Guns make it easier to kill and injure people. Therefore, it is obvious to any fool that reducing the prevalence of guns will reduce the prevalence of death and injury. But, what about people who aren't fools?
As with many issues, if a person cares enough about the issues of violence and liberty to actually make the effort of getting all the relevant facts about gun possession, things are no longer so obvious. And there are a lot of really technical facts related to the costs and benefits, to us all, of private citizens possessing firearms.
As with other matters, the only way to clarify in the midst of a lot of confusing facts is to put in some effort to analyse the facts, and correlate them, and understand them. Then it all becomes clear again.
This site is for people who care enough about violence, life, death, liberty and slavery to put in the effort to get the facts about guns—and then understand them. If you don't care enough to learn, please have the decency to avoid doing things that might eliminate the ability of others to protect themselves, their families, their neighbors, and you—or might steal the liberty of our descendants.
Although much of what you find on this site will look superficially like what you can find on other sites, the information is different. It all results from GunsAndCrime.org thoroughly researching and analysing each issue addressed. If a study is addressed on this site, we have actually obtained and analyzed the report on the study, plus any documents we can find that support the study or are critical of it, unless otherwise specifically stated. And we tell you about all that source data.
To understand common claims and research about gun storage, you first need to understand something about child safety in conjunction with defensive use of guns in the home.
There have been one large scale study and a few small and tiny "studies" or surveys that are typically referenced, along with some unobtainable articles from "expert" child safety organizations like Prevention Magazine. Discussion of some of these claims follows the discussions of the most-referenced studies.
One of the 7 major studies was one by douglas weil and david hemenway (both prolific gun control drivel creators) that was reported in a 1992 issue of the journal of the American medical association (jAma) under the title "Loaded Guns in the Home." The second was reported by hemenway and a couple of female medical gun control trainees in a '95 issue of the jAma under the title "Firearm Training and Storage."
A small-scale study by 3 CDC doctors and 2 doctors from the Idaho and Oregon health departments was published in the May '99 issue of the Am. Journal of Preventive Medicine. A study supposedly about firearm "storage" in homes with children during '94 was published in a '99 issue of the Archives of Pediatric & Adolescent Medicine.
The one large scale study was reportedly published in the April 2000 issue of the American Public Health Assn's "American Journal of Public Health." Although this study could have been more important than the weil and hemenway studies because of the large number of people surveyed, its results are actually just as worthless because the questions asked were just as worthless.
Most recently, hemenway and his Harvard gun control doctors published another study, "Are Household Firearms Stored Safely? It Depends on Whom You Ask" in the Sep 2000 issue of Pediatrics.
NSPOF
One of the 7 most valid studies was a study that also dealt with several other firearm issues. This study, called the National Survey on Private Ownership (and Use) of Firearms (NSPOF), was an analysis (by gun controllers philip cook and young jens ludwig) of data collected by a survey conducted for the antigun "police foundation" using funding from the US Department of justice (Doj) National Institute of Justice (NIJ). It is reported by NIJ report NCJ 165476, May 1997, "Guns in America: National Survey on Private Ownership and Use of Firearms." This is the same study that found a prevalence of defensive gun use about the same as Gary Kleck found, but explained the estimate away as being the result of the "false positives" hemenway had publicized among gun controllers the year before publication of the NIJ report.You can get a copy of the NIJ report at their web site.
The report said that "20 percent of all gun-owning households had an unlocked, loaded gun in the home at the time of the survey" (meaning while the surveyed adult was at home with the gun and talking on the phone with the surveyor). This figure was 30 percent for households with handguns, but only 7 percent for households that had only long guns, which would be be expected since most (not all) people who use a gun for home defense have acquired a handgun for that purpose.
Note that these statements of finding had nothing to do with storage; that a table (Exhibit 6) and the "key findings" in the report said "16 percent," not 20; and that the authors sloppily claimed as facts what were actually things that people had said when asked over the telephone.
What portion of the public might, if someone called them asking about having guns and "is it loaded now," think that the person calling them might be doing so to determine if he is talking to someone in a home that would be easy to victimize? Suspicious people might, even if they didn't own a gun, say, "I have a big 22 magnum, I keep it loaded, and I keep it handy."
The report then said, "Slightly more than half of firearms .... were stored unlocked, but handguns were much more likely to be loaded. ...handguns were likely to be stored ... even on their persons." Notice that the authors abruptly changed here from saying that the conditions being described applied at the time of the survey to saying stored. Note, too, that the idea that people store guns on their person is absurd but that a person on the phone saying they have a gun on them at the time they are talking to a surveyor on the phone is realistic. It is obvious that the authors represented answers about where a gun was at the moment as being about storage, which is the condition of a thing when it is not being used. All the rest of their report had the same error/deception.
The authors, who have demonstrated that they don't understand about gun storage or are dishonest, continued:
Although training programs usually include suggestions on how to store guns safely, it does not appear that trainees are paying attention. ... (56 percent) of owners had received some form of 'formal' training.... owners who received such training were no less likely than others to keep guns loaded and unlocked. This surprising result is consistent with [hemenway, et.al.'s "Firearm Training and Storage" covered here].Note that cook and ludwig (c-l) when faced with indication that a lot of trained people (442 out of 789) don't seem to be doing what c-l think they should be doing know that those people must be fouled up, rather than thinking maybe they (c-l) don't understand something, even though they have no experience with firearms. Of course, their belief is supported by hemenway and crew that do exactly the same. And c-l would have us believe that that bunch of respondents who knew enough to lie to give the impression that guns are used a lot for defense were still stupid enough to freely admit to storing their firearms unsafely. Why did c-l not explain away the unsafe storage results as they had explained away the high defensive gun use results?
Automatic Stechkin pistol was added to Soviet Army armory in 1951
y. It was very popular among tanks and artillery crew members. It
were very popular because it`s large magazine capacity and for
BURST MODE! Many weapon experts noticed,
that APS was called pistol only by mistake (yeah, it look`s like
SMG more) .9mm PM ammunition, 20 shots in magazine. Three shots in the burst
(YES! IT IS A BURST! NOT TRIPLE!) Fire mode switching costs 1 AP. Burst fire
range is only 13!
Min. ST: 4 W: 6 lbs. Dmg: +10 Rng: 20 AP S: 4 T: 5 B: 5 (after switching)
RSA (Stechkin-Abramov revolver)
Value:450
In the end of the 20th century appeared the need of weapons
that could satisfy all requests of the MVD agents. Having
analyzed foreign police forces equipment,
specialists decided to put back in the service some
revolvers. RSA - is the product of cooperation of two
famous experts. But the weak 9mm PM ammo "limited" this
gun's popularity. 6 shots of 9mmm PM ammo.
Min. ST: 3 W: 4 lbs. Dmg: +8 Rng: 18 AP S: 4 T: 5 B: N/A
Nagan revolver. (1895 y. model)
Value:400
This "3-lined" revolver of the Nagan system is just an old damn
destructive piece of work. Regular weapon of the "chekists" and
Russian army officers at the beginning of the 20-th century. It`s a
Russian version of original Belgium Nagan. Uses 7.62mm ammo. Seven
shots.
Min. ST: 5 W: 5 lbs. Dmg: +8 Rng: 10 AP S: 5 T: 6 B: N/A
Fort-14
Value:900
This pistol was constructed by the Ukrainian weapon designers to
replace an antiquated PM. Very popular pre-war weapon. Easy toy, 15
shots of 9mm PM ammo.
Min. ST: 3 W: 3 lbs. Dmg: +8 Rng: 13 AP S: 5 T: 6 B: N/A
No comments:
Post a Comment