Guns are for suicide, and other anti-gun lies

Let’s take another way for people to use statistics to lie to you.

Murthy has already said that he plans to use his office to work on obesity, not guns. But looking at the instances in which firearm use ends in death, it becomes clear that there’s a health case to be made for gun control, too.

Guns are far more likely to be used in suicides than in killing assailants:

Then he shows you a graph that looks very much like this one I cobbled together in Excel

HomicideSuicideDGU1

and goes on to say

According to the CDC, 19,392 people committed suicide with a gun in 2010, the latest year for which data are available. That same year, meanwhile, the FBI recorded only 230 justifiable homicides (the legal term) in which a private citizen used a firearm to kill a felon during the commission of a felony.

OMG! I have a gun, so I’m at risk for suicide?!?!?!?

Oh, wait. I missed something. What did she say again?

But looking at the instances in which firearm use ends in death

Umm, why limit it just to “instances in which firearms use ends in death?” If I have to use a gun against another human, I am legally required to use it only when I reasonably fear death, serious bodily injury, or sexual assault. If I haul out the old XD and point it at someone, I am worried, with good cause, that I’m about to die. That means that if I don’t die, I win. In fact, any result other than the good guys ending up dead is considered a win. Why does Olga demand I kill my assailant? Is she not pleased if the assailant runs away, leaving both of us scared but unharmed? What kind of bloodthirsty ghoul is Olga, anyway?

With that in mind I did some poking about and looked up the various estimates of defensive gun uses (DGUs) and I added them to Olga’s little graph.

HomicideSuicideDGU2

Even the lowest number of estimated DGUs is more that five times higher that the number of suicides using a firearm.

I’m not even going to get into how Olga misrepresents suicide statistics. She attempts to paint suicide with a gun as a problem for young people.

Suicide is the second-leading cause of death for people under 35, and the Harvard School of Public Health has found that “suicide rates among children, women and men of all ages are higher in states where more households have guns.” More than six in 10 of the firearm deaths in the past decade were suicides, not homicides.

This graphic will immediately show you what a lie that is.

Daily Deaths(Graphic is from NYT, Bill Marsh)

See where all the red cartridges are concentrated? White men age 40 and over. Just adding up the cartridges shows 25 white men 40 or over vs. 20 in all other categories. If you use the CDC WISQARS info you will quickly determine that one half of all suicides using any method were white men over the age of 35. Suicide is an older white male problem. Statistically, the only people less likely to kill themselves than 14-19 year olds is the 0-13 group. And when you run the numbers, guns aren’t the most popular choice for teen and child suicides.

Maybe this explains why the Left likes to lump suicides in with homicides and scream “GUN DEATHS!!” yet refuses to do anything to reduce actual suicides. They really don’t care if we white male gun owners over the age of 40 kill ourselves. They regard us as the enemy, so our deaths help them twice. Once as statistics to support their gun grabbing agenda, and a second time because we aren’t around to vote against them.

For those who wish to do their own research, here’s where I got the DGU numbers. Here’s the table of data.

And here is WISQARS. Go ahead and poke around with it. You’ll find that suicides are an older white male thing.

 

Break into enough houses and eventually you’ll find an armed homeowner

Nothing says “Get out of my house!” like a bullet.

According to Bailey, (Suspect 1) and (Suspect 2) attempted to forcibly enter a home on Dix Creek #1 Road in Leicester at 11:12 am. The homeowner, who was at home at the time of the break-in, fired a shot at the suspects, who then fled the scene.

Nobody was injured during the incident.

But a win is a win. The homeowner was just fine as well. So who did his gunfire chase off?

Suspect 1

Suspect 2

Bad people only respect force. What would they have done to an unarmed person?

How to lie with statistics, or Rape in Canada

I am going to show you a well sourced graph that uses very good governmental data. All the data is good, but the graph is a lie.

US vs Canada Rape

OMG! Canadian women are getting raped at rates FAR FAR higher than American women. Are Canadian men all monsters covered in maple leaves?

NO. You’ve been hoodwinked.

Here’s the data.

US Crime Stats, including state by state forcible rape statistics

Canadian Crime Stats including Sexual Assault level 1-3

Do you see the difference? The Canadian crime stats don’t measure the same thing that the US crime stats measure. Let’s look at the US crime stats definition of “Forcible Rape.”

Forcible rape, as defined in the FBI’s Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program, is the carnal knowledge of a female forcibly and against her will. Attempts or assaults to commit rape by force or threat of force are also included; however, statutory rape (without force) and other sex offenses are excluded.

