|
|
|
NOTE!
This is a real-time comments system. As such, it's also a
free speech zone within guidelines set forth on the Post
Comments page. Opinions expressed here may or may not
reflect those of KeepAndBearArms staff, members, or
any other living person besides the one who posted them.
Please keep that in mind. We ask that all who post
comments assure that they adhere to our Inclusion
Policy, but there's a bad apple in every
bunch, and we have no control over bigots and
other small-minded people. Thank you. --KeepAndBearArms.com
|
The
Below Comments Relate to this Newslink:
The Myth Behind Defensive Gun Ownership
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
What do these and so many other cases have in common? They are the byproduct of a tragic myth: that millions of gun owners successfully use their firearms to defend themselves and their families from criminals. Despite having nearly no academic support in public health literature, this myth is the single largest motivation behind gun ownership. It traces its origin to a two-decade-old series of surveys that, despite being thoroughly repudiated at the time, persists in influencing personal safety decisions and public policy throughout the United States. |
| Comment by:
Millwright66
(1/15/2015)
|
Why do the "anti-gun advocates" always presume a "lack of evidence means a lack of validity" ? Current data nets only harvest what's intended. Just as we see how media bias creates false impressions of events. And its intransigence in the face of revealed facts maintains its narrative(s).
In truth we have relatively sparse data on the overall effect of private citizen armament. We can't "prove a negative". That is how many perps decide not attack an individual or home because of the threat of a weapon ? This sometimes referred to as "the halo effect". We already see some "broad scale" indications firearms ownership reduces crime. Now its time to "de-politicize the science" and conduct serious, peer-reviewd studies.
|
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| "Some people think that the Second Amendment is an outdated relic of an earlier time. Doubtless some also think that constitutional protections of other rights are outdated relics of earlier times. We The People own those rights regardless, unless and until We The People repeal them. For those who believe it to be outdated, the Second Amendment provides a good test of whether their allegiance is really to the Constitution of the United States, or only to their preferences in public policies and audiences. The Constitution is law, not vague aspirations, and we are obligated to protect, defend, and apply it. If the Second Amendment were truly an outdated relic, the Constitution provides a method for repeal. The Constitution does not furnish the federal courts with an eraser." --9th Circuit Court Judge Andrew Kleinfeld, dissenting opinion in which the court refused to rehear the case while citing deeply flawed anti-Second Amendment nonsense (Nordyke v. King; opinion filed April 5, 2004) |
|
|
