Gun owners more likely to be shot than non-gun owners

This should come as no surprise. Brandishing a gun is a good way to get yourself shot.

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.

American Public Health Association: Investigating the Link Between Gun Possession and Gun Assault

(via Disinfo)


  1. The “science” on this “study” was horrible. They called people who had been victims of violent crime and asked them if they had a gun when the crime occurred. Hmm… do you think people who have been victims of violent crime are likely to tell the truth to a stranger over the phone about whether they own a gun? I guarantee you that if somebody calls me up in that situation, I’m not telling them squat.

    Also, there’s the causality question. Here’s a quote from an article on the study:

    Criminologist Gary Kleck of Florida State University said the Penn results can be explained by the fact that people who are at risk of being shot are also more likely to buy or carry guns. Such people might have dangerous jobs or belong to a street gang or be involved in the illicit drug trade, for example.

    In an e-mail, Kleck explained his view with an analogy. “It is precisely as if medical researchers found that insulin use is more common among persons who suffer from diabetes than among those who are not diabetic (something that is most assuredly true), and concluded that insulin use raises one’s risk of diabetes.”

  2. Hmmmm…a person with a gun and without a gun get in a verbal confrontation. What happens? More than likely nothing.

    Two people with guns get in a verbal confrontation. What happens? Each is worried that the other person with a gun will shoot first, so they figure they need to be the first one. Someone shot, maybe killed.

    If you don’t own a gun, you are safer, because there is no chance of two guns.

    Also my kid can’t accidentally shoot a gun if it is not in the house.

    I know I am safer with no gun in the house.

    • Also, at least according to the police, the best thing you can do when confronted with someone brandishing a gun is to run. It’s harder to hit a moving target, and, if the guy shooting at you is a regular piece of scum, he’s not going to CARE if innocent bystanders get hit, and you ARE, which immediately puts you at a disadvantage. So run. You’re more likely to survive the attack if you do.

      Another thing gun nuts never mention: If someone comes looking for you with intent, they already have you at a disadvantage because they’re walking in locked and loaded. You have to find your piece, load it, aim, and fire. All they have to do is squeeze the trigger. And if they see you reaching, they’ll aim for you first.

Comments are closed.

© 2024 Technoccult

Theme by Anders NorénUp ↑