Women in a house with a gun much more likely to be shot.

The NRA likes to claim that guns are an equalizer for women but the truth is women who have a gun in the house are more likely to have that gun used against them.

http://articles.latimes.com/2014/feb...udies-20140224

The NRA likes to claim that guns are an equalizer for women but the truth is women who have a gun in the house are more likely to have that gun used against them.

http://articles.latimes.com/2014/feb...udies-20140224 Originally Posted by southtown4488

LMAO....you'd better check up on your author before you post. A radical left wing, anti-gun, pro-union, anti-American hack is who you're quoting. Don't you think that women have "a right to choose" whether or not they have a gun? The problem with your little link is that it goes to another link and following that link you see that they totally discount certain things; the training and mindset of the woman (military and police women defend themselves more forcefully), a poorly trained or non trained woman is her own worst enemy if she has fallen for the left wing ploy that just the possession of a gun is some kind of magical (evil according to the left) shield. Owning and using a weapon is a skill that has to be developed and the secondary link dismisses that. They have also made a big deal about a woman who lives with a man. It seems that, according to some "research", men are stinky and are very likely to shoot the woman they live with. Single women who live alone (i.e.; they know that help is not coming) have a higher rate of a sucessful defense. My 84 year old mother would drop you in your tracks if you were to break into her home, make a cup of coffee, and then call the Sheriff.

To put it bluntly, your article is shit. It was written by a guy with a track record of attacking gun rights with questionable research. So if this is the only thing that you have....then this was a shit post and you are just a little demagogue and not much more.

By the way, the idea that guns were the great equalizer predates the NRA by nearly 50 years.

women who have a gun in the house are more likely to have that gun used against them. Originally Posted by southtown4488

Only if she's BSC. (Bat Shit Crazy)
Unfortunately, they all are.

“Where there are more guns, more women die”: A Harvard public health expert breaks down the data on firearms and women’s safety.

Women in the United States are 11 times more likely to be murdered with guns than women in other high-income countries. The presence of a firearm during a domestic violence incident increases the likelihood of a homicide by 500 percent.


http://articles.latimes.com/2014/feb...udies-20140224

its not just women, its all family members in a house with a gun. . .

"If you have a gun, everybody in your home is more likely than your non-gun-owning neighbors and their families to die in a gun-related accident, suicide or homicide."

https://www.minnpost.com/second-opin...aving-gun-home

its not just women, its all family members in a house with a gun. . .

"If you have a gun, everybody in your home is more likely than your non-gun-owning neighbors and their families to die in a gun-related accident, suicide or homicide."

https://www.minnpost.com/second-opin...aving-gun-home Originally Posted by southtown4488

I blame it on liberals!!!

“Where there are more guns, more women die”: A Harvard public health expert breaks down the data on firearms and women’s safety.

Women in the United States are 11 times more likely to be murdered with guns than women in other high-income countries. The presence of a firearm during a domestic violence incident increases the likelihood of a homicide by 500 percent.


http://articles.latimes.com/2014/feb...udies-20140224 Originally Posted by southtown4488

It's a bullshit article. The stats are misleading. It's not that guns are more dangerous to women, but rather the assholes that they date and get married to are. It never seizes to amaze me the number of women who get caught up in abusive relationships and it ends tragic. This article is better viewed as a domestic violence issue not a gun issue.

Jim

Only if she's BSC. (Bat Shit Crazy)
Unfortunately, they all are. Originally Posted by gfejunkie

not all but, you there something call drug and their side effect ... dam it where my time machine ... i like to go back to when there was no drug to C how BSC some were back then and now

It's a bullshit article. The stats are misleading. It's not that guns are more dangerous to women, but rather the assholes that they date and get married to are. It never seizes to amaze me the number of women who get caught up in abusive relationships and it ends tragic. This article is better viewed as a domestic violence issue not a gun issue.

Jim Originally Posted by Mr MojoRisin

It's always bullshit to you guys. It's always the stats, or the writer is a liberal or some other excuse to keep from seeing the reality. It's that cognitive dissonance rearing its ugly head again.

It's always bullshit to you guys. It's always the stats, or the writer is a liberal or some other excuse to keep from seeing the reality. It's that cognitive dissonance rearing its ugly head again. Originally Posted by WombRaider

You've got cognitive dissonance. The trend is "Gun Control" in order to achieve that there must be a change in public opinion. So they use a subject in this case, domestic violence and associate it with guns. Many women in America grew up around guns their fathers and brothers hunted. They most likely end up marrying men that have guns and they hunt. They are not in eminent danger because there's guns in the house hold. It's the relationships that put women in danger not the fact that a gun exists in the home.

