CDC Reports that 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. ... 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, in the context of about 300,000 violent crimes involving firearms in 2008. Criminologist and researcher Gary Kleck, using his own commissioned phone surveys and number extrapolation, estimates that Americans use guns for defensive purposes 1.2 million times each year — and that 1 in 6 Americans who have used guns defensively believe someone would have died but for their ability to resort to their defensive use of firearms.

CDC also reported t hat the 1994 Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act (Brady Act) imposing a 5-day waiting period had no effect in the reduction in homicides.

https://www.investors.com/politics/columnists/how-many-lives-are-saved-by-guns-and-why-dont-gun-controllers-care/

I am a bit skeptical of that number to be honest. For starters it is difficult to really measure something consistently and objectively.

Secondly, that is a huge variation in possibilities, 500K to 3 million? Obviously we would have to dive into the study itself to look at methodology and how that number is derived. Not saying it is wrong but only that I remain skeptical.

I saw an FBI report that estimated around 60,000 uses a year for firearms in self defense.

When I debate someone who is against guns and suggests they never protect people I usually reply that estimates range from 60,000 times a year to 3 million times a year. I then point out that even if we go with a conservative estimate of 60,000 times a year that is still a huge number, 6 times the number of gun murders.

I agree, should verify by reading the report before using it.  The big difference in the numbers could be how they measured it.  60,000 could be actual uses of a firearm that probably prevented a crime.  3 million could be a theoretical estimate where even if a gun is not used, it still prevented a crime because criminals are afraid of armed victims.

Comparing gun defensive uses in all crimes to those used in murders isn't a fair comparison.  It should be number of murders prevented versus number of guns used in murder, or number of guns used defensively in all crimes versus number of all crimes where a gun is used or all violent crimes.  Something like that to show no bias.

Arent waiting periods designed for people who want to commit suicide? Say u just got dumped and are suicidal. 3 days wait time, maybe you will think clearer?

Useless for those who already own guns.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

Arent waiting periods designed for people who want to commit suicide? Say u just got dumped and are suicidal. 3 days wait time, maybe you will think clearer?

Useless for those who already own guns.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

Its a way for police to monitor gun owners of recent mental illness and criminal history.  Rapback partially addressed that.

Yea pretty worthless if you already own a gun.  They could make a small case about preventing straw sales.

Quote from: changemyoil66 on Today at 08:05:36 AM
    Arent waiting periods designed for people who want to commit suicide? Say u just got dumped and are suicidal. 3 days wait time, maybe you will think clearer?
    Useless for those who already own guns.

Quote from Zippz
    Its a way for police to monitor gun owners of recent mental illness and criminal history.  Rapback partially addressed that.
    Yea pretty worthless if you already own a gun.  They could make a small case about preventing straw sales.

As far as I recollect from the "olden times", waiting periods were designed as a "cooling off period" as in  I AM PISSED OFF, GONNA GO AND GET A GUN RIGHT NOW AND....
Way before mental illness and/or suicide were part of gun stats.

Quote from: changemyoil66 on Today at 08:05:36 AM
    Arent waiting periods designed for people who want to commit suicide? Say u just got dumped and are suicidal. 3 days wait time, maybe you will think clearer?
    Useless for those who already own guns.

Quote from Zippz
    Its a way for police to monitor gun owners of recent mental illness and criminal history.  Rapback partially addressed that.
    Yea pretty worthless if you already own a gun.  They could make a small case about preventing straw sales.

As far as I recollect from the "olden times", waiting periods were designed as a "cooling off period" as in  I AM PISSED OFF, GONNA GO AND GET A GUN RIGHT NOW AND....
Way before mental illness and/or suicide were part of gun stats.

Rocky,
I'm pretty sure you are correct about the "olden times" reason for the waiting period although
it was a totally irrational argument.  But who expects rationality out of anti-gun people?

In Hawaii, the whole system is set up for confiscation, and no other reason.

