Active Shooter Response - A different kind of rant

[jerryskids 5,198]

I think ex military/police who happen to be teachers now are uncommon. Im fine with them having guns, but there arent nearly enough of them to make a meaningful difference. I dont think training regular teachers is a good idea, as no weekend course will approximate the expertise of retired military or LEO.

 

And my use of stats is fine, thanks. Id think an MIT trained rocket scientist would know anecdotal evidence doesnt mean anything.

So why did you bring up a single case? And why so you think statistics on the entire population of gun owners are relevant to a group of trained responders?

[Casual Observer 597]

But food scientists are finding lots of ways to sneak it in food, so I guess I should ignore all the kids being gunned down

It's always about the children.

[Casual Observer 597]

The are studies on private, presumably legal gun ownership. The risks exceed the benefits by a long shot, pun intended.

 

There is a problem defining how many lives guns save, but studies that have attempted to quantify that number also show they do more harm than good. And theres those pesky international comparisons, which never make our gun culture look good.

The pesky international comparisons show that African, Latin and South American countries have the highest rates of gun deaths. If only there were some kind of logical inferences we could make or common denominator or denominators we could identify and apply to the US number to make more sense of it.

[5-Points 2,727]

It would be interesting to know whether good guys with guns prevent more deaths than private gun ownership seemingly causes. But to know that, youd need to first know how many lives a private gun owner has saved and whether it would have been possible to save those lives without a gun. Then youd need to know how many gun deaths are caused by legally owned guns through murders, accidents, lost / stolen firearms that are subsequently used in commission of a fatal crime etc. Then you could compare the first # to the second to definitively know whether private gun ownership does in fact save lives.

 

According to wiki, the number of times annually a gun is used defensively ranges from 55,000 to 4.7 Million.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defensive_gun_use

 

 

Estimates over the number of defensive gun uses vary wildly, depending on the study's definition of a defensive gun use, survey design, population, criteria, time-period studied, and other factors. Low-end estimates are in the range of 55,000 to 80,000 incidents per year, while high end estimates reach of 4.7 million per year.

 

I'm sure the correct number is somewhere in between.

 

We can assume that a certain percentage of those times, the gun was used in the defense of a life. What percentage that is, I don't know but it's clear that people do use firearms defensively to prevent crime, violent or otherwise.

 

 

 

 

 

[MDC 5,890]

 

According to wiki, the number of times annually a gun is used defensively ranges from 55,000 to 4.7 Million.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defensive_gun_use

 

I'm sure the correct number is somewhere in between.

 

We can assume that a certain percentage of those times, the gun was used in the defense of a life. What percentage that is, I don't know but it's clear that people do use firearms defensively to prevent crime, violent or otherwise.

 

 

 

 

 

Theres no disputing that. I am guessing though that the vast majority of times when a gun is used to prevent a crime, the gun isnt actually fired and the crime was not life threatening.

[penultimatestraw 473]

So why did you bring up a single case? And why so you think statistics on the entire population of gun owners are relevant to a group of trained responders?

I was responding to Mensa, who made up some horsesh!t about armed Israeli teachers eliminating school shootings, to illustrate there is a downside to even trained teachers packing heat.

 

We don't have statistics for the latter group, especially since no one has described the details of the proposed training. But I don't see any great reason to believe they're less susceptible to accidents/mistakes/impaired judgement/acts of aggression/depression than other gun owners. Even if I concede they might be a little better, I doubt they'd be good enough to overcome the risk:benefit we see in the overall population.

[penultimatestraw 473]

The pesky international comparisons show that African, Latin and South American countries have the highest rates of gun deaths. If only there were some kind of logical inferences we could make or common denominator or denominators we could identify and apply to the US number to make more sense of it.

Dude, you're better than this. Try comparing the US to industrialized, high income countries. Everyone acknowledges poverty promotes crime.

[penultimatestraw 473]

It's always about the children.

They're the same ones being fed HFCS you know.

