Originally Posted by Librarian
First we'd have to get a definition of "successful uses of guns in self-defense" that most people would accept.
Since my definition would include cases where no shots were fired, then we'd have to figure out how to get people to honestly and consistently report those.
If you haven't already read it, look at Gary Kleck's work - his 1995 article on DGU - http://www.saf.org/lawreviews/kleckandgertz1.htm
- started a lot of the discussion.
I bought a hardcopy of that journal back then, I thought it was so important.
We face a disadvantage against the Disarmament Lobby on that topic, just because quantifying defensive gun uses where an attack was prevented is nearly impossible. Even determining legitimate cases of self defense is difficult due to how some legal areas classify incidents. If there's a No-Bill its easy enough to determine, but sometimes the DA just declines to file charges and that's the end of it. Was incident X a case of self defense? Who knows, it never went to court.
But crimes with guns, well, those are downright childs play to locate and post for all the world to see , even if no actual criminal attack happened with a firearm. DEA raids a crack den and finds an SBR next to the drugs? BAM! GUN CRIME!
If the truth about self defense with firearms were told on the airwaves, we'd have a "national conversation on gun laws" alright.........
BTW ,South Dakota is #1 in the USA for Lax Gun Laws! Funny, I have yet to see a kid get shot by gang crossfire on the news. In point of fact, the only time a gun got used in anger at all in the past 90 days in this state is when someone tried to run over a State LEO , who thus understandably drew his weapon.
Yup, this place is just a cesspool of gun violence and death, where just one shooting a year is considered ultra violent. I should move to someplace safer like Chicago.