I'm not say what I would do at all. I'm describing the actual criminal activity here in the US. What other country has 1 million home invasions with 260,000 victims of violence related to those invasions?
No, it's your failure to read for comprehension that's at issue here, not my ability to support my claims.
No, rights do not depend upon statistics. If almost no women chose to have an abortion, could that right be further restricted? If almost no gay people chose to get married, could that right be curtailed?[/QUOTE]
Self Defence
- I know what your stating, but I asked a question. In what world are you constantly ready with a firearm to use at all times?
- The statistics you use are misleading. The US may have the highest raw figure but you have not taken into account the population (per 100,000) it doesn't.
Thus.... when you take into account population the US ranks 11. Denmark ranks first at 808.6 per 100,000 whilst the USA is at 351.1 per 100,000. Quite a difference.
- Other countries may have no choice but those rules seem to be working for them.....It doesn't matter how it is enforced the fact it is in place and functioning
- So if I told a child that "if you had a firearm you would be safe at all times" would you consider that instilling a false sense of security in his own safety? A firearm doesn't make you invincible.... right?
Costs/Benefits
- 1 justified homicide for every 36 unjustified homicide. 36,000 killed by firearms every year. 103,000 casualties by firearms every year. 1.7 million children live with unlocked, loaded guns. 2,824 children (age 0 to 19 years) died by gunshot and an additional 13,723 were injured in 2015. Those people that die from accidental shooting were more than three times as likely to have had a firearm in their home as those in the control group. Among suicide victims requiring hospital treatment, suicide attempts with a firearm are much more deadly than attempts by jumping or drug poisoning — 90 percent die compared to 34 percent and 2 percent respectively. Living in a home where there are guns increased risk of homicide by 40 to 170% and the risk of suicide by 90 to 460%
ALL OF THESE ARE VALID. You seem to be willing to allow this to continue occurring simply to enact "self defence" that isn't proven to be deterring anyone. Cost = Above ---> Benefit= unproven Protection (provide some statistics to show that living in a home with a gun makes you more than 40-170% safer)
Reports on Self Defence
- Of that 284,000 how many people were actually in danger of losing their life or incurring injury. The fact is these are all estimates with no proven credibility. There are more credible sources that contradict the "estimates". Additionally the data drawn from your "estimates" was only only across 15 states and academics underpin it as not a representative sample of the entire USA. The survey used was also found to be ambiguous and poorly constructed with respondents not accurately answering the questions. IT IS FLAWED.
HarvardAccording to a Harvard University analysis of figures from the National Crime Victimization Survey, people defended themselves with a gun in nearly 0.9 percent of crimes from 2007 to 2011. David Hemenway, who led the Harvard research, argues that the risks of owning a gun outweigh the benefits of having one in the rare case where you might need to defend yourself.
"The average person ... has basically no chance in their lifetime ever to use a gun in self-defense," he tells Here & Now's Robin Young. "But ... every day, they have a chance to use the gun inappropriately. They have a chance, they get angry. They get scared."
Statistics
- Maybe I can't find them because they are not there. If they were there instead of insulting my intelligence, you could point the out to me or reference the page number.
Rights and Statistics
- You negated what I stated and termed my response in the way that suited your premise.
I stated "It doesn't solely depend on statistics, rather they are a point of consideration". That is one should consider the amount of deaths, injuries induced by firearms.
- On that notion why are you depending upon statistics to support your
right to bear arms and protection. On the other you negate statistics and their dependence on rights when it is not in aligned with your opinion and imposes on your rights. It seems you manipulate this to suit your own needs.
Abortion- Statistics would be considered in relation to the risk of adverse effects, injury, success rates etc...which relates to ones right to conduct such a procedure.