Defensive gun use
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
This article may require cleanup to meet Wikipedia’s quality standards. The specific problem is: Seems to be copy/pasted from another site and is not in Wikipedia’s style Please help improve this article if you can. (July 2015) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)
People training self-defense with firearm in the Czech Republic
Defensive gun use (DGU) is the use of a firearm in self-defense or defense of others. The frequency of defensive firearms incidents, and their effectiveness in providing safety and reducing crime is a controversial issue in gun politics and criminology.:64 Different authors and studies employ different criteria for what constitutes a defensive gun use which leads to controversy in comparing statistical results. Perceptions of the number of DGUs dominate discussions over gun rights, gun control, and concealed carry laws.
Estimates of frequency
Kleck and Gertz, and Cook and Ludwig
National Crime Victimization Survey
Predictors of defensive gun use
Estimates of frequency
Estimates over the number of defensive gun uses vary wildly, depending on the study’s definition of a defensive gun use, survey design, population, criteria, time-period studied, and other factors. Low-end estimates are in the range of 55,000 to 80,000 incidents per year, while high end estimates reach of 4.7 million incidents per year. Discussion over the number and nature of DGU and the implications to gun control policy came to a head in the late 1990s.
Estimates of DGU from the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) are consistently lower than those from other studies. A 2000 study suggested that this may be because the NCVS measures different activities than the other surveys do.
The National Self-Defense Survey and the NCVS, vary in their methods, time-frames covered, and questions asked. DGU questions were asked of all the NSDS sample. Due to screening questions in the NCVS survey, only a minority of the NCVS sample were asked a DGU question.
Lower-end estimates include that by David Hemenway, a professor of Health Policy at the Harvard School of Public Health, which estimated approximately 55,000–80,000 such uses each year.
Another survey including DGU questions was the National Survey on Private Ownership and Use of Firearms, NSPOF, conducted in 1994 by the Chiltons polling firm for the Police Foundation on a research grant from the National Institute of Justice. NSPOF projected 4.7 million DGU per year by 1.5 million individuals after weighting to eliminate false positives. Another estimate has estimated approximately 1 million DGU incidents in the United States.:65
Kleck and Gertz, and Cook and Ludwig
A commonly cited 1995 study by Kleck and Gertz estimated that between 2.1 and 2.5 million DGUs occur in the United States each year.:64–65 After Kleck and Gertz accounted for telescoping, their estimate was reduced to 2.1 million DGU per year. Kleck and Gertz conducted this survey in 1992, and Kleck began publicizing the 2.5 million DGU per year estimate in 1993. By 1997, the 2.5 million per year number from Kleck & Gertz’ study had been cited as fact by news articles, editorial writers, and the Congressional Research Service. Besides the NSDS and NCVS surveys, ten national and three state surveys summarized by Kleck and Gertz gave 764 thousand to 3.6 million DGU per year. In the report “Guns in America: National Survey on Private Ownership and Use of Firearms” by Philip J. Cook and Jens Ludwig, projected 4.7 million DGU which Cook and Ludwig explained by pointing out all of the NSPOF sample were asked the DGU question. Cook and Ludwig also compared the U.S. crime rate to the number of DGU reported by Kleck and similar studies and said that their estimate of DGU is improbably high.
