Another Home Invasion thwarted by gun---held by brave 12 yr old girl

I think there's no question that guns are the most effective weapon to kill an attacker. But they're also the most effective weapon to kill a loved one, an innocent bystander, one's children, or oneself. If you own a gun and the gun is used to kill someone, it is much more likely to kill you or someone in your family, than it is to kill a home intruder.

For every 12 year old who kills a home intruder, there are many more 12 year olds who kill themselves when in the presence of a gun.

That's why a baseball bat may be a more prudent self-defense weapon. While it may not be as effective in the unlikely event that you are attacked by a home intruder, it is certainly less likely to kill you or someone in your own family, and that makes it a smarter self-defense weapon overall.

 

For every 12 year old who kills a home intruder, there are many more 12 year olds who kill themselves when in the presence of a gun.

That's why a baseball bat may be a more prudent self-defense weapon. While it may not be as effective in the unlikely event that you are attacked by a home intruder, it is certainly less likely to kill you or someone in your own family, and that makes it a smarter self-defense weapon overall.[/QUOTE]
Nope.

Maybe if you are a criminal and live a less than positive life. The stat you just repeated includes the deaths of criminals engaged in criminal acts.

Fact is, the total number of firearm related self-defensive uses far outweigh your figures.

 

What's to keep them from taking the bat away and beating the victim to death?

Ever hear of 'blunt force trauma?'

Sad to say,but you're living in a dream world.

 

The bat is clearly an inferior weapon for offense. But is a far superior weapon in keeping your household safe. Owning a gun is like losing the forest for the trees. In trying to increase your personal safety, a gun actually makes your household less safe. It would be like trying to protect your house by building a moat with sharks. You're much more likely to accidentally fall into your own moat than to prevent someone from entering in the first place.

 

actually, most of the deaths that I cited are due to either suicides, accidents, or "moment of passion" crimes. The danger from these far outweigh any self-defense benefit that you may gain from owning a gun.

 

Nope.

Suicides are moot. There are countries with strict gun control that have suicides higher than that of the US, guns are obviously not the cause.

How many moments of passion crimes occur?

Do those really outweigh the self-defensive uses of firearms every year?

Nope.

The Brady Campaign is not a reliable source of information.

 

whatever else, she stood her ground. That guy could have had the intent of a hienious crime in his heart.
Too many children are kidnapped, raped , and murdered to even give one inch on this...she did good. If she had killed the guy, she was still in the right......the guy got lucky

 

cross cultural comparisons are invalid since suicides are multifactorial. But consider suicides in the US. Women attempt suicide more than men but men are far more likely to be "successful" at suicide then women. Why? Because men are much more likely then women to use a gun when attempting suicide, and a gun is a very effective suicide method.

yes. Again - it's been demonstrated that if you own a gun and that gun is used to kill somebody, that somebody is more likely to be either you or somebody you know, rather than a random criminal invading your home. Now that's a sobering fact. So the next time you buy a gun thinking that it's going to be used for self-defense----chances are---it's not.

 

What is to stop them from taking the gun away from the person holding it and then shooting them - same argument especially at close quarters?

And you have to be able to GET to the gun - the baseball bat was just one example of something which might be around the home which could be used - equally effective would be a face full of insect spray, or shower cleaner. The home is full of self defence weapons and all anyone seems to be able to think is "I would be helpless without a gun"

But guns are NOT used that often in self defence
http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/researc...n-threats-and-self-defense-gun-use/index.html

 

Bullhockey......a gun is no more liable to be taken away from someone as a baseball bat,and the by now debunked kellerman study didn't take into aount the times whe a defensive gun use resulted in not a shot being fired ,I/E the sound of a pump shotgun being racked scaring away thieves.

The notion that having the best means of self defense available is a liability is ludicrous.

 

http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/researc...n-threats-and-self-defense-gun-use/index.html

Unfortunately research does not back that opinion

 

Yet... countries with strict gun control can have higher suicide rates than the US.

Your point is moot.

Nope.

Most homicides are gang related. The figures considered into your silly statistic includes the deaths of criminals involved in criminal activity. That in no way contradicts what I said, being that those people involved in those situations often know the people whom they shoot. Those figures do not even come close to trumping the total number of self-defensive uses. There are more self-defensive uses of firearms than there are firearms related crimes. Your argument is resting on my acceptance of a physical impossibility.

 

Errr WRONG!!!!

Methinks, with all due respect, you have been reading too many NRA funded sites

http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/researc...n-threats-and-self-defense-gun-use/index.html

http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/research/hicrc/firearms-research/gun-ownership-and-use/index.html

 

baloney

 

Nope. I read a study from the Department of Justice, they tag it at about 618,000 uses per year. I do not claim the millions that many gun owners do, being that those include uses against animals.

Countries with strict gun control have higher suicide rates than the US.

The point is moot.

 

I think the idea is to use it before they get that close. If they are within striking distnce for a baseball bat, they are too close

 

No, Don;t think you could you use that as self defence unless you threw it at the intruder

 

Love you to give me a link - and I am sort of betting it was done by one of about 3 or 4 people in America who have been specialising in "manipulating" statistics about this subject

Okay - you have re-iterated your claim but I have yet to see evidence (and remember you are arguing with a health professional about this and I can and do use google scholar)

 

Was the girl as brave as the nine year old in Tennessee who was shot by relatives for looking too like a skunk?

 

Ill find it when I have more than my phone.

I have shown it to you before, go to Nation Master, under crime, you can look up suicide stats.

 

Correlation is not the same as causation

BTW - this is what "nation master' actually says

http://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/Suicide-methods

Oooops!

 

Here is another one!!

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1485564/