Are people who own guns more likely to be shot?

[CORed]

Here in Missouri, for many years it was simply illegal to carry a firearm. Period. No permits, no exceptions.
Some years back, when about half the states had adopted at least some form of concealed-carry provision, Missouri legislators passed a “permit” law. Now, if you obtained the required training and obtained a background check, one could carry a concealed weapon. At the time, there were many cries of opposition.... The streets would run red, every argument would become a shooting, etc, etc.
That didn’t happen, nor did it happen in states that had similar training and background requirements.
But more recently, the august boys in Jefferson City removed the permit requirement in a move to placate 2nd-Amendment activists.

Now.... If you can legally purchase a handgun, you can carry it. No permit, no training. And, we have indeed seen a rather sharp increase in “rage” shootings. Here in St. Louis, we have seen a pretty steady number of road-rage shootings, arguments (even between friends) devolving in gunfights, and the like.
This is quite separate from the gang/drug related shootings that are a constant.

Colorado still requires the course and the permit, which I think is the right way to do it. In fact, were I king or dictator, I would require the training and permit to be allowed to own a gun, whether you intend to carry it or not.

 

[arthwollipot]

And similarly, it's the ignorant, untrained gun owner that causes accidental deaths. But that is a minuscule percentage.

Then why are there so many accidental gun deaths in America?

But don't blame the tool, it can be replaced. Blame the violent inner city socio-economic condition. Don't blame the gun in the house, blame the conditions that warrant needing a gun in the house.

While I agree with this sentiment in principle, the #1 risk factor for being shot is having a gun in the house.

Also I would make a small adjustment to your last statement - blame the conditions that warrant the perception of needing a gun in the house. As far as I'm aware, the number of actual crimes that are prevented by that gun in the house is vanishingly small.

 

[casebro]

There is a huge difference between your claim and the facts. Has it made you revise your opinion?

You do recall that your point was that 51% is not "most"? My opinion is still that 51% qualifies as most.

It's sort of like "Most people voted for Hillary".

Or we could get back to the OP. My point was that more households have guns than they admit to.

 

[casebro]

Then why are there so many accidental gun deaths in America?.

Do you want to look up the numbers, or shall I? Or are you just going to say "One is too many"?

While I agree with this sentiment in principle, the #1 risk factor for being shot is having a gun in the house.

No, because most homicides happen elsewhere. The risk factor is Inner city criminal.

Also I would make a small adjustment to your last statement - blame the conditions that warrant the perception of needing a gun in the house. As far as I'm aware, the number of actual crimes that are prevented by that gun in the house is vanishingly small.

CDC said about 200,000 per year. Obama asked them to do a preliminary study. With numbers like that the study quietly died, it didn't back up the party line. This from the "Not the Anti Science Party".

 

[Darat]

You do recall that your point was that 51% is not "most"? My opinion is still that 51% qualifies as most.

It's sort of like "Most people voted for Hillary".

Or we could get back to the OP. My point was that more households have guns than they admit to.

No my point was your premise was wrong, therefore I wondered if since you now know your premise was wrong if you would change your conclusion. It appears that it won’t.

 

[Giordano]

The biggest demographic is the inner city drug addled ignorant gang members. Something like 97% of the homicides. Fix that demographic group and America's homicide rate drops to one that is comparable to many other countries.

It's not the NRA members that do the mass numbers of homicides.

The topic is are people who own guns more likely to be shot? Not homicides. But okay. Actually only 1/3 of USA gun deaths are homicides. About half of those gun related homicides are in urban areas but the other half are in much more rural areas. Eliminating the “inner city...” wouldn’t come anywhere close to make the USA rate to that of most other first or second world countries.

Per capita gun deaths of all types are particularly high in rural states.

https://lawcenter.giffords.org/facts/gun-violence-statistics/

 

[Giordano]

Sure, the people that get shot are more likely to live in homes with guns. They are also more likely to have a criminal record for violent offenses, like 97%. And drug offenses. And most cannot qualify for legal gun ownership because of it.

Do you have a source for these numbers or are they your own estimates?

 

[Giordano]

You're making your own logical fallacies here. The study you reference finds a positive correlation between gun ownership rates and homicide rates on a statewide level. But that says nothing about the protective value of guns to an individual. Nor does it say anything about the direction of causation (if any) in the correlation it found. You seem to have concluded that gun ownership leads to homicides, but the data itself don't distinguish between that possibility and homicides leading to gun ownership (ie, people buy more guns when they live somewhere more dangerous).

Furthermore, risk isn't evenly distributed among individuals either. If you're a drug dealer, your odds of already owning a gun are high, and your risk of getting shot are high. But it's the being a drug dealer, not owning a gun, which causes that high risk. If you want to avoid being shot, don't buy a gun and become a drug dealer. But again, that correlation says nothing about whether a law abiding individual is at any increased risk if they buy a gun. Similarly, if you're prone to suicidal thoughts but you don't want to commit suicide, don't buy a gun. But plenty of people are not at risk of suicide, and owning a gun doesn't place them at any increased risk. What's more, people can determine with high accuracy whether they are in these high risk groups.

No doubt that being a drug dealer raises your risk greatly. But is not the likelihood of an accidental shooting of oneself or another much higher if one owns a gun verse not? How could they not be?

How much protection is conferred by gun ownership is another issue that I am now trying t research. It probably protects drug dealers.