Both Kleck and Gertz’ and Lott’s research are highly controversial within the academic community. Hemenway has asserted that Kleck and Gertz’ methodology suffers from several biases leading them to overestimate the number of DGU, including telescoping, the social desirability bias, and the possibility that “some gun advocates will lie to help bias estimates upwards.” Hemenway contends the Kleck and Gertz study is unreliable and no conclusions can be drawn from it. He argues that there are too many “false positives” in the surveys, and finds the NCVS figures more reliable, yielding estimates of around 100,000 defensive gun uses per year. Applying different adjustments, other social scientists suggest that between 250,000 and 370,000 incidences per year. In 1996, Cook and Ludwig reported that based on their analysis of the National Survey of Private Ownership of Firearms, which “incorporated a sequence of DGU questions very similar to that used by Kleck and Gertz,” they estimated that 4.7 million defensive gun uses occur in the United States per year. However, they questioned whether this estimate was credible because the same survey suggests that approximately 132,000 perpetrators were either wounded or killed at the hands of armed civilians in 1994. They note that this number is about the same as the number of people hospitalized for gunshot injuries that year, but that “almost all of those are there as a result of criminal assault, suicide attempt, or accident.”:464–5
Kleck asserts errors in his critics’ statements that his survey’s estimates of defensive gun uses linked with specific crime types, or that involved a wounding of the offender, are implausibly large compared to estimates of the total numbers of such crimes. The total number of nonfatal gunshot woundings, whether medically treated or not, is unknown, and no meaningful estimates can be derived from his survey regarding defensive gun uses linked with specific crime types, or that involved wounding the offender, because the sample sizes are too small. The fact that some crime-specific estimates derived from the Kleck survey are implausibly large is at least partly a reflection of the small samples on which they are based – no more than 196 cases. Kleck states that his estimate of total defensive gun uses was based on nearly 5,000 cases. Thus, he argues, the implausible character of some estimates of small subsets of defensive gun uses is not a valid criticism of whether estimates of the total number of defensive gun uses are implausible or too high.
A 1998 study by Philip Cook and Jens Ludwig replicated the Kleck and Gertz survey, but also concluded that the results of these surveys were far too high.
National Crime Victimization Survey
A 1994 study examined NCVS data and concluded that between 1987 and 1990, there were approximately 258,460 incidents in which firearms were used defensively in the United States, for an annual average of 64,615. The same study said that “Firearm self-defense is rare compared with gun crimes.” An article published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics, drawing its DGU from the NCVS, said: “In 1992 offenders armed with handguns committed a record 931,000 violent crimes … On average in 1987-92 about 83,000 crime victims per year used a firearm to defend themselves or their property. Three-fourths of the victims who used a firearm for defense did so during a violent crime; a fourth, during a theft, household burglary, or motor vehicle theft.” A 2013 study, also released by the BJS, found that less than 1% of nonfatal violent crime victims during the 2007-2011 period reported using a gun to defend themselves. The same study reported that “The percentage of nonfatal violent victimizations involving firearm use in self defense remained stable at under 2% from 1993 to 2011.”:12
Cook and Ludwig said of the NCVS, NSPOF, and Kleck surveys: “The key explanation for the difference between the 108,000 NCVS estimate for the annual number of defensive gun uses and the several million from the surveys discussed earlier is that NCVS avoids the false-positive problem by limiting defensive gun use questions to persons who first reported that they were crime victims. Most NCVS respondents never have a chance to answer the defensive gun use question, falsely or otherwise.”
Clayton Cramer and David Barnett say that such a structure could cause the NCVS to under-count defensive gun uses, because someone who has successfully defended themselves with a gun may not consider themselves a “victim of a crime.” In the NCVS, if one says that they have not been a victim of a crime, the survey assumes that there was no attempted crime and does not go on to ask if they have used a gun in self-defense. According to Jens Ludwig, estimates of the frequency of DGU from the NCVS appear to be too low, but those from phone surveys (like that conducted by Kleck and Gertz) appear to be too high.
This article should include a summary of John Lott. See Wikipedia:Summary style for information on how to incorporate it into this article’s main text. (January 2014)
John Lott, an economist and guns rights advocate, argues in both More Guns, Less Crime and The Bias Against Guns that media coverage of defensive gun use is rare, noting that in general, only shootings ending in fatalities are discussed in news stories. In More Guns, Less Crime, Lott writes that “[s]ince in many defensive cases a handgun is simply brandished, and no one is harmed, many defensive uses are never even reported to the police”.
Attempting to quantify this phenomenon, in the first edition of the book, published in May 1998, Lott wrote that “national surveys” suggested that “98 percent of the time that people use guns defensively, they merely have to brandish a weapon to break off an attack.” The higher the rate of defensive gun uses that do not end in the attacker being killed or wounded, the easier it is to explain why defensive gun uses are not covered by the media without reference to media bias. Lott cited the figure frequently in the media, including publications like the Wall Street Journal and the Los Angeles Times.