Jim

its not just women, its all family members in a house with a gun. . .

"If you have a gun, everybody in your home is more likely than your non-gun-owning neighbors and their families to die in a gun-related accident, suicide or homicide."

https://www.minnpost.com/second-opin...aving-gun-home Originally Posted by southtown4488

In other news, people with cars on their property are more likely to be in auto accidents.

You're an idiot.

Go home and be kind to each other's gun.

In other news, people with cars on their property are more likely to be in auto accidents.

You're an idiot.

Go home and be kind to each other's gun. Originally Posted by gnadfly

You're the idiot. It's not disputable that homeowners who keep guns are much much more likely to end up having the gun used against them rather than in self-defense. That's been known for decades and the number of citations from scholarly journals are numerous and quite easy to find.

So, shut the fuck up and find a topic to discuss where you have some semblance of knowledge.

This is representative but there is a huge amount of research that supports the assertion.

Injuries and deaths due to firearms in the home.

Kellermann AL, et al. J Trauma. 1998.
Show full citation

Authors

Kellermann AL1, Somes G, Rivara FP, Lee RK, Banton JG.Author information

• 1Center for Injury Control, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA.

Citation

J Trauma. 1998 Aug;45(2):263-7.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Determine the relative frequency with which guns in the home are used to injure or kill in self-defense, compared with the number of times these weapons are involved in an unintentional injury, suicide attempt, or criminal assault or homicide.

METHODS: We reviewed the police, medical examiner, emergency medical service, emergency department, and hospital records of all fatal and nonfatal shootings in three U.S. cities: Memphis, Tennessee; Seattle, Washington; and Galveston, Texas.

RESULTS: During the study interval (12 months in Memphis, 18 months in Seattle, and Galveston) 626 shootings occurred in or around a residence. This total included 54 unintentional shootings, 118 attempted or completed suicides, and 438 assaults/homicides. Thirteen shootings were legally justifiable or an act of self-defense, including three that involved law enforcement officers acting in the line of duty. For every time a gun in the home was used in a self-defense or legally justifiable shooting, there were four unintentional shootings, seven criminal assaults or homicides, and 11 attempted or completed suicides.

CONCLUSIONS: Guns kept in homes are more likely to be involved in a fatal or nonfatal accidental shooting, criminal assault, or suicide attempt than to be used to injure or kill in self-defense.

PMID

9715182 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

You've got cognitive dissonance. The trend is "Gun Control" in order to achieve that there must be a change in public opinion. So they use a subject in this case, domestic violence and associate it with guns. Many women in America grew up around guns their fathers and brothers hunted. They most likely end up marrying men that have guns and they hunt. They are not in eminent danger because there's guns in the house hold. It's the relationships that put women in danger not the fact that a gun exists in the home.

Jim Originally Posted by Mr MojoRisin

Your wasting your time, I responded to posts from both of these two with questions and facts and got nadda in response, neither want a conversation they want capitulation, as most liberals do, especially when it comes to gun control. Both whine about name calling and ruined threads but both will do just that the minute what they say is questioned. Regardless of what is presented to them, they both will stick the lefts guidelines and talking points.

You've got cognitive dissonance. The trend is "Gun Control" in order to achieve that there must be a change in public opinion. So they use a subject in this case, domestic violence and associate it with guns. Many women in America grew up around guns their fathers and brothers hunted. They most likely end up marrying men that have guns and they hunt. They are not in eminent danger because there's guns in the house hold. It's the relationships that put women in danger not the fact that a gun exists in the home.

Jim Originally Posted by Mr MojoRisin

So you're saying they would end up dead regardless of whether there was a gun present?

You don't even know what cognitive dissonance is.

Your wasting your time, I responded to posts from both of these two with questions and facts and got nadda in response, neither want a conversation they want capitulation, as most liberals do, especially when it comes to gun control. Both whine about name calling and ruined threads but both will do just that the minute what they say is questioned. Regardless of what is presented to them, they both will stick the lefts guidelines and talking points. Originally Posted by dirty dog

You haven't presented anything that is relevant. Tim just posted some good information on several studies that prove the point.

You've done your share of name calling. Don't get butthurt over it now.