If you let people know (e.g. put a sign in your window) that you have a gun in the house ("and are not afraid to use it!"), then wouldn't this make you "safer", especially so in some neighborhoods? ...and if you don't have a gun (and the bad guys know it) then doesn't this make you "less safe"?3uGHZD4MLj wrote:ok, I've looked around a little, I'm not going to bother listing sources and results, but I can see that you're less safe with a gun in the house, period.
This is not a fair assessment of gunowner safety ("safer or less safe"). ...how about the percentage of gun owners who were NOT injured or killed (because they owned a gun)?Scott wrote:It should not really be looking at the aspects of gun ownership that lead to the result but just be looking at the net results (i.e. what percentage of gun owners were injured or killed over a certain timeframe versus what percentage of non-gun-owners were injured or killed over the same timeframe).
If you ONLY look at the injuries and deaths (i.e. ONLY the 'bad' stuff associated with gun ownership), and refuse to look at the 'good' stuff associated with gun ownership, then your conclusion will ALWAYS be "less safe"! ...which makes this 'one-sided' study/analysis wholly 'invalid' (aka "totally bogus") for determining "safer or less safe".
Is this same "access to firearms" ALSO responsible for and associated with saving lives, and protecting one-self from harm? ...or did this study (meta-analysis) conveniently close its eyes to this part?Scott wrote:Here is the official conclusion of the meta-analysis:"Access to firearms is associated with risk for completed suicide and being the victim of homicide."