In 2002, he repeated the survey, and reported that brandishing a weapon was sufficient to stop an attack 95% of the time. Other researchers criticized his methodology, saying that his sample size of 1,015 respondents was too small for the study to be accurate and that the majority of similar studies suggest a value between 70 and 80 percent brandishment-only. Lott explained the lower brandishment-only rates found by others was at least in part due to the different questions that were asked. Most surveys used a recall period of “Ever” while some (Hart, Mauser, and Tarrance) used the previous five years. The Field Institute survey used periods of previous year, previous two years and ever. The NSPOF survey used a one-year recall period. Lott also used a one-year recall period and asked respondents about personal experiences only, due to questionable respondent recall of events past one year and respondent knowledge of DGU experiences of other household members.
In 2000, Hemenway published a survey which found that “Guns are used to threaten and intimidate far more often than they are used in self defense”; also that year, he published another survey which found that “criminal gun use is far more common than self-defense gun use.” Both of these surveys argued that many defensive gun uses may not be in the best interests of society. Also in 2000, Hemenway and his colleagues conducted a small survey that found that guns in the home were used more often to intimidate family members (13 respondents) than in self-defense (2 respondents). The same study stated that its results suggested that most self-defense gun uses did not occur in the home, and that non-gun weapons are used more often to thwart crime than guns are. A later survey by Hemenway et al. that included 5,800 California adolescents found that about 0.3% of these adolescents reported having used a gun in self-defense, whereas, in the same study, 4% of those adolescents reported that someone had threatened them with a gun. In a 2015 study co-authored with Sara Solnick, Hemenway analyzed data from the NCVS from 2007 to 2011 and identified only 127 instances of DGU.
A study published in 2013 by the Violence Policy Center, using five years of nationwide statistics (2007-2011) compiled by the Federal Bureau of Investigation found that defensive gun uses occur an average of 67,740 times per year.
A 2004 study surveyed the records of a Phoenix, Arizona newspaper, as well as police and court records, and found a total of 3 instances of defensive gun use over a 3.5 month period. In contrast, Kleck and Gertz’s study would predict that the police should have noticed more than 98 DGU killings or woundings and 236 DGU firings at adversaries during this time.
A 1995 study led by Arthur Kellermann, which examined 198 home invasion crimes in Atlanta, Georgia, found that in only 3 of these cases did victims use guns for self-protection. Of these three, none were injured, but one lost property. The authors concluded that “Although firearms are often kept in the home for protection, they are rarely used for this purpose.”
The same data indicating that DGU against criminals is uncommon also indicates that it is often effective.
A 2002 study looking at instances of DGU where convicted offenders were the defenders found that DGUs “are not likely to provide similar social benefits, implying that prevalence estimates may not simultaneously estimate social benefits.” Another study published the same year found that DGU is an effective deterrent against injury for some groups of people, but not others; notable groups for whom DGU did not provide benefits in this study included women, people living in rural areas, and those living in low-income homes. A 2009 study reported that gun owners were more likely to be shot in an assault than were non-gun owners, and concluded that the chances of DGU being successful for residents of urban areas may be low. Another 2009 study of NCVS data found that DGU was “most often effective at helping the victim” in the contexts in which it occurred, with an average of 92% of victims reporting that their DGU had been beneficial for them. A 2013 National Research Council report found that studies looking at the effectiveness of different self-protective strategies had consistently found that victims who used guns defensively had lower injury rates than did victims who used other strategies. A 2015 study by Solnick and Hemenway which analyzed NCVS data reported “little evidence that [DGU] is uniquely beneficial in reducing the likelihood of injury or property loss.”
Predictors of defensive gun use
Individuals who use guns defensively tend not to have extremely punitive attitudes toward criminals, but people with punitive attitudes may be somewhat more likely to own guns, and, thus, to use them defensively. A 2009 study found no support for the “Southern culture of honor” hypothesis, in that no significant relationship was seen between living in the Southern United States and defensive gun use.
Jump up to:
a b c Harry L. Wilson, Guns, Gun Control, And Elections: The Politics And Policy of Firearms, ISBN 0742553485, Rowman & Littlefield, 2007.
Jump up to:
a b c Smith, Tom W. (1997). “A Call for a Truce in the DGU War”. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology (Northwestern). p. 1462.
