Monday, June 3, 2013

Semi-Automatic Rifles Are Used for Personal Defense

June 3, 2013

Here's a collection of incidents I've come upon in which someone has used a so-called "assault weapon," a.k.a. a modern semi-automatic sporting rifle, to defend themselves, their property or others. These incidents came to me in my normal news feed and reading. I did not specifically look for them. There may be many other cases in 2013 alone and there are certainly some before 2013 when I started paying attention.


In 1992 during the post-Rodney King trial Los Angeles riots, Korean store owners famously defended themselves and their businesses with a variety of firearms including so-called "assault weapons". The Los Angeles Times article mentions "automatic" weapons a couple times. I seriously doubt that's true. It's probably the typical media misinformation, intended or not, where semi-automatic rifles that may look like military firearms or are otherwise branded as so-called "assault weapons" are being misidentified and inaccurately described.

http://articles.latimes.com/1992-05-02/news/mn-1281_1_police-car
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tgCiC6qTtjs
http://www.humanevents.com/2012/12/23/when-assault-weapons-saved-koreatown/

In January 2013 a 15-year old boy used his father's AR-15 to protect himself and his younger sister from 2 home invaders.

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/01/09/15-Year-Old-Boy-Uses-AR-15-To-Defend-House-Against-Burglars

In January 2013 a college student used his AR-15 to protect himself and his roommate from 2 armed intruders.

http://www.humanevents.com/2013/01/25/college-students-ward-off-home-intruders-with-ar-15/

On April 19, 2013 a 20-year old college student used his AR-15 to defend himself and his girlfriend from a home invader who was killed in the incident.

http://www.phillyburbs.com/my_town/willow_grove/montco-da-cheltenham-college-student-appears-justified-in-fatally-shooting/article_a0698cdc-651b-54f1-80cb-b4323a82f630.html

On April 28, 2013 a store clerk used his AR-15 to defend from 2 would-be robbers.

http://jobs.aol.com/articles/2013/05/02/national-guardsman-store-clerk-scares-off-burglars-assault/

On May 26, 2013, a man in Medford, Oregon used his AR-15 to defend his home from an intruder. The warning shot was a mistake for which he's been charged with a crime and had his rifle confiscated. If he is found not guilty he'll get the rifle back.

http://www.kdrv.com/man-attempts-to-stop-felon-with-firearm/

===
  • MH: I believe there is more gun crime in Chicago alone in 1 day than all you've listed here. I would be interested to see a scientific analysis (as un-biased as possible) with data on ratio of "positive" stories involving guns and crime stories involving guns. Given the vested interests of parties on both sides of the issue, I find it hard to trust more "data-based" stories involving firearms. It's just too hot an issue to get a clear view of the facts these days.
  • MH: This was posted about 10 minutes ago by a public figure/author I follow: 
    25 people shot in 48 hours in New York. This is a picture of Tayloni Mazyck, 11, who was paralyzed by a stray bullet: 
    http://nydn.us/1aWRrJ0


There probably is, MH, but this was not intended as a balancing act. I posted this to debunk the "assault weapons are not used for personal defense" argument and because as time passes it was getting harder to remember all the incidents I'd read, when they occurred and their details. I decided it was time to put these specific incidents in writing where I could reference and add to them more easily as time passes.

Like you, I would love to see that unbiased scientific analysis. Some of it may appear in More Guns, Less Crime by John Lott (http://www.amazon.com/More-Guns-Less-Crime-Understanding/dp/0226493660/ref=tmm_pap_title_0?ie=UTF8&qid=1370303327&sr=1-1) which I recently purchased but have not yet read. The bias may be impossible to get past though. I think we both recognize the bias from both sides of the debate. Even on the pro-gun side, I've seen articles that reference as few as 600k and as many as 2.1 (or 2.5?) million incidents of firearms used annually for defense or crime prevention. That's a really wide range, making it very difficult to know what to believe. But even on the low end of those estimates that's still a remarkable number.

Besides the bias, the other challenge is that the number of times guns are used for positive purposes can never be recorded or analyzed because many are never reported. I'm sure there are crimes, including those with guns, that are never reported too but I'm pretty confident that the unreported positive uses dwarfs the unreported crimes. There are a few reasons for this.

1) Once a crime has been prevented, there’s not as much motivation or incentive to report it. Many people have lost confidence in law enforcement to investigate and solve random crime. They do know, however, that it will result in paperwork and formality that they don’t really want to participate in and that may put them in jeopardy.
2) Sometimes the guns used for positive purposes may be used in a technically unlawful way, so reporting crime prevention would result in self-incrimination. An example would be someone in Illinois (no legal carry until now) or California (a “may issue” state where it’s very difficult to get a carry license) carrying a firearm for protection and having to use it for that purpose.
3) Many, perhaps most, of these positive purposes don’t result in shots being fired. Brandishing a firearm is often all that’s needed to prevent crime. This feeds #1, above.
4) Gun crimes are so prevalent and varied that few, if any, know them all. Even when you think you’re lawfully exercising your right to “bear arms” and that you’ve used it lawfully to protect yourself, you can’t be sure that an anti-gun law enforcement officer or prosecutor won’t charge you with a crime, costing you a lot of money and jeopardizing your freedom and future 2nd Amendment rights. I can think of 3 incidents, in Texas, New York, and Oregon, where this has occurred this year.
5) Many people are paranoid about what government knows and will do or allow to be done with information at its disposal. There are plenty of validating reasons for this concern. Personal and firearms data has been misused several times this year alone.

Note: On points 1, 2 and 3, above, I have a friend in California who has been in this situation on 3 occasions. Only one of those is known to local law enforcement.

Note: These points generally apply to the survey results regarding personal or household gun ownership too. Many lawful owners of firearms will not disclose information to a pollster, doctor, school administrator, journalist or law enforcement officer.

We cannot rely on the media to report all the incidents or a measure of them. Positive uses of firearms don’t often make dramatic news and goes against some of the undeniable anti-gun agendas of some media services. Regarding the overall gun control debate, in January (?) 2013 there was an analysis of media stories published by some major services that were advocating gun control vs. advocating gun rights. It was 8:1 in favor of advocating for gun control. Neutral stories were not included in that ratio.

This post was specific to use of so-called “assault weapons” for defensive and protective purposes and is limited to the stories I’d found. There’s a Twitter account I follow (to my account, not my phone, so I don’t look at it regularly), https://twitter.com/Guns_Save_Lives, that attempts to follow positive uses of firearms more generally. It also includes related stories, so it’s not pure. I don’t know the source beyond their Twitter bio – whether it’s an individual or organization. They do a pretty good job of showing that firearms are used OFTEN for positive purposes but I doubt they’re getting even all the reported cases.

Hot issue? No doubt! Difficult to get a clear view of the facts? Very much so. In my biased, gun rights perspective, that’s intentional and mostly intentional by the outspoken gun control advocates who trade in misinformation and worse.

MH: I appreciate the civil conversation on the topic, ME. Not surprising in talking with you. Thanks for that. (this topic is a minefield!)

===
Related blogs:
Firearms Blog Collections

No comments:

Post a Comment