And the CDC says...

[Drang]

CDC Study: Use of Firearms for Self-Defense is ‘Important Crime Deterrent’

“Self-defense can be an important crime deterrent,”

“Studies that directly assessed the effect of actual defensive uses of guns (i.e., incidents in which a gun was ‘used’ by the crime victim in the sense of attacking or threatening an offender) have found consistently lower injury rates among gun-using crime victims compared with victims who used other self-protective strategies,” the CDC study, entitled “Priorities For Research to Reduce the Threat of Firearm-Related Violence,” states.

The CDC’s latest report on firearms might not make many gun control activists happy – Rare

As for gun control measures potentially having an effect on decreasing casualties, the report expresses uncertainty: “Whether gun restrictions reduce firearm-related violence is an unresolved issue,” and there is no evidence “that passage of right-to-carry laws decrease or increase violence crime.” It also stated that proposed “gun turn-in programs are ineffective.”

[Mitchell, Esq.]

Russians hacked the study!

[ranger]

Maybe its because the CDC is downtown Atlanta and they see the local news.............

[Glenn E. Meyer]

There is a subtle problem. We know many DGUs are deterrent in nature. How many are reported by concealed carriers outside of the home. If someone breaks in, you call the cops. If someone tries to mug you or intimidate you outside - do you call? A friend of mine was approached at a gas station - long story short - he said to the crook - I don't know want what you are selling and you don't want want I'm selling. This with a hand on a 1911. No report. Another was similarly approached (1911) fan by several miscreants. He says: I'm not XXX. XXXX and I will shoot you dead. Old marine and fierce, they flee - no report. XXX.XXXX - that's a mutual friend of ours who said he suggests no resistance to a mugger. Just give over the money. Well, that's a judgment call and the marine isn't ok with it. So it just came to mind at the time. It did convince them to flee even if they had no idea whom XXX was.

Also, there are many crimes that are stopped before the person is harmed. Are they clocked as a crime? Is there a breakdown of successful vs. nonsuccessful crimes if the victim is armed? Or is just a crime. They did say it was a deterrent but does that figure in the overall report rate?

Whatever, not bad news.

[BehindBlueI's]

Also, there are many crimes that are stopped before the person is harmed. Are they clocked as a crime? Is there a breakdown of successful vs. nonsuccessful crimes if the victim is armed? Or is just a crime. They did say it was a deterrent but does that figure in the overall report rate?

Whatever, not bad news.

I'll try to address some of that.

1) We have no way to know how many crimes are deterred and not reported. I've got several in my own statistics were a weapon was displayed but neither side fired. I also know of at least two incidents personally (before I was LEO) where a display only stopped unwanted actions (a threat with a knife and a likely sexual assault). Sometimes people don't want to bother with making a report, sometimes they are afraid they will get hemmed up, sometimes they just don't think of it. The first stat I have for this year involved a delivery driver. Even though he reported the attempt robbery, he had motivation not to as his employer may not be happy he was carrying a gun while on the clock.

2) If it's a crime before a person is harmed depends. If someone is aggressively panhandling and it MIGHT have turned into a robbery, no. If someone already made the demand for property and then the good guy gun comes out, then yes. The same could be said for burglaries/residential entries (did the person make entry/kick the door in the attempt/etc yet?). "Attempt" usually requires something like "substantial steps taken toward the commission of the crime of..." Also, there's abandonment of the crime, but for our purposes the answer is "maybe".

3) I am keeping my own stats of successful vs non-successful resist attempts. I don't know what else is out there. My stats are solely the random crimes, I kick out the domestics, LEO involved, the doper-on-doper shootings and robberies, etc. This skews the data, but I think it skews it in a way that's most relevant to most people.

[joshs]

The report referenced in the article is from 2013.

[Drang]

The report referenced in the article is from 2013.

So it is.

Gee, I wonder why no one heard about it at the time?

[Oldstate]

So it is.

Gee, I wonder why no one heard about it at the time?

Yes it is. I don't know why it is news all the sudden. I have a link and copy of the actual study saved and was posting it in response to anti-gun propaganda I saw on social media the moment it was released. It got zero media attention...so much so that people are still saying the CDC isn't allowed to research gun violence and a CNN commentator actually laughed it off when it was brought up in an interview.

I also like to explain the actual reason with links for the Dickey Amend. Basically people at the CDC openly discussed using "research" to turn public opinion against guns.

http://http://thefederalist.com/2015...search-budget/

[5pins]

Russians hacked the study!

Fake news!

[Drang]

http://http://thefederalist.com/2015...search-budget/

That link didn't work, this one should: Why Congress Cut The CDC’s Gun Research Budget

I get why the banners want to suppress this and similar studies (that is, studies with similar results), I don't understand why it just sort of faded into the background if anyone on Our Side knew about it.