TexasCHLforum.com

I can believe there is someone so , so. ....well I can't find the words. At least words I can use in this forum.

The police can protect you, and will, and do. And a gun in the house is not a guarantee of personal security -- it is instead a standing invitation to family tragedy. The cold dead hands from which they pry the gun are very unlikely to be the hands of a heroic minuteman defending home and hearth against intruders. They are much more likely to be the hands of a troubled adolescent or a clumsy child.

In the land of the Second Amendment, nobody will take your guns away. But if you love your children, you should get rid of them voluntarily.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/07/23/opinion/f ... l?c&page=2" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Is there ANY statistical backing at all to support the common anti's refrain that you or a family member are more likely to be killed with a gun in your home than a bad guy? Or is that just more anti prattle without any basis in fact?

SQLGeek wrote:Is there ANY statistical backing at all to support the common anti's refrain that you or a family member are more likely to be killed with a gun in your home than a bad guy? Or is that just more anti prattle without any basis in fact?

The latter.

SQLGeek wrote:Is there ANY statistical backing at all to support the common anti's refrain that you or a family member are more likely to be killed with a gun in your home than a bad guy? Or is that just more anti prattle without any basis in fact?

Gun sales having increased so dramatically since 2008, I'd say his stats are a product of pure mental creation.

SQLGeek wrote:Is there ANY statistical backing at all to support the common anti's refrain that you or a family member are more likely to be killed with a gun in your home than a bad guy? Or is that just more anti prattle without any basis in fact?

If there is any statistical basis, it is so badly distorted as to be unrecognizable. Here is another that doesn't even bother to mis-represent facts. His opinion is so much better

http://nation.foxnews.com/jason-alexand ... n-shooting

Then there are the folks who write that if everyone in Colorado had a weapon, this maniac would have been stopped. Perhaps. But I do believe that the element of surprise, tear gas and head to toe kevlar protection might have given him a distinct edge. Not only that, but a crowd of people firing away in a chaotic arena without training or planning - I tend to think that scenario could produce even more victims.

Not only a TV star but a security consultant, too. Who wooda thunk.

I don't know any people who have guns out of fear. If I was afraid, I'd move. I don't have an alarm system because I'm afraid either. It is there to give me enough notice to be able to do something about someone who shouldn't be there. That isn't fear - it's good planning.

SQLGeek wrote:Is there ANY statistical backing at all to support the common anti's refrain that you or a family member are more likely to be killed with a gun in your home than a bad guy? Or is that just more anti prattle without any basis in fact?

As I remember, there was a study done years ago by two doctors, published in a medical journal, that purported to show this. It was later ripped to pieces by other doctors, in the same journal, for shoddy research and analysis, making the data fit their conclusions. Of course, the second one is never mentioned.

I think it was that a gun in the home was supposed to be 14 times more likely to result in the death of a family member than a criminal.

SQLGeek wrote:Is there ANY statistical backing at all to support the common anti's refrain that you or a family member are more likely to be killed with a gun in your home than a bad guy? Or is that just more anti prattle without any basis in fact?

If they say it enough times it becomes fact. They quote each other as substantiation. It is the same type of argument the Brady bunch used on their recent testimony in DC regarding changing some of the draconian DC laws. Emily Miller testified and mentioned that more people than ever were buying guns. The Brady representative insisted that the number of households that had guns was drastically declining. That the increase in gun sales and NICS checks were due to few gun owners buying more and more guns and not that more people were buying guns. That has been their mantra regardless of the evidence against it.