Skip to main content

View Diary: Accurately Comparing Death Rates from Motor Vehicle and Firearm Use (88 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Say that to the struggling retiree whose home... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    BlackSheep1, noway2

    ...had been burglarized several times.

    He sought the "social utility" of a personal firearm , an SCOTUS agreed that he should avail himself of it.

    And so do I.

        In McDonald v. City of Chicago, U.S., 130 S.Ct. 3020, 177 L.Ed.2nd 894 (2010), Chicago resident Otis McDonald, a 76 year old (in 2010) retired maintenance engineer, had lived in the Morgan Park neighborhood since buying a house there in 1971.[7] McDonald decried the decline of his neighborhood, describing it as being taken over by gangs and drug dealers. His lawn was regularly littered with refuse and his home and garage had been broken into a combined five times, with the most recent robbery committed by a man McDonald recognized from his own neighborhood.[7] An experienced hunter, McDonald legally owned shotguns, but believed them too unwieldy in the event of a robbery, and wanted to purchase a handgun for personal home defense. Due to Chicago's requirement that all firearms in the city be registered, yet refusing all handgun registrations after 1982 when a citywide handgun ban was passed, he was unable to legally own a handgun. As a result, in 2008, he joined three other Chicago residents in filing a lawsuit which became McDonald v. Chicago.[7]

    Learn about Centrist Economics, learn about Robert Rubin's Hamilton Project.

    by PatriciaVa on Mon Feb 18, 2013 at 10:31:39 AM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  We've had this discussion several times. (4+ / 0-)

      The social utility of guns is not 0, defensive gun use does occur.

      However, any reasonable analysis of defensive gun use shows that it is far outweighed by gun injuries, murders, and suicides.

      And just because someone 'believed' that a shotgun was too unwieldy for effective home defense doesn't mean that he was right.

      But if you feel that you can successfully compare the utility of defensive gun use to personal transportation on anything other than a logarithmic graph, feel free to try.

    •  Say what? (5+ / 0-)

      These numbers say nothing about the right of anyone to keep and bear arms. I put this together in response to gun advocates who kept comparing the death rate from cars to the death rate from guns. It's a stupid argument on their part- guns are dangerous. If they weren't, they wouldn't be the object of choice for self defense. You don't bring a knife to a gunfight. But claiming that cars are as or more dangerous than guns? It just ain't so. But it does raise questions of liability insurance and how we establish safe practice.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site