[Vision2020] Firearms - Dangerous or Useful?
Dan Carscallen
areaman at moscow.com
Thu Jul 26 21:54:46 PDT 2007
Thanks for the good read, Mike.
Just like any other tool, a gun can be harmless or dangerous depending
on the user, or abuser, whatever the case may be.
DC
-----Original Message-----
From: vision2020-bounces at moscow.com
[mailto:vision2020-bounces at moscow.com] On Behalf Of Mike Finkbiner
Sent: Thursday, July 26, 2007 9:36 PM
To: vision2020 at moscow.com
Subject: [Vision2020] Firearms - Dangerous or Useful?
Visionaries -
Most of the arguments about firearms revolve around the three areas of
Rights, Liability to Society and Usefulness. The Rights question is
interesting, but I think the Liability vs Usefulness question is more
personal.
A lot of these arguments are religious in nature, with people on both
sides
more focused on emotion than fact. Sound bites like "For the children"
and
"From my cold dead hands" don't really do more than comfort the true
believers. I'm sorry this is rather long, but it's a subject that
deserves
more than a sound bite.
I think a lot of the problem comes down to perceived risk. People worry
about things they perceive as dangerous, rather than things that really
are.
The common example is driving vs flying. Statistically you are much
more
likely to be killed in a car accident than on a commercial aircraft, but
people worry more about traveling by air. A person who is not involved
in
criminal behavior has a small risk of being shot in comparison to other
types of injuries, but sports injuries, auto accidents and drowning are
accepted, while firearms are demonized
Here are some interesting chart of causes of death. To get firearms
into
10th place, below septicemia and renal failure, they have to total those
shot by police and in self defense with those shot by criminals.
http://www.the-eggman.com/writings/death_stats.html
If you look more closely at the types of people killed by firearms, you
will
find that the majority are well known to police, and have been involved
in
violent behavior many times before. If you take out the people with
criminal records, the percentage of deaths from firearms drops a lot.
Another problem is perceived usefulness. People feel that swimming
pools,
5-gallon buckets and automobiles are useful, so while sad when someone
is
injured or killed, they don't feel the object caused the death. With
firearms, reports in the news tend to concentrate on criminal use rather
than citizens defending themselves.
In 2001 "USA Today ... reported 5,660 words on criminal use of guns but
no
reporting on the use of guns to stop crimes, and the Washington Post,
...
devoted 46,884 words to the criminal use of firearms and 953 words to
their
defensive use by law-abiding citizens." - Jeff Johnson CNSNews.com
Congressional Bureau Chief Oct 2003
There have been several studies by academics and government agencies
looking
at defensive use of firearms. Every one of them has concluded that
despite
the lack of media interest, there are at least a hundred thousand,
perhaps
over a million instances every year in this country where a person
defends
themselves with a firearm. Those uses vary from just displaying a gun
to
killing an attacker. In a large percentage of cases, no shots are
fired,
which is probably why they don't make the news.
If you want to look at the actual studies, rather than what people are
saying about them, this page has links to a wide variety -
http://www.gunowners.org/sourcetb.htm
If you want to see a regularly updated list of civilians using guns in
self
-defense -
http://www.gunowners.org/sourcetb.htm
The recent home invasion in Connecticut is an example of what young,
strong
thugs can do to people who do not have the means to defend themselves.
I
gather the weapon of choice was a baseball bat. A homeowner with a
firearm
has a chance to defend his family against that kind of thing. Firearms
allow the average person to not live in fear of the young and violent.
None of this excuses people who do not properly control dangerous
objects
that they own. Children who die in swimming pools, 5-gallon buckets or
from
household chemicals are victims of adult neglect, just as those who are
killed by guns in their homes. That doesn't mean we should ban any of
those
from the home. They are all useful in their place, and dangerous when
not.
As far as access to firearms causing violence, there was an interesting
study in the Spring 2007 Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy -
http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlpp/Vol30_No2_KatesMauseronlin
e.pdf
The authors looked at the rate of gun ownership in various Euoropean
countries and compared it to the murder and suicide rates. Essentially,
they couldn't find a correlation. Countries with very high firearms
ownership rates like Norway have low rates of murder while countries
like
Luxembourg and Russia, with very low rates of ownership have much higher
rates of murder. The criminals just use other tools. Violence is a
problem
of the society, not the tools available.
It's a complicated subject, but the evidence is strong that we cannot
blame
guns for societies failings. In a violent society, the honest citizen
has a
right to defend herself from the goblins, and firearms have been the
great
equalizer for a long time.
Please take a look at -
http://www.a-human-right.com/
Mike Finkbiner
"The gun is the only personal weapon that puts a 100-pound woman on
equal
footing with a 220-pound mugger, a 75-year old retiree on equal footing
with
a 19-year old gang banger, and a single gay guy on equal footing with a
carload of drunk guys with baseball bats. The gun removes the disparity
in
physical strength, size, or numbers between a potential attacker and a
defender."
- Maj. L. Caudill USMC (Ret)
=======================================================
List services made available by First Step Internet,
serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
http://www.fsr.net
mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
=======================================================
More information about the Vision2020
mailing list