|
|
|
NOTE!
This is a real-time comments system. As such, it's also a
free speech zone within guidelines set forth on the Post
Comments page. Opinions expressed here may or may not
reflect those of KeepAndBearArms staff, members, or
any other living person besides the one who posted them.
Please keep that in mind. We ask that all who post
comments assure that they adhere to our Inclusion
Policy, but there's a bad apple in every
bunch, and we have no control over bigots and
other small-minded people. Thank you. --KeepAndBearArms.com
|
The
Below Comments Relate to this Newslink:
Americans Rarely Use Guns for Self-Defense Despite Widespread Belief
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
The common narrative that armed Americans routinely use their firearms to protect themselves and their loved ones from threats has been dealt a significant blow by new research suggesting such scenarios are exceedingly rare.
A comprehensive study published March 14 in JAMA Network Open revealed that less than 1% of gun owners reported using their weapon defensively in the past year, while exposure to gun violence was dramatically more common. |
| Comment by:
Judge100
(3/15/2025)
|
The survey mentioned in this article only surveyed 3000 gun owners. In contrast, the 2021 National Firearms survey polled "fifty-four thousand U.S. residents aged 18 and over, and it identified 16,708 gun owners."
Results: "approximately a third
of gun owners (31.1%) have used a firearm to defend themselves or their property,
often on more than one occasion, and it estimates that guns are used defensively by
firearms owners in approximately 1.67 million incidents per year."
Nice try.
|
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.' The right of the whole people, old and young, men, women and boys, and not militia only, to keep and bear arms of every description, and not such merely as are used by the militia, shall not be infringed, curtailed, or broken in upon, in the smallest degree; and all this for the important end to be attained: the rearing up and qualifying a well-regulated militia, so vitally necessary to the security of a free State. Our opinion is that any law, State or Federal, is repugnant to the Constitution, and void, which contravenes this right. [Nunn vs. State, 1 Ga. (1 Kel.) 243, at 251 (1846)] |
|
|
