Defensive gun use

[Brian Kegerreis]

https://nypost.com/2023/08/21/13-women-use-firearms-in-self-defense-against-exes-criminals-over-2-week-period-across-us/ 

I know there are studies by anti gun nuts and according to them people are more likely to be hurt by a gun than defend themselves but those studies don't discriminate between trained gun users and untrained.  In some they juat compare the number of people hurt by guns vs those who hurt others in in defense with guns. Which eliminates the the non use use of guns. Where demonstrating you have one deters an attack. Which happens quite bit more than actually needing to shoot someone. 

Yes untrained people with guns are less competent than trained people moat of the time. But learning how to use a firearm effectively ans safely is a very easy thing to learn. That's one of the reasons why the English Longbow is no longer a dominat or widely used weapon in the battlefield. 

[kan...@aol.com]

When you start your post with "anti gun nuts" after posting an article from this rag,  it's pretty much the end of the road. 

So here's your well-deserved "fuck you" for the day. 

Since you only read far right crazy sites, I'll fill you on a few things. Stat's on gun use are so scattered that they are currently useless. I won't even say "essentially" useless; they are totally useless. The NRA suggests that guns are used to deter a crime about 1.5 million times a year. Surveys from other sites, some clearly progressive, estimate the number at about  65-100K. So there's your useless. 

But good studies, which are easier to verify, suggest that homes with gun owners put the family at about 2-4 times the risk of death. So there's that. 

So while 13 women may have defended themselves, the pertinent question is how many died during the same period. How many died by their OWN GUN? That last stat didn't show up on my search. 

So there's your useless post for Friday. I would expect nothing more from you. Nothing less doesn't exist.