CDC Study: Use of Firearms For Self-Defense is ‘Important Crime Deterrent’

[Free Northman]

OK guys, I searched back 10 pages and the only gun debate thread I could find was the 21 page "Guns now Printable" thread which is now closed. Sorry if I missed a more recent one in my skim reading.

Anyway, I came across this interesting article, about a new CDC report that's come out on gun violence, and thought I'd put it out there. Here's the link:

http://cnsnews.com/n...crime-deterrent

And here's the link to the actual report it references:

http://www.nap.edu/c...record_id=18319

I haven't read the report itself, but from the article that references it, it would appear that the findings are actually counterproductive to Obama's gun control goals when he initially commissioned the research.

Specifically worth noting is:

“Studies that directly assessed the effect of actual defensive uses of guns (i.e., incidents in which a gun was ‘used’ by the crime victim in the sense of attacking or threatening an offender) have found consistently lower injury rates among gun-using crime victims compared with victims who used other self-protective strategies,” the CDC study, entitled “Priorities For Research to Reduce the Threat of Firearm-Related Violence,” states.

Also very noteworthy is the following:

The Institute of Medicine and the National Research Council released the results of their research through the CDC last month. Researchers compiled data from previous studies in order to guide future research on gun violence, noting that “almost all national survey estimates indicate that defensive gun uses by victims are at least as common as offensive uses by criminals, with estimates of annual uses ranging from about 500,000 to more than 3 million per year.”

Also:

The report expresses uncertainty about gun control measures, stating that “whether gun restrictions reduce firearm-related violence is an unresolved issue,” and that there is no evidence “that passage of right-to-carry laws decrease or increase violence crime.” It also stated that proposed “gun turn-in programs are ineffective.”

And lastly what caught my eye:

The CDC’s findings - that guns are an effective and often used crime deterrent and that most firearm incidents are not fatal - could affect the future of gun violence research..

In any case, I thought this is some interesting research on a topical issue, and I invite comment on it from all interested parties. I make no comment on the standing of the researchers, or the weight of this evidence. I put that out to you more dilligent folks who have the time to go and dig up some dirt on the researchers, or alternatively find reasons to endorse them.

My comments would just be that on the face of it, this research seems to support the position of us pro-gunners. Let's hear the your views.

[Sci-2]

Wait, the report is the 123 page one right?

I might skim some of it but first I want to know it's the correct one you're talking about.

Thanks!

[Free Northman]

Hi Sci.

I believe it is. I got there from the link that was provided in the article itself, so I assume it is the correct report.

If not, then the link in the article is incorrect. Yeah, the 123 pages is what put me off too.

[Seli]

The CDC report seems to be an attempt to collect all available information to try and determine what areas would be good targets for new research.

Which explains why so much of the information is so familiar (eg the Slate summary http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/human_nature/2013/06/handguns_suicides_mass_shootings_deaths_and_self_defense_findings_from_a.html ).

But it is nice to have an overview, and I hope the CDC gets to do some research that doesn't have to do with the relation between media/entertainment and (gun)violence.

[Free Northman]

Thanks to my friend google, I found a bunch of other news sites headlining this study's results, now that I know what to search for. Here are a few of the interesting headlines:

Obama orders CDC gun violence study, study shreds his position

http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/56191

CDC Study Ordered by Obama Contradicts White House Anti-gun Narrative

http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/crime/item/15941-cdc-study-ordered-by-obama-contradicts-white-house-anti-gun-narrative

CDC: Armed Victims Less Likely to be Harmed by Attackers

http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/Guns-Self-Defense-CDC-NRA/2013/07/20/id/516128

Most probably these are all conservative leaning sites (I haven't checked them all), but at least it means the media has picked up on this news.

[Seli]

Daily Kos also has a piece, as well as Slate, so it seems to get broad attention.

[TerraPrime]

I wonder what's FLoW's take on this? ;)

[Sci-2]

I wonder what's FLoW's take on this? ;)

Didn't FLoW already present a lot of this information?

As Seli said, a lot of this seems like gathering past studies.

Did Obama ever say people shouldn't utilize guns for defense of their homes?

[Free Northman]

Didn't FLoW already present a lot of this information?

As Seli said, a lot of this seems like gathering past studies.

Did Obama ever say people shouldn't utilize guns for defense of their homes?

While it may be an overview of previous research, it seems this report has the credibility of having been commissioned by Obama, hence it making the news now. It seems to confirm the validity, therefore, of what a lot of pro-gunners have been using as their arguments for some time.

