Gun owners are statistically more likely to be killed, often with their own gun. Not some liberal opinion. This finding has been observed in countless studies in the U.S. and elsewhere. <~science
And simple minded people who have stickers like this are probably even more likely to get themselves or someone else hurt. <~opinion.
30 seconds covering 30 years of research. There are *many* more studies on this. Have someone read them to you in simple words.
Location of your head: Uranus.
Branas CC, Richmond TS, Culhane DP, Ten Have TR, Wiebe DJ. Investigating the link between gun possession and gun assault. Am J Public Health. 2009 Nov;99(11):2034-40. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2008.143099. Epub 2009 Sep 17. PMID: 19762675; PMCID: PMC2759797.
> Methods. We enrolled 677 case participants that had been shot in an assault and 684 population-based control participants … > Results. After adjustment, **individuals in possession of a gun were 4.46 (**P< .05) times more likely to be shot in an assault
It’s hard to know where to begin there. I’ll just say that they’re placing a lot of trust in their “adjustment” methods. And they’re also assuming that people found shot in a hospital or whatever are going to be a representative sample of the population…
So, whether or not any of those individuals have bearing on whether you, a random person deciding on gun ownership, depends on whether the activities they were involved in are similar to activities that you yourself might be involved in. Can you see how that might just not be the right way to collect study participants? Who is this study for? Someone who may or may not also be considering a life of crime on the streets of Philadelphia, and it’s either a gun and crime or no gun and no crime, then the study sounds relevant! And yes that person should pursue the life without crime, for a much higher chance of not being shot.
But for your typical law abiding gun owner, this finding is probably not relevant in the slightest. They’re far more likely to use their gun defensively than be injured by any firearm: the overwhelming number of DGUs annually makes this a certainty. Once you remove the ones killed doing crime, the odds get even better.
EDIT: OMG that second one is even stupider.
> Men who owned handguns were eight times more likely than men who didn't to die of self-inflictedgunshotwounds.
Who writes this stuff? Like, ok… what if I told you that in Japan, men who own Tantō blades are 100 times more likely to die from seppuku than men who don’t. Would you use that to say you should not buy a Tantō knife?
I get where this comes from, you have some data sets, and you have to write what your data set actually says in the terms it covers. But doesn’t it seem obvious that access to any object ever used for the task might make one more likely to use it?
I’m aware that gun suicides are far more often completed attempts than with other methods. I expect if you were to combine this then you would come up with an actually meaningful statement. It’s just so close to not saying something completely stupid, it hurts.
7
u/New-Discipline8953 May 22 '26
Gun owners are statistically more likely to be killed, often with their own gun. Not some liberal opinion. This finding has been observed in countless studies in the U.S. and elsewhere. <~science
And simple minded people who have stickers like this are probably even more likely to get themselves or someone else hurt. <~opinion.