As for the suicide prevention argument, cars will do just fine for that.  I could think
of a hundred ways to kill yourself without  going through the police to get permission
to buy a gun.

Lastly I would not trust a thing the CDC says about guns.  They will overstate
the evil of guns, and understate the good they do. 

It was my understanding that the 5-day waiting period for handguns was a cooling off period intended to reduce gun violence and homocides. IIRC, there were published studies that that was a failed experiment in an attempt to reduce gun violence and homicides. That it was for a set period of time and when the studies didn’t show an impact, that the restriction was allowed to sunset.

I bought my first handgun during that period. In WA, I was allowed to forego the waiting period if I had a CCW. That’s the main reason why I got the CCW. I let the CCW expire when I moved back to HI. I should have kept it.

It was my understanding that the 5-day waiting period for handguns was a cooling off period intended to reduce gun violence and homocides. IIRC, there were published studies that that was a failed experiment in an attempt to reduce gun violence and homicides. That it was for a set period of time and when the studies didn’t show an impact, that the restriction was allowed to sunset.

I bought my first handgun during that period. In WA, I was allowed to forego the waiting period if I had a CCW. That’s the main reason why I got the CCW. I let the CCW expire when I moved back to HI. I should have kept it.

I had a CCW in WA state from 1985 to 2000.  You had to show up in person to renew.
In my day they put your thumb print on the license,  you could only do that in person.
In the King county courthouse you had to stand in the same line as Sex offenders
updating whatever it is they have to do to.  Typical liberals.
BTW I carried a CCW for personal protection.  Probably 15% of the population had
CCW's back then.
Of course here in Hawaii you don't have the right of self defense in public,
you are just supposed to die.

I had a CCW in WA state from 1985 to 2000.  You had to show up in person to renew.
In my day they put your thumb print on the license,  you could only do that in person.
In the King county courthouse you had to stand in the same line as Sex offenders
updating whatever it is they have to do to.  Typical liberals.
BTW I carried a CCW for personal protection.  Probably 15% of the population had
CCW's back then.
Of course here in Hawaii you don't have the right of self defense in public,
you are just supposed to die.

I got mine around 1997. Didn’t renew when I moved back home. But yeah, I remember going down to the courthouse and doing the finger printing for the FBI background check and the fee. Was first time getting background check. Have had many since then tho.

I eventually carried, but wasn’t often.

Arent waiting periods designed for people who want to commit suicide? Say u just got dumped and are suicidal. 3 days wait time, maybe you will think clearer?

Useless for those who already own guns.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

Suicide is the first thought I believe but I think it was really meant to stop any type of violent incident one might be reacting to suddenly without thinking it through.

As for the suicide prevention argument, cars will do just fine for that.  I could think
of a hundred ways to kill yourself without  going through the police to get permission
to buy a gun.

I don't think this was part of the thought process when the law was passed but I did see a study which ranked suicide methods by effectiveness. Guns were right at the top with a gunshot to the head being 95% (give or take) effective and other methods having various degrees of effectiveness. Certainly the fact that some methods give you a window to change your mind illustrates that they aren't all equal.

Bottom line is that if they are determined, they will find a way. However if they are conflicted and try it, doing so with a gun makes them much more successful. So an argument could be made that a waiting period might help with successful suicides however I don't think it is a good enough one to stop others from purchasing guns. 

I've looked all over the CDC's website and cannot find that report or finding. Some interviews like to reference it (like Steven Crowder) but they never actually provide the specific link to it.  They only say "if you look up the CDC or if you Google CDC..."
I'd like the have that actual link if anyone know what it is. 
I keep a list of these handy on my phone for verbal sparring with anti-gunners or people just incorrectly informed.   

I've looked all over the CDC's website and cannot find that report or finding. Some interviews like to reference it (like Steven Crowder) but they never actually provide the specific link to it.  They only say "if you look up the CDC or if you Google CDC..."
I'd like the have that actual link if anyone know what it is. 
I keep a list of these handy on my phone for verbal sparring with anti-gunners or people just incorrectly informed.   