[Sci-2]

While it may be an overview of previous research, it seems this report has the credibility of having been commissioned by Obama, hence it making the news now. It seems to confirm the validity, therefore, of what a lot of pro-gunners have been using as their arguments for some time.

I guess I'm not clear on the aspects of this study that contradict Obama's stated policy plans, though I can see where various progressive ideas about guns are, at minimum, challenged by the data.

Admittedly I've not followed the President closely on this issue.

[davos]

I've skimmed the study rather than reading it thoroughly. That being said, primarily it summarizes existing research and suggests potentially productive avenues for future studies. Given that there is a well-supported narrative (for example see: http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2012/12/gun_violence_research_nra_and_congress_blocked_gun_control_studies_at_cdc.html) that the gun lobby has done a remarkably effective job of limiting researching into gun violence that is not taken from perspectives they are comfortable with, it might not be surprising that a study built on a foundation of recent research might be skewed.

Even with that, I don't see it as being the "shredding" of the administration's position that some are holding it up as. The study indicates it can not draw conclusions about either the effectiveness of gun control laws or of right to carry laws. There is plenty of meat here for the gun-rights folks and it certainly isn't something for the gun-control crowd to celebrate, but its also not a game-changer in the debate by any means.

[Sci-2]

Even with that, I don't see it as being the "shredding" of the administration's position that some are holding it up as. The study indicates it can not draw conclusions about either the effectiveness of gun control laws or of right to carry laws. There is plenty of meat here for the gun-rights folks and it certainly isn't something for the gun-control crowd to celebrate, but its also not a game-changer in the debate by any means.

I do think it the numbers showing guns deter criminals and protect citizens is a major challenge for those who claim anyone having guns is adding to the problem.

Suicide by firearms is a bit complicated - I'm not 100% convinced that all those people would find another way to kill themselves. (I'm similarly unconvinced that people who do violence in the name religion would find some other excuse.)

As far as universal background checks go, the study survey seems to show that's a good idea? At least what I got from the more liberal sites that analyzed the legislation.

My own position is nebulous, as I've not kept up with every gun thread nor done a lot of research on my own. I'm very much in favor of using guns to defend yourself, and at least somewhat [against] civilians putting themselves in positions where they are counting on guns to see them through.

[Lily Valley]

Could one of the smart medical people on this board tell me why the Center for DISEASE Control is doing this study? I'm not being facetious, I'm just flabbergasted. I'm trying to imagine CERN being tasked with airplane safety...

[chris999]

The areas in America that have the highest per capita firearm ownership, also have the lowest amount of crime.

It is a fact that no amount of spin can make go away.

[Prince of the North]

Could one of the smart medical people on this board tell me why the Center for DISEASE Control is doing this study? I'm not being facetious, I'm just flabbergasted. I'm trying to imagine CERN being tasked with airplane safety...

Study of risk behaviors (i.e. behaviors which may contribute to disease and/or death) is well within the purview of the CDC.

[Shryke]

The areas in America that have the highest per capita firearm ownership, also have the lowest amount of crime.

It is a fact that no amount of spin can make go away.

It's not actually, but when has that stopped you before.

[Lily Valley]

Study of risk behaviors (i.e. behaviors which may contribute to disease and/or death) is well within the purview of the CDC.

Thank you. Have some reading to do.

[Shryke]

And here's the link to the actual report it references:

http://www.nap.edu/c...record_id=18319

I haven't read the report itself, but from the article that references it, it would appear that the findings are actually counterproductive to Obama's gun control goals when he initially commissioned the research.

I suggest you actually do, since your sources, even just the quotes you showed, don't seem to represent the reports actual content very well.

For instance, the section of defensive gun use only references studies already done, most by Kleck notably who's research is contested by frequently in debates on gun use, and they specifically say "More research is needed". (pg 15-16 if you are looking)

I mean, in general the report seems to be more about assessing what type of research needs to be done. It's not actually research itself. It's basically saying "We have determined/decided that these are the important areas that need to be studied and questions that need to be answered".

[Shryke]

Interesting point I found at several points in the report that I hadn't known before though:

- gun violence in domestic situations is overwhelmingly directed at women and homicides of spouses or ex-spouses is almost always done by firearm

[sologdin]

Interesting point I found at several points in the report that I hadn't known before though:

- gun violence in domestic situations is overwhelmingly directed at women and homicides of spouses or ex-spouses is almost always done by firearm

so, to take this out of context in an antigun way in the same manner that progun writers have taken other parts:

CDC finds that firearm industry causes domestic violence

CDC determines that firearm lobby is wifekilling lobby

Study proves that guns are anti-women