Data collection

The UCR Program counts one offense for each female victim of a forcible rape, attempted forcible rape, or assault with intent to rape, regardless of the victim’s age. A rape by force involving a female victim and a familial offender is counted as a forcible rape and not an act of incest. All other crimes of a sexual nature are considered to be Part II offenses; as such, the UCR Program collects only arrest data for those crimes. The offense of statutory rape, in which no force is used but the female victim is under the age of consent, is included in the arrest total for the sex offenses category. Sexual attacks on males are counted as aggravated assaults or sex offenses, depending on the circumstances and the extent of any injuries.

Now let’s look at the Canadian definition of Sexual Assault levels 1-3

Uniform Crime Reporting Survey (UCR2)

The incident-based Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR2) Survey captures criminal incidents that have come to the attention of the police, which includes 4 different types of sexual offences as defined by the Criminal Code.

Sexual assault level 1 (s.271): An assault committed in circumstances of a sexual nature such that the sexual integrity of the victim is violated. Level 1 involves minor physical injuries or no injuries to the victim.

Sexual assault level 2 (s.272): Sexual assault with a weapon, threats, or causing bodily harm.

Aggravated sexual assault (level 3): Sexual assault that results in wounding, maiming, disfiguring or endangering the life of the victim.

Other sexual offences: A group of offences that are meant to primarily address incidents of sexual abuse directed at children. The Criminal Code offences included in this category are: Sexual interference (s.151), Invitation to sexual touching (s.152), Sexual exploitation (s.153), Incest (s.155), Anal intercourse (s.159), and Bestiality (s.160).

So in addition to spelling things differently, Canadians count things as Sexual Assault that would be not be counted in the US as Forcible Rape. Canada counts Sexual Assaults whether they are unwanted kissing or rape, while the US statistics are limited to just the rapes. You can see why our numbers would be a great deal lower if we’re only counting a subset of the crimes that Canada is counting.

Why do I point this out? Because whenever we are treated to a discussion of how scary and violent the US is, the anti-gunners dump a lot of statistics on us comparing the US to whichever countries they are currently enamored of. There’s no attempt to determine if those statistics are collected in the same way from one country to another. When we compare countries, we try to stick to Murder and Non-Negligent Homicides because dead bodies are fairly easy to count. There’s not a lot of fudging the numbers you can do. Or at least we thought.

We now know that the UK murder numbers are tainted by the fact that in the UK, they don’t count it as a murder until someone gets convicted of the crime. The coroners in the UK don’t even return a finding of Homicide on obvious homicides. They write a narrative of their findings and hand it off to the cops. But if no one gets convicted, it’s possible that even though they have a dead body, it never gets counted in the official statistics.

We also know that in Japan, police officers routinely lie on their criminal records and categorize obvious homicides as suicide, or even “found body.” Japanese police detectives get promoted based upon what percentage of crimes get solved. If there isn’t an obvious perpetrator standing over the body for the cop to arrest, the pressure to mark it down as suicide or “found body” is enormous. In many cases they even refuse to do an autopsy.

Whenever someone tries to show you some statistics, remember this graph. Remember that it’s not always obvious if all the data is good and that the data is comparable from one country to the next.

Beating a man to death

Sometimes a beating leads to death.

Police have charged a 52-year-old Cary man with beating another man to death last summer in Southeast Raleigh.

Sometimes it takes a few days to die.

Last year, on June 29, paramedics were dispatched to the 100 block of Idlewild Avenue, east of downtown Raleigh, where a man was reported to be injured. They transported (Victim), 50, to WakeMed, where he was treated for head injuries and later released, said Raleigh police spokesman Jim Sughrue.

On July 10, (Victim) returned to WakeMed complaining of health problems. He died at the hospital later that day.

11 days after the beating the victim died.

Suspect

Victim

The Bully Moms will be happy to know that no guns were used in this killing.

US vs. Canada Intentional Homicide Rates

Just for fun I made up a graph comparing US States (and DC) vs. Canadian Provinces intentional homicide rates. Some places in Canada aren’t very safe.

US vs Canada Homicide Rates(Click to enlarge)

I’ve placed a horizontal line at right about the US National Average of 4.7 homicides per 100K population as well as a vertical line separating the US and Canada.

Overall, Canada is a pretty safe place, but then again, overall, so is the US. I suspect that Canada has the same issues as we do, homicides being drug trafficking related rather than random. How does the Canadian drug policy differ from ours?