[penultimatestraw 473]

Theres no disputing that. I am guessing though that the vast majority of times when a gun is used to prevent a crime, the gun isnt actually fired and the crime was not life threatening.

Yep. And other means of averting the crime could probably have been used as well.

[Hardcore troubadour 12,631]

Dude, you're better than this. Try comparing the US to industrialized, high income countries. Everyone acknowledges poverty promotes crime.

Poverty promotes certain crimes.

[penultimatestraw 473]

Poverty promotes certain crimes.

OK, poor people aren't involved with a lot of insider trading. Violent and property crimes. Better?

[Hardcore troubadour 12,631]

OK, poor people aren't involved with a lot of insider trading. Violent and property crimes. Better?

Plenty of people deal drugs and don't shoot each other. Other drug dealers shoot each other all the time.

[5-Points 2,727]

Theres no disputing that. I am guessing though that the vast majority of times when a gun is used to prevent a crime, the gun isnt actually fired and the crime was not life threatening.

I believe that to be the case but I also believe that if we include all such cases we are probably close to that 4.7M mark, if not higher. I'm sure quite a few instances never even get reported.

 

The fact that most times merely brandishing a gun is enough to prevent a crime or put an end to an attack is a positive in my opinion and goes to show just how effective they can be in such situations.

[penultimatestraw 473]

Plenty of people deal drugs and don't shoot each other. Other drug dealers shoot each other all the time.

Right. Violent property crime.

[Hardcore troubadour 12,631]

Right. Violent property crime.

There are drugs all over America. The large scale violence appears, for the most part, to be confined to certain areas.

[jerryskids 5,198]

I was responding to Mensa, who made up some horsesh!t about armed Israeli teachers eliminating school shootings, to illustrate there is a downside to even trained teachers packing heat.

 

We don't have statistics for the latter group, especially since no one has described the details of the proposed training. But I don't see any great reason to believe they're less susceptible to accidents/mistakes/impaired judgement/acts of aggression/depression than other gun owners. Even if I concede they might be a little better, I doubt they'd be good enough to overcome the risk:benefit we see in the overall population.

 

I see what you did there... I've consistently said that they would have access to guns, not carry the entire time. Gun safes as an example.

 

You see no reason that trained responders, many with military/LEO/security experience, would have an appreciable difference than a redneck Billy Joe Jim Bob (who btw you hold in great disdain) in gun safety? I'm not really sure there is much more to discuss. I mean, let's just disarm the military and police. Wait, maybe that is the plan?

 

Seriously, do you you not see how that sounds?

[penultimatestraw 473]

I see what you did there... I've consistently said that they would have access to guns, not carry the entire time. Gun safes as an example.

 

You see no reason that trained responders, many with military/LEO/security experience, would have an appreciable difference than a redneck Billy Joe Jim Bob (who btw you hold in great disdain) in gun safety? I'm not really sure there is much more to discuss. I mean, let's just disarm the military and police. Wait, maybe that is the plan?

 

Seriously, do you you not see how that sounds?

And others have been talking about concealed carry. For the firearm to be useful, it has to be readily available, but potential for harm remains regardless. And quit insisting there are hordes of ex officers, etc., who happen to be teaching at the neighborhood school in their spare time - without extensive training, I don’t think the idea is plausible for the vast majority of educators.

 

Let the military and police do their jobs. With guns. Dedicated armed security are OK too. Teachers should focus on teaching.

[MDC 5,890]

I believe that to be the case but I also believe that if we include all such cases we are probably close to that 4.7M mark, if not higher. I'm sure quite a few instances never even get reported.

 

The fact that most times merely brandishing a gun is enough to prevent a crime or put an end to an attack is a positive in my opinion and goes to show just how effective they can be in such situations.

Agreed. Im just saying that of all the instances of private citizens using guns to prevent crime, very few of them are legitimately life saving.

[BLS 313]

Impossible: Guns are here to save us from tyrannical government!

Please tell me you're being facetious.

[MDC 5,890]

Please tell me you're being facetious.

Yep. His statement about Nazi Germany was so retarded I responded in kind.