to minimize subjective information and to provide highly factual content. Therefore, we are taking the additional step of providing readers with four examples to illustrate the type of material that was excluded because it did not meet Just Facts' Standards of Credibility. Ownership * As of 2009, the United States has a population of 307 million people.[5] * Based on production data from firearm manufacturers,[6] there are roughly 300 million firearms owned by civilians in the United States as of 2010. Of these, about 100 million are handguns.[7] * Based upon surveys, the following are estimates of private firearm ownership in the U.S. as of 2010:  Households With a Gun  Adults Owning a Gun  Adults Owning a Handgun Percentage  40-45%  30-34%  17-19% Number  47-53 million  70-80 million  40-45 million [8] * A 2005 nationwide Gallup poll of 1,012 adults found the following levels of firearm ownership: Category  Percentage Owning a Firearm Households  42% Individuals  30% Male  47% Female  13% White  33% Nonwhite  18% Republican  41% Independent  27% Democrat  23% [9] * In the same poll, gun owners stated they own firearms for the following reasons: Protection Against Crime  67% Target Shooting  66% Hunting  41% [10] Crime and Self-Defense * Roughly 16,272 murders were committed in the United States during 2008. Of these, about 10,886 or 67% were committed with firearms.[11] * A 1993 nationwide survey of 4,977 households found that over the previous five years, at least 0.5% of households had members who had used a gun for defense during a situation in which they thought someone "almost certainly would have been killed" if they "had not used a gun for protection." Applied to the U.S. population, this amounts to 162,000 such incidents per year. This figure excludes all "military service, police work, or work as a security guard."[12] * Based on survey data from the U.S. Department of Justice, roughly 5,340,000 violent crimes were committed in the United States during 2008. These include simple/aggravated assaults, robberies, sexual assaults, rapes, and murders.[13] [14] [15] Of these, about 436,000 or 8% were committed by offenders visibly armed with a gun.[16] * Based on survey data from a 2000 study published in the Journal of Quantitative Criminology,[17] U.S. civilians use guns to defend themselves and others from crime at least 989,883 times per year.[18] * A 1993 nationwide survey of 4,977 households found that over the previous five years, at least 3.5% of households had members who had used a gun "for self-protection or for the protection of property at home, work, or elsewhere." Applied to the U.S. population, this amounts to 1,029,615 such incidents per year. This figure excludes all "military service, police work, or work as a security guard."[19] * A 1994 survey conducted by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found that Americans use guns to frighten away intruders who are breaking into their homes about 498,000 times per year.[20] * A 1982 survey of male felons in 11 state prisons dispersed across the U.S. found:[21] • 34% had been "scared off, shot at, wounded, or captured by an armed victim" • 40% had decided not to commit a crime because they "knew or believed that the victim was carrying a gun" • 69% personally knew other criminals who had been "scared off, shot at, wounded, or captured by an armed victim"[22] * Click here to see why the following commonly cited statistic does not meet Just Facts' Standards of Credibility: "In homes with guns, the homicide of a household member is almost 3 times more likely to occur than in homes without guns."

Law Enforcement and Concealed Carry

Often the subject of what to do when questioned by a law enforcement officer (LEO) and you have a concealed carry permit and are carrying a weapon. Many concealed carry (CC) gun owners state that they will not divulge that they have a permit and are carrying unless asked. Others think that informing a LEO right away is the correct thing to do.

When I consider this I put myself in the place of, say a Highway Patrol officer who has stopped me for some violation or issue. In his or her case, I would feel much better and more secure knowing that I was dealing with a person who is licensed to carry a concealed weapon and who so informed me, right up front. I would not like surprises and would feel that the person I stopped was immediately dealing with me honestly and cooperatively.

From my perspective, I have nothing to hide and I have a legal right and permit to carry my weapon, so there is really no reason to hide that fact. Some states, and maybe all for what I know, have your CCP (concealed carry permit) logged into the records accessible by the police dispatch anyway, so it won't be a secret once the LEO runs your plate and license. My intent - I haven't been stopped while carrying since I'm an old fart driver and seldom break traffic laws - is to stop, turn on my dome light if it is dark, roll down the window and put my hands on the top of the steering wheel. When asked for my license, I will hand it, and my CCP over for inspection, and let the LEO take it from there.

A simple matter, but important. Those LEOs are out there to help us and I believe in giving them all the help I can while staying out of their way.