Source for US statistics HERE

Source for Canadian statistics HERE

Is the US really a crime ridden slaughterhouse?

We hear it all the time. “The US has the highest gun murder rate of any industrialized western country not at war.” Or in the case that Weer’d dug up, the “highest gun murder rate in the ‘developed’ world.” What does that mean, anyway?

Read the sentences above again. Note all the qualifiers. “Industrialized,” “Western,” “Developed.” They make no claims about the world as a whole, just the small subset of countries that they wish to compare the USA to. The one Weer’d dug up used the member states of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (minus Mexico) as a proxy for “developed.” Basically all they are saying is that among white(ish) western European countries, plus a few more, we rank second worst in gun related murders after Mexico. So how do we rate in the whole world?

Firearm Homicide Rate(Source data, List of countries by firearm-related death rate, Wikipedia)

Our rate doesn’t look so bad now, does it? We have a total firearm homicide rate of 3.6 per 100K. Keep in mind, that’s just the 75 countries they have data for.

But we’ve always maintained to the anti-gunners that dead is dead. Stabbed to death is just as bad as shot to death is just as bad as strangled. So how does the US compare in overall homicide rates?

Intentional Homicide total

In this graph there are so many countries that Excel is unable to label them all. The US is two bars lower than Belarus and two bars above Surinam. Our intentional homicide rate is 4.8 per 100K.

Let’s make the whole thing more clear. Here is the above graph broken down into smaller graphs. They all use the same scale of 0-100, so the bars are proportional on every graph.

Intentional Homicide Part1Intentional Homicide Part2Intentional Homicide Part3Intentional Homicide Part4Intentional Homicide Part5Intentional Homicide Part6

If you want to have a lot of fun, go through the countries on the first 3 graphs and count how many of them are places that rich white liberals consider good vacation destinations.

This isn’t secret data. It’s all posted on Wikipedia for everyone to look at. You can make your own graphs using the current data here.

What’s going on is that the gun haters cherry pick the countries that they want to compare the US to. They don’t look at the whole world, but just a tiny subset. They ignore the very real problem that other countries do not collect homicide data in the same way as we do in the US. Our rule is “dead body that isn’t clearly suicide or accident = homicide.” In the UK, it’s not a murder until someone gets convicted. (Seriously, read this and see how different the UK statistics are from reality)

So next time someone spouts off about how murderous the US is, point them to my handy dandy graphs.

UPDATE: Just for grins I made a graph comparing US States vs. Canadian Provinces. Check it out.

Duke Park Robbers

What’s worse than criminals? Criminals working together.

Police say they are looking for two men who were involved in a series of daytime burglaries in North Durham.

The lede is misleading as they are actually looking for 4 people. The other two are underage.

Suspect 1

Suspect 2

This is why I carry, even at home. I am at home a lot during what would ordinarily be considered work hours. What am I supposed to do when confronted with 4 people breaking down my door if I don’t have, and use, a gun?

See also Leopards, spots not changed

Criminality is a lifestyle

(Suspect)’s past caught up with him Monday along with a Raleigh police officer who arrested him on a larceny charge at a Walmart store and then charged him with being a habitual thief.

Those who have been following along at home know that criminals are people who commit crimes on a regular basis. They don’t wake up one day and decide suddenly that they’re going to stop following the laws and morals of society. They’ve been that way a long time.

Suspect

Never forget that for the 10% you see, there’s the 90% hidden underwater.

Lies of the Antis

I wanted to expand on a comment I left over at Weer’d Beard’s place. He was mocking Jim Jones wannabe “Baldr Odinson” Jason Kilgore.

As for “Felons Obtaining Guns”, did I miss a memo where the NRA is for repealing GCA ’68? Its a crappy law, and need of revision, but overall its a law where its heart is in the right place. I subscribe to the philosophy that if somebody isn’t trustworthy enough to own a gun they shouldn’t be able to freely walk around the same streets that I do, but as a pragmatist we simply can’t lock up or execute every violent felon out there. On the other hand, somebody who is convicted of perjury like Martha Stewart is no more a threat to anybody’s safety than the dude on the corner who’s never been arrested for anything. Non-Violent felonies are a bit of a red herring in the idea of gun ownership.

He is talking about a graphic that Jason posted somewhere that makes the claim that the NRA is working to get guns for felons.

Like I posted in my comment, this is one of those typical anti-gunner lie that mixes just a hint of truth with about 10 gallons of horseshit. When talking about the things that the gun haters say, it’s often helpful to go back to the source material they got their info from. And who publishes the talking points for the left? Why Media Mutters Against America, that’s who!

