Challenging The Myth That Guns Stop Crime

[kpete]

MORE CHARTS:
http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2013/04/charts-debunking-myth-guns-self-defense

[hack89]

1. What about the three other possible outcomes besides killing someone?

1. shots fired and person wounded
2. shots fired and no one hit
3. No shots fired but bad guy ran away when they saw the gun.


The survival rate for gun shot wounds is pretty high so deaths are not the most likely outcome.

[DreamGypsy]

3. There are two charts at the link that may represent answers to your questions...

...unfortunately the charts are live, so I can't link to the graphic. You'll need to go to the article.

Uses of guns for self-defense, 2007-2011

The gun lobby often claims that firearms are used for self-defense an estimated 2.5 million times a year. But according to the Department of Justice's National Crime Victimization Survey, the actual number is just a fraction of that:

(the chart is here)

and

Crime victims who used guns, 2007-2011
Guns are used for self defense (both successfully and unsuccessfully) by less than 1 percent of all violent crime victims:

(the chart is here)

I say "may represent answers" because there are no precise definition provided for "used for self defense". Does one have to fire a gun to use it, for example?

However, if you go to the report mentioned in the article (pdf) there is a table on page 10 presenting Self-Protective Behaviors by Type of Crime, 2007–2011 that breaks down the responses by crime victims. Here is a sample of that data, where the victim had a firearm and used it to either threaten or attack:

Threatened or attacked with a firearm: 235,700 0.8% 103,000 0.1%

where the first number/percentage is for violent crime, the second for property crime, 2007-2011. The total number of crimes considered are 29,618,300 and 4,495,500 respectively.

Hope this helps.

(on edit: changed "consider" to "considered&quot

[Nuclear Unicorn]

2. That's some massaged data there

I like the one about 30 million crime victims but only 1% used a gun to defend themselves. If someone slashes your car tires you're a victim of crime. Is MJ actually suggesting there are 30 million crimes annually that rate a violent response (Boy, have our civil authorities failed if there are) or are they lumping every nuisance crime in to inflate the figures and drive-down the self-defense vs. crime ratio?

And then we are told only 10% of defensive gun uses are by women; which I'm is true but carrying a gun for self-defense is a personal choice. If fewer women choose to carry then fewer women will have a gun if confronted by a criminal.

Meanwhile, a Clinton Administration report shows --

MENU TITLE: Guns in America: National Survey on Private Ownership and Use of Firearms.

Series: NIJ Research in Brief
Published: May 1997
20 pages
41,893 bytes

National Institute of Justice
Research in Brief

Jeremy Travis, Director
May 1997

--clip--

A somewhat more conservative NSPOF estimate is
shown in the column of exhibit 7 that reflects the
application of the criteria used by Kleck and Gertz
to identify "genuine" defensive gun uses.
Respondents were excluded on the basis of the most
recent DGU description for any of the following
reasons: the respondent did not see a perpetrator;
the respondent could not state a specific crime
that was involved in the incident; or the
respondent did not actually display the gun or
mention it to the perpetrator.

Applying those restrictions leaves 19 NSPOF
respondents (0.8 percent of the sample),
representing 1.5 million defensive users. This
estimate is directly comparable to the well-known
estimate of Kleck and Gertz, shown in the last
column of exhibit 7. While the NSPOF estimate is
smaller, it is statistically plausible that the
difference is due to sampling error. Inclusion of
multiple DGUs reported by half of the 19 NSPOF
respondents increases the estimate to 4.7 million
DGUs.

https://www.ncjrs.gov/txtfiles/165476.txt

[SlimJimmy]

4. I'm guessing the OP didn't read the entirety of what was posted. I agree that

MJ was trying to massage the data quite a bit. Your analysis is more correct than theirs.