Gun Control & RKBA
In reply to the discussion: Concealed Carry’s Body Count (VPC padding the numbers again) [View all]DonP
(6,185 posts)I could be wrong, but it's a habit of gun control "fans" to quote different numbers as to how much more likely you are to shoot a family member or "friend or associate" than defend yourself. I've seen them use 43, 21, 57 all kinds of random numbers. Total BS.
The one thing you won't see is any of them actually reading the study or the peer critiques of it that made Kellerman revise it three separate times.
So the number is accurate ... if it's the 1980's. if you live in a crack dealing neighborhood in the Northwest US at the height of the epidemic, and if you consider other drug dealers as "friends and associates" the way Kellerman did for his "research".
But the poster in question would rather believe a bumper sticker number he read on someone else post than the CDC and FBI numbers of Defensive Gun Uses. The DoJ and CDC are obviously biased. So I'm guessing trying to reason there is pretty pointless.
But hell, it's 10AM, sunny and already 50 degrees in the Chicago area. I'm going to the outdoor range with some folks from one of my CCW classes to qualify and allow more armed, law abiding citizens on the streets of Illinois that can defend themselves.
Meanwhile ... the control folks wring their hands in Mom's basement and play their violent Call of Duty games.
Happy Pi Day all.