^ Otis Dudley Duncan, “Gun Use Surveys: In Numbers We Trust?”, Criminologist, v25 n1, Jan/Feb 2000.
^ McDowall, David; Loftin, Colin; Presser, Stanley (2000). “Measuring Civilian Defensive Firearm Use: A Methodological Experiment”. Journal of Quantitative Criminology. 16 (1): 1–19. doi:10.1023/A:1007588410221.
^ Committee on Law and Justice, Firearms and Violence: A Critical Review (2004) ISBN 0-309-09124-1, page 103.
Jump up to:
a b c d e Kleck, Gary; Gertz, Marc (1995). “Armed Resistance to Crime: The Prevalence and Nature of Self-Defense with a Gun”. J. Crim. L. & Criminology. 86: 150. doi:10.2307/1144004.
Jump up to:
a b c d Philip J. Cook and Jens Ludwig, “Guns in America: National Survey on Private Ownership and Use of Firearms”, NIJ Research in Brief, May 1997.
Jump up to:
a b David Hemenway, Chance, Vol 10, No. 3, 1997.
^ Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology (Northwestern) 87 (1997): 1430.
^ J.N. Schulman, Guns, Crimes and Self-defense, Orange County Reg., Sept. 19, 1993, at 3.
^ Hemenway, David (1997). “Survey Research and Self-Defense Gun Use: An Explanation of Extreme Overestimates”. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology. 87 (4): 1430.
Jump up to:
a b Cook, Philip J.; Ludwig, Jens; Hemenway, David (Summer 1997). “The gun debate’s new mythical number: How many defensive uses per year?” (PDF). Journal of Policy Analysis and Management. 16 (3): 463–469. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1520-6688(199722)16:3<463::AID-PAM6>3.0.CO;2-F.
^ Cook, Philip J.; Ludwig, Jens (May 1997). “Guns in America: National Survey on Private Ownership and Use of Firearms” (PDF). US Dept. of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, National Institute of Justice.
^ Evan DeFilippis and Devin Hughes. “The Myth Behind Defensive Gun Ownership”. POLITICO Magazine.
^ Paul Barrett (27 December 2012). “How Often Do We Use Guns in Self-Defense?”. Bloomberg Businessweek.
^ Kleck, G. and D. Kates (2001), Armed: New Perspectives on Gun Control, Chapter 6. N.Y.: Prometheus
^ Cook, Philip J.; Ludwig, Jens (1998). “Defensive Gun Uses: New Evidence from a National Survey” (PDF). Journal of Quantitative Criminology. 14 (2): 122. Retrieved 2015-11-20.
^ McDowall, D; Wiersema, B (December 1994). “The incidence of defensive firearm use by US crime victims, 1987 through 1990.”. American Journal of Public Health. 84 (12): 1982–1984. PMC 1615397 . PMID 7998641. doi:10.2105/AJPH.84.12.1982.
^ Rand, Michael R. (April 1994). “Guns and Crime: Handgun Victimization, Firearm Self Defense, and Firearm Theft”. U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs,Bureau of Justice Statistics. Retrieved 11 November 2012.
^ Planty, Michael (May 2013). “Firearm Violence, 1993-2011” (PDF). Bureau of Justice Statistics.
^ Clayton Cramer and David Barnett, “Tough Targets: When Criminals Face Resistance From Citizens” CATO Institute, 2012, p.8
^ Ludwig, Jens (2000). “Gun Self-Defense and Deterrence”. Crime and Justice. 27: 363–417. doi:10.1086/652203.
^ Lott, Jr., John R. (1998-06-23). “Keep Guns out of Lawyers’ Hands”. Wall Street Journal. p. 1.
^ Lott, Jr., John R. (1998-12-01). “Cities Target Gun Makers in Bogus Lawsuits”. Los Angeles Times. p. 7.
^ McDowall, David (Summer 2005). “John R. Lott, Jr.’s Defensive Gun Brandishing Estimates”. Public Opinion Quarterly. 69 (2): 246–263. doi:10.1093/poq/nfi015.
Jump up to:
a b Discussion of different surveys on defensive gun use.
