Live data from Hacker News

Guns, Privacy, and Crime

nber.org

141–149 of 149 posts

Re: Guns, Privacy, and Crime

#141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even the lowest estimates by pro gun control groups and researches put defensive gun uses in the US at 55k+ a year. Most estimates range from 500k to several million a year.

Those all include police and other security personnel usages as far as I am aware. I guess my statement lacked the proper context but I’m focused more on private gun ownership. The idea that having a gun in our home is ample protection from a burglar, for instance, is rooted in an egotistical vision of ourselves saving the day from the bad guy. Not any sort of reality. It happens, but it is exceedingly rare and you’r…

The CDC disagrees:

https://nap.nationalacademies.org/read/18319/chapter/3#15

Re: Guns, Privacy, and Crime

#142
post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know you’re being sarcastic, but it most definitely was the fault of the shooter who did not follow basic firearm safety rules (either not knowing what they were shooting at or what was beyond what they were shooting at). Firearm ownership is a right, but also must be taken seriously and responsibly. Regardless of the “mistake”, the offender should have been charged (hopefully with a felony).

If there are say 1% stupid people who won't follow safety rules, the sheer amount of personal danger is quite different if you have 100 gun owners or 10.000.

And thankfully that number is far, far below 1%, more like 0.04%. The US has by far the highest number of guns per capita, but no where near the highest number of gun deaths.

Re: Guns, Privacy, and Crime

#143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those all include police and other security personnel usages as far as I am aware. I guess my statement lacked the proper context but I’m focused more on private gun ownership. The idea that having a gun in our home is ample protection from a burglar, for instance, is rooted in an egotistical vision of ourselves saving the day from the bad guy. Not any sort of reality. It happens, but it is exceedingly rare and you’r…

The CDC disagrees: https://nap.nationalacademies.org/read/18319/chapter/3#15

The CDC seems to agree that the data available is shaky and inconclusive, and that other gun related injuries may outweigh the defensive benefit as I said above, but I take your point.

Re: Guns, Privacy, and Crime

#144
post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

you actually made the point of it.. when the populace is unarmed, the thugs can bully / rob / coerce just using muscle and knives, which makes the law abiding citenzry less safe imho.. but of course some will see it that way and some will not - much of individuals view point depends on where live / work.. people in nice places, surrounded by other nice places are more insulated from the more prevalent daily violence…

When the thugs actually use their muscle to rob you, you get a twisted arm. When the thugs actually use their gun, you get dead. One is less healthy than the other.

Well for me that twisted arm would likely lead to a slow painful death (maybe 70/30 chances).

There is a chance I could beg for charity at Vanderbilt to donate $10,000 hemophilia treatments (of which it may take several for days) to keep me from nonstop internally bleeding to death - and there is a chance it would prevent death and just keep me in excruciating pain physically, mentally and emotionally instead of complete death.

There is a chance I could get charity to live through it, although I put the chances at less than 50%. There are other possible outcomes - partial treatment, and lawsuits over the hospital bills, and doctor bill. I would likely try to skip the hospital, apply ice every other 10 minutes and try to meditate my blood to flow slower. This could lead to nerve damage, and PTSD plus, but maybe not death.

Frankly I'd rather them have a gun or knife and let things get decided faster.

Many of the women I know would rather have the option to be armed to prevent twisted arms, and threats of severe violence.

However I can understand that there are people int he world who would rather be at risk of mugging via force to prevent their neighbors from having firearms. I do think this varies much depending on the amount of localized violence and is likely different for the folks living in nice parts of the world then people who live in cheaper parts of the world / cities.

I've also never thought when walking through New Orleans, SE D.C., or Memphis or St Louis that if one was to engage in a physical altercation with 'thugs' - that a simple 'twisted arm' would be the result.

Wish I had the resources to poll the locals to know how many of them think that would be a common result.

I understand things are different in different places, maybe parts of Germany and Russia have strong guys that twist arms and they get compliance. I would not expect that around here.

Re: Guns, Privacy, and Crime

#145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m not tracking - what is the implication? Anecdotally, was in Nashville for a work training event at a Fairfield near the new Grand Ol’ Opry. Of the 2 dozen attendees, all with anything remotely “gun” suggestive had their trucks burglarized at the hotel. Several lost weapons during the burglaries.

Gun ownership is common here, as is (apparently) leaving the guns in cars. Criminals need an illegal source of guns, since they can't pass a background check, so they steal them from the copious amounts of cars containing them.

>Gun ownership is common here, as is (apparently) leaving the guns in cars.

Would you prefer that they take them into the business, regardless of whether it is posted to not allow carry?

Re: Guns, Privacy, and Crime

#146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Considering that about 266,000[1] people are injured by burglars per year, deaths included, I'm not seeing how the resident being able to shoot back is making anything "less safe" for anyone except for the burglar, which I'm pretty sure anyone getting burgled is usually ok with. Though as to why burglaries went down, I wonder if people got more alarm systems or took other deterrent countermeasures after the database…

There is the point of correct close combat training. Shooting in an enclosed proximity is vastly different. For instance you don't want the gun to blind, deafen or grabbed and used against you. That can be alleviated with the right training and choices. You need more information beyond that to assess -- e.g. are people living in remote areas or next to a police officer?

>For instance you don't want the gun to blind, deafen or grabbed and used against you

Sounds like we need to make it easier to obtain suppressors so that the victim's guns do not blind or deafen them as much.

Re: Guns, Privacy, and Crime

#147
post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I grew up in a place where gun ownership was the norm, and I have had a gun pulled on me in anger following a mutual fault car accident. People fuck up and get mad, confrontation happens. It is better for everyone if having firearms at hand is not the norm. Aside from that I also caught a stray bullet in the hand when I was 15. I was in the woods, it was hunting season, I should have known better, etc etc. Hundreds o…

>The rural american attitude towards guns is indefensible. It just is. Case closed! Damn, all that time wasted arguing. lol

How you feeling about this one today?

Re: Guns, Privacy, and Crime

#148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I grew up in a place where gun ownership was the norm, and I have had a gun pulled on me in anger following a mutual fault car accident. People fuck up and get mad, confrontation happens. It is better for everyone if having firearms at hand is not the norm. Aside from that I also caught a stray bullet in the hand when I was 15. I was in the woods, it was hunting season, I should have known better, etc etc. Hundreds o…

>I grew up in a place where gun ownership was the norm Same here, rural America Deep South: Most people I know are armed and concealed carry almost all the time. In over 4 decades here, I have never seen a person even brandish a weapon.

How's this comment sitting for you a couple days later?

Re: Guns, Privacy, and Crime

#149
post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If there are say 1% stupid people who won't follow safety rules, the sheer amount of personal danger is quite different if you have 100 gun owners or 10.000.

And thankfully that number is far, far below 1%, more like 0.04%. The US has by far the highest number of guns per capita, but no where near the highest number of gun deaths.

Like where you stand on this one this morning?
Post reply on HN