• @Garbanzo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        21 year ago

        What are you trying to point out with your link? All I’m seeing is more guns = more homicide, but it seems like your point was that guns are not effective self defense tools and I’m not seeing the connection.

        • spaceghotiOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          11 year ago

          https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2759797/

          Objectives. We investigated the possible relationship between being shot in an assault and possession of a gun at the time.

          Methods. We enrolled 677 case participants that had been shot in an assault and 684 population-based control participants within Philadelphia, PA, from 2003 to 2006. We adjusted odds ratios for confounding variables.

          Results. After adjustment, individuals in possession of a gun were 4.46 (P < .05) times more likely to be shot in an assault than those not in possession. Among gun assaults where the victim had at least some chance to resist, this adjusted odds ratio increased to 5.45 (P < .05).

          Conclusions. On average, guns did not protect those who possessed them from being shot in an assault. Although successful defensive gun uses occur each year, the probability of success may be low for civilian gun users in urban areas. Such users should reconsider their possession of guns or, at least, understand that regular possession necessitates careful safety countermeasures.

          Is that clear enough for you? Possessing a gun for self defense increases the chances that you or your loved ones will be hurt in the act of defending yourself. The mere presence of a gun creates an escalation of violence during confrontations, regardless of whether or not the justification is “self defense.”

          • @agent_flounder@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            01 year ago

            That’s an interesting study. I didn’t reply to the earlier post as I wanted to get a chance to review and think on it more. Appreciate the added clarity here.

          • @Garbanzo@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            -31 year ago

            It’s clear that you’ll move the goal posts and pull out something new when someone points out your flawed argument. Stop trying to do your side favors and the debate might have a snowball’s chance.

            • spaceghotiOP
              link
              fedilink
              01 year ago

              I’m sorry. Does offering clear, reliable sources to prove my point offend you? That sounds positively horrible for you. How about a hug?

              • @Garbanzo@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                -11 year ago

                clear, reliable sources to prove my point

                Did you forget the part where you supplied a link to sources that didn’t relate to the point you were making?

                • spaceghotiOP
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  01 year ago

                  The part where I pointed out that the guns don’t make people safer? Two links (I can find more!) in support of that conclusion? I’m confused as to your motives in accusing me of being dishonest unless your goal is to try to pretend that I haven’t actually proven the point that I’ve been making all along.

                  Either way, I can see that further discussion is pointless. Feel free to have the last word.