Jump up to:
a b Hemenway, D (1 December 2000). “Gun use in the United States: results from two national surveys”. Injury Prevention. 6 (4): 263–267. PMC 1730664 . PMID 11144624. doi:10.1136/ip.6.4.263.
Jump up to:
a b Hemenway, D; Azrael, D (2000). “The relative frequency of offensive and defensive gun uses: results from a national survey.”. Violence and Victims. 15 (3): 257–72. PMID 11200101.
^ Azrael, Deborah; Hemenway, David (January 2000). “‘In the safety of your own home’: results from a national survey on gun use at home”. Social Science & Medicine. 50 (2): 285–291. doi:10.1016/S0277-9536(99)00283-X.
^ Hemenway, David; Miller, Matthew (1 April 2004). “Gun Threats Against and Self-defense Gun Use by California Adolescents”. Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine. 158 (4): 395. doi:10.1001/archpedi.158.4.395.
Jump up to:
a b Hemenway, D; Solnick, SJ (October 2015). “The epidemiology of self-defense gun use: evidence from the National Crime Victimization Surveys 2007-2011.”. Preventive Medicine. 79: 22–7. PMID 25910555. doi:10.1016/j.ypmed.2015.03.029.
^ http://www.vpc.org/studies/justifiable.pdf, retrieved 10/29/2014
^ Denton, JF; Fabricius, WV (April 2004). “Reality check: using newspapers, police reports, and court records to assess defensive gun use.”. Injury prevention : journal of the International Society for Child and Adolescent Injury Prevention. 10 (2): 96–8. PMC 1730063 . PMID 15066974. doi:10.1136/ip.2003.003947.
^ Kellermann, AL; Westphal, L; Fischer, L; Harvard, B (14 June 1995). “Weapon involvement in home invasion crimes.”. JAMA. 273 (22): 1759–62. PMID 7769769. doi:10.1001/jama.1995.03520460041032.
^ McDOWALL, D. (1 May 1995). “Firearms and Self-Defense”. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science. 539 (1): 130–140. doi:10.1177/0002716295539001010.
^ Wells, William (1 March 2002). “The nature and circumstances of defensive gun use: A content analysis of interpersonal conflict situations involving criminal offenders”. Justice Quarterly. 19 (1): 127–157. doi:10.1080/07418820200095191.
^ Schnebly, Stephen M. (June 2002). “An examination of the impact of victim, offender, and situational attributes on the deterrent effect of defensive gun use: A research note”. Justice Quarterly. 19 (2): 377–398. doi:10.1080/07418820200095281.
^ Branas, Charles C.; Richmond, Therese S.; Culhane, Dennis P.; Ten Have, Thomas R.; Wiebe, Douglas J. (November 2009). “Investigating the Link Between Gun Possession and Gun Assault”. American Journal of Public Health. 99 (11): 2034–2040. PMC 2759797 . PMID 19762675. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2008.143099.
^ Hart, T. C.; Miethe, T. D. (1 February 2009). “Self-Defensive Gun Use by Crime Victims: A Conjunctive Analysis of Its Situational Contexts”. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice. 25 (1): 6–19. doi:10.1177/1043986208328164.
^ National Research Council (2013). “Priorities for Research to Reduce the Threat of Firearm-Related Violence”. National Academy of Sciences. pp. 15–16. Retrieved 6 April 2016.
^ Kovandzic, Tomislav; Gertz, Gary Kleck Marc (May 1998). “Defensive gun use: vengeful vigilante imagery versus reality: results from the national self-defense survey”. Journal of Criminal Justice. 26 (3): 251–258. doi:10.1016/S0047-2352(97)00077-9.
^ Copes, H.; Kovandzic, T. V.; Miller, J. M.; Williamson, L. (12 August 2009). “The Lost Cause? Examining the Southern Culture of Honor Through Defensive Gun Use”. Crime & Delinquency. 60 (3): 356–378. doi:10.1177/0011128709343145.
Categories: Self-defenseGun politics in the United StatesDefensive gun use
Not logged in
Donate to Wikipedia
What links here
Cite this page
Create a book
Download as PDF
This page was last edited on 17 June 2017, at 20:46.