Paranoid? Hardly.

[Tom Givens]

Here is something I have been preaching about for years. It’s nice to see the same theme appear in a mainstream publication. This article appeared recently in The Federalist. https://thefederalist.com/2020/04/08...gainst-danger/

The basic premise of the article is that it is NOT paranoid or irrational to carry a firearm for self defense. Here is a small bit of that author’s data on the subject.

In 2017, 2.7 million Americans were injured in 6.4 million car crashes.

In 2018, 3.3 million Americans age 12 or older were the victim of one of the 6 million violent crimes. So, your odds of being involved in a violent crime are higher than your odds of being involved in an automobile accident. In this light, carrying a handgun is just like wearing a seatbelt. Good read.

[Doc_Glock]

Thank you.

[Totem Polar]

On occasion, a single post here goes into my screenshot file. This is one of those posts.

[JJN]

That was well written. Good find; thanks for sharing.

[KellyinAvon]

On occasion, a single post here goes into my screenshot file. This is one of those posts.

Absolutely! Excellent information.

[peterb]

Here is something I have been preaching about for years. It’s nice to see the same theme appear in a mainstream publication. This article appeared recently in The Federalist. https://thefederalist.com/2020/04/08...gainst-danger/

The basic premise of the article is that it is NOT paranoid or irrational to carry a firearm for self defense. Here is a small bit of that author’s data on the subject.

In 2017, 2.7 million Americans were injured in 6.4 million car crashes.

In 2018, 3.3 million Americans age 12 or older were the victim of one of the 6 million violent crimes. So, your odds of being involved in a violent crime are higher than your odds of being involved in an automobile accident. In this light, carrying a handgun is just like wearing a seatbelt. Good read.

Ok, but for the sake of accuracy, the problem with both those arguments as stated -- for auto accidents and violent crimes -- is that the calculated "odds" are based on a uniform, random distribution of events. In real life there are many things you can do to change your odds of being involved.

I'm not arguing that wearing a seatbelt or carrying a handgun is irrational. I'm just saying that calculating the odds for any specific person is more complex than those numbers.

[45dotACP]

The stats being used here are somewhat varied. One is the likelihood of being injured in an automobile accident compared to the likelihood of being victim of a violent crime, but the likelihood of simply being in an automobile accident where there is no injury is probably considerably higher

Not trying to nitpick, as I do believe my overall chances of being the victim of a violent crime justify my carrying a gun, but it seems like a distinction worth noting, as I don't believe I'm more likely to be victim of a violent crime than I am to be involved in an automobile accident of any sort.

Sent from my moto g(6) using Tapatalk

[jetfire]

Here is something I have been preaching about for years. It’s nice to see the same theme appear in a mainstream publication. This article appeared recently in The Federalist. https://thefederalist.com/2020/04/08...gainst-danger/

The basic premise of the article is that it is NOT paranoid or irrational to carry a firearm for self defense. Here is a small bit of that author’s data on the subject.

In 2017, 2.7 million Americans were injured in 6.4 million car crashes.

In 2018, 3.3 million Americans age 12 or older were the victim of one of the 6 million violent crimes. So, your odds of being involved in a violent crime are higher than your odds of being involved in an automobile accident. In this light, carrying a handgun is just like wearing a seatbelt. Good read.

Tom, related question to that. Was the information from the 60-odd shootings your students were in ever published anywhere? Like something handy I could reference for articles, etc?

[peterb]

It's a valid response to the question "Is there a rational basis for carrying a firearm for self-defense?". It's a good, quick answer if you need one for that argument.

The question "Does it make sense for ME to carry a firearm for self-defense?" is far more complex.

[RJ]

Thanks Tom. Good info.

Whenever I feel like my CCW is too much of a pain to strap on every day, I think about the Petit family.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cheshi...vasion_murders

"Hayes said in his confession that while he was raping Hawke-Petit on the living room floor Komisarjevsky entered and announced that Dr. Petit had escaped.[33] Hayes then strangled Hawke-Petit. He and Komisarjevsky doused her lifeless body and parts of the house, including the daughters' bedrooms, with gasoline.[1] While tied to their beds, both daughters were doused with gasoline as well. Investigators would later find the accelerant on the Petit sister's beds and on the clothing they were wearing.[34][35] Hayes and Komisarjevsky started a fire and fled the scene. Hayley and Michaela both died of smoke inhalation.[36][37] Hayley managed to escape her restraints and run out of her bedroom and into the hallway where she collapsed and died. Her body was found at the top of the staircase. Third and fourth-degree burns on her feet indicate that she got very close to the fire around the time she died. The medical examiner who performed an autopsy on her could not determine if the burns occurred before or after her death.[38][39][40] Michaela's body was found in her bedroom. She was still in her bed, her hands tied to it and her lower body hanging off of it.[38][41][42][29] Like with her older sister, Michaela's burns may have occurred while she as still alive."