9 votes

99.999% of guns owned in America are not used for violence. Here are some objective stats.

I originally posted this on Facebook, but I thought it might help you guys argue against anti-2nd Amendment folks (and man are there many). That said, I'm not a statistician or a mathematician, so if any of you folks who are see flaws in my logic, please feel free to enlighten me! Here's what I wrote:

"Okay, according to the Guardian (a foreign paper respected by all, yes?), there were 9,146 murders by guns in the U.S. in 2007:


That number was actually lower in 2011, but whatever:


So, divide that by the population of the United States (311,591,917 - 2011 U.S. Census) that amounts to .00003% of U.S. citizens dying at the hand of a firearm in 2007. A number which is lower now.

Oh no! Looks like we have a crazy gun murder epidemic people, time to ban them!

Next, divide the gun murder rate in 2007 by the 2007 total estimated number of civilian-owned firearms in this country (270,000,000). For the sake of argument, let's assume each murder was committed by three guns, (3 x 9146 = 27438), that means that of all the guns owned in this country in 2007 (or at least legally declared), .0001% of all guns owned were used to kill a U.S. citizen.

So really, it makes total sense to punish/over-regulate the hundreds of millions of law-abiding citizens who do not use the other 99.999% of firearms to kill people. (I know I'm excluding gun crimes that do not involve homicide, but that still indicates .0001% of guns are used for violence: http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/glance/tables/firearmnonfat...)

You may believe that no person should die at the hand of a gun and we should repeal the Second Amendment. But personally, I don't think it's worth sacrificing our right to defend ourselves against intruders/tyranny/zombies whatever, for the rare acts of murder perpetrated by criminals. And 80% of criminals in prison didn't even legally purchase their guns anyway: http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/guns.cfm "

I'd love to hear what you guys think, even if it's identifying flaws. Thanks!


More interesting facts:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/interactive/2012/jul... Pretty much all of South America has less citizen gun ownership than the U.S. and way more homicides. So clearly, there's a no correlation gun bans and less murders.

"Whether causative or not, the consistent international pattern is that more guns equal less murder and other violent crime. Even if one is inclined to think that gun availability is an important factor, the available international data cannot be squared with the mantra that more guns equal more death and fewer guns equal less death. Rather, if firearms availability does matter, the data consistently show that the way it matters is that more guns equal less violent crime." - From the Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy, Spring 2007. http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlpp/Vol30_No2_Kate...

This site is great for raw gun facts: http://www.justfacts.com/guncontrol.asp


Just wanted to clarify that some of the conclusions I state in my Facebook post were meant to be sarcasm, in case anyone was confused. I'm definitely pro-2nd Amendment. :)

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Some additional statistics (included many children)

The 1973 Edition of the Guinness Book of World records. Category - Crime and Punishment, Greatest Mass Killings.

China - 26.3 million Chinese killed during the regime of Mao Tse-tung.

USSR - 8-10 million victims during the great purge.

Nazi Germany - 4-6 million killed

It is my understanding that in each of these that gun registrations and/or gun owner registrations were used by the state to systematically disarm the populous, not all at once less the people rise up and defend themselves. Instead one group or neighborhood at a time.

I am certain if you add up all the accidental killings and all the intentional murders (as opposed to self defense) in this country since 1776 the number of victims is far less than 4 million. And in reality if someone decides to kill themselves or others they will find a way, so if we had outlawed guns from the start, the majority of the victims would not have been saved.

An unarmed populous is a herd waiting for the slaughter. All they have left is standing in front of a tank and hoping the guy driving has a conscience. Good luck with that!!

Mighty mountains in grandeur stand, but tiny raindrops turn them to sand! Noah, I think I just felt a raindrop!!

"In 2008, more than 36,000 people died from drug overdoses,

and most of these deaths were caused by prescription drugs." CDC

How many of these were children?

Where is the media on this? lol

Where? Busy keeping the people opiated I guess...

Otherwise people might stop taking the drugs and when watching the MSN think, OH that's BS!

That's not how the percent

That's not how the percent symbol works. It should be a 0.003% chance.

Interesting though. Thanks for the post.

Don't legally owned firearms account for only about 1%...

of gun related homicides? I've been finding it hard to get the stat's.

If so it is 0.0003% of legally owned guns... Meaning 99.9997 percent are never used criminally.

Or did he take that into account I swear he didn't.

Besides as I keep telling people 3D printers will make any gun laws irrelevant. They'll be made at the push of a button no waiting time, no trip to the shops...

Does anyone know the percentage of lawful gun owner who commit such crimes? I don't trust my maths skills

Yes its all quite sill....stupid.

Gun Control Explained:

"Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos!"- Homer Simpson