Under current Georgia law, individuals claiming immunity from prosecution under “Stand Your Ground” must be complying with Georgia gun laws when they use their firearm.

However under H.B. 875, “Stand Your Ground” claimants would no longer be required to have been in compliance with Chapter 11, Article 4, Part 3 of Georgia’s criminal code. That part of Georgia’s code includes provisions on carrying weapons on school grounds, carrying a handgun without a license, the possession of firearms by convicted felons, the possession of handguns by minors, and the discharging of a firearm “while under the influence of alcohol or drugs.”

Georgia media have largely overlooked this significant change in law that could grant legal immunity to individuals who possess guns illegally.

There you have it. The latest Outrageous Outrage in gun laws is the part of Georgia House Bill 875 that says basically “If it was a good self defense shoot, then you get immunity for any other laws you broke as well.”

I don’t think this is a problem. As a matter of fact, I doubt most people would have a problem with this. So that’s why it’s not being presented like this. It’s being presented in a far different way.

Yet, the most insidious part of this bill, which has been mostly missed by the media, probably makes this the most extreme gun legislation to have ever been considered in this country. I’m having a hard time typing this it is so ridiculous, but here it goes. Those using a Stand Your Ground defense—you know, for when someone comes along with the especially threatening jumbo bag of Skittles—would no longer have to be in compliance with Georgia’s Criminal Code. That’s right, a felon who has illegally obtained a gun (it is by definition illegal for a felon to have one) can now fire at will at someone playing that newfangled rap music in their car extra loud as long as they “saw” that person reach for something. The fact that they’re committing a crime by even having a gun will not get in the way of the Stand Your Ground defense.

Genius!

Well, we can’t expect anything like an approach to the truth out of Cliff Schecter.

So let’s break it all down for you. The Georgia Legislature is planning on passing a relatively innocuous pro liberty bill. It shortens the list of places where the State demands you remain unarmed. It makes clear that necessary self defense trumps other considerations. And it advances liberty just a little bit more. The gun haters can’t stand the idea that liberty will advance even one more step. Not even in Georgia, a state they would prefer never to be caught dead in. They’ve got millions from Michael Bloomberg and so they’re going to play goal line defense in every state. And they’re not afraid to lie while they do it.

Gun grabbers lie. They have to. It’s all they have.

In compliance with the new www.GunFreeZone.net rules for gun blogs, here are some links to the actual bill and the actual Georgia law

HB875

A person who uses threats or force in accordance with Code Section 16-3-21, 16-3-23, 16-3-23.1, or 16-3-24 shall be immune from criminal prosecution therefor unless in the use of deadly force, such person utilizes a weapon the carrying or possession of which is unlawful by such person under Part 2 or 3 of Article 4 of Chapter 11 of this title.

Note how “or 3″ is struck out.

Chapter 11, Article 4, Section 3

2010 Georgia Code
TITLE 16 – CRIMES AND OFFENSES
CHAPTER 11 – OFFENSES AGAINST PUBLIC ORDER AND SAFETY
ARTICLE 4 – DANGEROUS INSTRUMENTALITIES AND PRACTICES
PART 3 – CARRYING AND POSSESSION OF FIREARMS

 

Criminalizing a difference of opinion

The best way to win an argument with someone is to convince them not to even show up. Failing that, you convince him to leave. That’s what the anti-gunners at Moms Demand is trying. Check out this comment left for me.

You appear to have some “stalking” characteristics yourself sir. Very obsessive over the Moms group aren’t you?

This was left on a post about a domestic violence attempted murder that I posted yesterday. The local Demanding Mommies have said the same or worse to me on Twitter.

Let’s consider the logic of this. I watch, counter protest, and report on the group Moms Demand Action, a wholly owned subsidiary of Michael Bloomberg, Inc. Calling my work in countering MDA “stalking” is basically accusing me of a crime for working to win a political argument.

So why do they do it? We’re “bullies” for standing up to them. We’re “stalkers” for counter-protesting them. They misuse language in a deliberate attempt to make us stop. They know that they can’t win against a dedicated group of gun owners and liberty lovers. The only way to win is to get us to give up. So they attack us as “bullies” and “stalkers,” they play the victim card, and they hope that our natural decency will cause us to back off. You must resist this.

Of course they call us names. I suspect that worse will happen soon. The first chance they get to have one of us arrested for “stalking,” they’ll take it. They want us to cede the field to them. They want us to shut up so that they can lie and propagandize without fear of contradiction. Don’t give it to them.