That link has been posted before.  The report is not on the CDC site.  They apparently tried to bury it on a report server since the results were not supportive of Obama's gun control agenda and contradicts many of the talking points he pushed in his speeches.

This link is to a very good synopsis of the findings.  It contains a link to the report as well:

http://www.gunsandammo.com/politics/cdc-gun-research-backfires-on-obama/

Here's the link to the report itself:

http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=18319&page=R1

Try Googling the report title.  You're see all the places that share the report or have information about it. I don't see any links in that search that start "cdc.gov" ...

In fact, if you do a search on the CDC website using their own database, it comes back saying that page doesn't exist.
 
Priorities for Research to Reduce the Threat of Firearm-Related Violence

In January 2013, President Obama issued 23 executive orders directing federal agencies to improve knowledge of the
causes of firearm violence, the interventions that might prevent it, and strategies to minimize its public health burden.
One of these executive orders noted that “in addition to being a law enforcement challenge, firearm violence is also a
serious public health issue that affects thousands of individuals, families, and communities across the Nation,” and
directed the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), along with other relevant federal agencies, to immediately
begin identifying the most pressing firearm-related violence research problems.

The CDC and the CDC Foundation2 requested that the Institute of Medicine (IOM), in collaboration with the National
Research Council (NRC), convene a committee of experts to develop a potential research agenda focusing on the public
health aspects of firearm-related violence—its causes, approaches to interventions that could prevent it, and strategies
to minimize its health burden. In accordance with the CDC’s charge, the committee did not focus on public health surveillance
and potentially related behavioral/mental health issues, as these will be addressed separately. The research program
envisioned by the committee, which is designed to produce impacts in 3-5 years, focuses on

    • the characteristics of firearm violence,
    • risk and protective factors,
    • interventions and strategies,
    • gun safety technology, and
    • the influence of video games and other media.

I know many more people who have died in vehicle accidents than firearm shootings, including one lady who tried to drive her car off a cliff but survived because she drove an Audi. It happens...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5578227/Mom-seen-surveillance-footage-driving-cliff.html

Someone can analyze this report and see how it can be used for 2a activism.  You can discuss it at our next 2a meeting end of next month.

Someone can analyze this report and see how it can be used for 2a activism.  You can discuss it at our next 2a meeting end of next month.

I tell people who are anti 2a and use 1 sided stats, that stats don't matter to much unless the stat is ZERO, if you were the 0.0001% or 1 person that was raped when a firearm could have helped the fight.

I wrote that to my rep and I believe it hit home so that's why he presented the CCW bill (HR38)

I read somewhere that this report had been buried for a lot of years before it surfaced. 

Apparently, they didn't want the pro gun people to see it.

I read somewhere that this report had been buried for a lot of years before it surfaced. 

Apparently, they didn't want the pro gun people to see it.

So was Schatz "gun show loop hole" study.

I don't think this was part of the thought process when the law was passed but I did see a study which ranked suicide methods by effectiveness. Guns were right at the top with a gunshot to the head being 95% (give or take) effective and other methods having various degrees of effectiveness. Certainly the fact that some methods give you a window to change your mind illustrates that they aren't all equal.

Bottom line is that if they are determined, they will find a way. However if they are conflicted and try it, doing so with a gun makes them much more successful. So an argument could be made that a waiting period might help with successful suicides however I don't think it is a good enough one to stop others from purchasing guns.

Lately more and more famous people are using hanging or drugs for suicide. 
Perhaps they are trying to be more polite and not make such a mess?
Waiting period does not stop people from purchasing guns, it is just an added
irritation that anti-freedom people want to cause you.  The entire purpose is to make
guns such a pain to own and procure they think they deter people.  Plus they register
you so they know who has guns so they can punish you.  The word that comes to my
mind is "Kristallnacht".