Guns Secure & Save Lives
Meet Darren Seiber. He’s the author of the East Tennessean viewpoint article of 3/26/2007 entitled “Guns do not save or secure lives.“
“Guns do not save or secure lives
Darren SeiberIt is often said that everything’s bigger in Texas - and without the assistance of Academy Award worthy films such as “Debbie Does Dallas” - some may believe this saying to be nothing more than a myth. But for the Texans who don’t quite measure up there is always another way to compensate: own a gun. Because we all know how Texans love their guns, right?”
If you couldn’t be bothered to read the whole bucket of tripe, this first paragraph pretty much sums up the whole article. Throw in three or four bogus statistics from the IANSA (no I won’t link to them) and toss in a blender. Voila!
I commented on the article, but I seriously don’t expect it to be posted. Below is my comment back to Mr. Seiber:
“What a self serving, smug little essay. Too bad your arguments are both disingenuous and puerile. First you start off with the tired old, “He must be compensating for something” gag. Grow up. If you want to be taken seriously as a writer, leave the childish insults at the door.
There are many reasons that Americans own guns, hunting, target shooting, protection and just because they have a right to under The Bill of Rights. Rights I might add, that pre-existed the United States.
Do you have a degree in Philosophy Darren? Why your insistence that gun rights supporters have one? The facts are, it doesn’t take a mental giant to understand that criminals are responsible for their crimes, not the tool they used. With your reasoning we should also ban pagers, cell phones and cars, since they are all used by criminals. While we’re at it, let’s ban swimming pools too since the risk of drowning in a pool is nearly 100 times higher than from a firearm-related accident for everyone, and nearly 500 times for ages 0-5.
Did you know that guns prevent an estimated 2.5 million crimes a year, or 6,849 every day. Often the gun is never fired and no blood (including the criminal’s) is shed. This includes 550 rapes, 1,100 murders, and 5,200 other violent crimes are prevented just by showing a gun. In less than 0.9% of the time is the gun ever actually fired….and since you bring up Canada, “Statistics Canada, Oct. 1, 2003″ States that the firearm homicide rate in Canada is virtually unchanged from before and after gun registration.
Saying “We are wrong because guns are wrong” is like saying “I am right because I’m right.” Saying so doesn’t make it so Darren. The “Kellerman study” you site used three non-random counties, a limited (266) case file, began with only cases where a death was involved, and had many other statistical weaknesses. This “study” also notes that the majority (54%) of the homicides were committed without firearms, and concluded that “household use of illicit drugs and prior domestic violence increase the risk of homicide.”
The British Home Office – not a “pro-gun” organization by any means, says that you are far more likely to survive a violent assault if you defend yourself with a gun. In episodes where a robbery victim was injured, the injury/defense rates were:
Resisting with a gun 6%
Did nothing at all 25%
Resisted with a knife 40%
Non-violent resistance 45%Also, the National Crime Victimization Survey states that when using guns in self-defense:
• 83% of robbery victims were not injured
• 88% of assault victims were not hurt
• 76% of all self-defense use of guns never involve firing a single shotAny questions?
Based on your reasoning that the Second Amendment is no longer appropriate, I could also say that about the First Amendment. Which parts of The Bill of Rights should we keep? Using your very arguments I could also make a case (a weak one at that) that you should only be allowed to use quill pens and hand operated presses. And the internet? Fugetaboutit!
Your argument that gun owners are more likely to kill someone over an disagreement or a crying child is idiotic. Likewise, all men are not potential rapists, and all women are not potential prostitutes just because they have the required equipment. It’s called “Transference” Darren, look it up. Anti-gun advocates have been crying this same old song and dance for years. Every time a state enacts a law allowing law abiding people to carry a concealed handgun, they scream that there will be blood running in the streets, that people will have shoot-outs over a stolen parking space and that fender benders will result in massacres. In fact Multiple victim public shootings drop in states that pass shall-issue CCW legislation. The anti’s even admit that they were wrong, but they keep repeating it anyway. Saying something is so multiple times doesn’t make it true. As a reference the Earth still isn’t flat and still revolves around the Sun.
Your article is based on false assumptions derived from flawed statistics from people with an agenda . I’m sure I won’t change your mind, but I would encourage you to discard the rhetoric and look at all the facts before coming to any conclusions. I would also encourage anyone reading this to do the same.”
7 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
Leave a comment
Entries and comments feeds.
Valid XHTML and CSS. ^Top^
41 queries. 0.571 seconds.
Powered by WordPress with jd-desert theme design by John Doe.
1,790 spam killed by WP-SpamFree
Powered by eShop v.2
The Real Gun Guys is Digg proof thanks to caching by WP Super Cache!
Picture changes every five minutes while camera is operating. Refresh to update.



![Validate my RSS feed [Valid RSS]](http://www.therealgunguys.com/images/valid-rss.png)

Women who attempt to use a gun to defend themselves are more likely to get killed. I don’t know if the same is true for men. Nonetheless, I support gun-rights and self-defense. It’s a personal choice for each individual to individually make. I support freedom, which means that I want people to have the right to do whatever they want insofar as they do not offensively harm anyone else.
Comment by Scott Hughes — March 29, 2007 #
Scott,
You wouldn’t happen to have at least one verifiable cite for your assertion about women using with-gun self defense?
Comment by Steve — March 29, 2007 #
That is one of the most thorough fiskings I’ve seen in quite a while! Good work Yuri! Posted a link to your blog on my main site last night.
Comment by E. David Quammen — March 29, 2007 #
Mr. Hughes,
Click below and tell me if the woman in this video was killed. Quite frankly, I’ve never before heard such abject nonsense, and the converse is true because over 500 women defend themselves against rape each and every day by using a firearm to thwart the assailant.
Or robbery, as the video clearly shows,
http://shooting-the-messenger-ii.blogspot.com/2007/01/blog-post.html
Comment by Fits — March 29, 2007 #
I find it interesting that the article says it doesn’t have any comments. Sounds like he didn’t like what you had to say. Truth hurts.
Comment by David — March 29, 2007 #
Excellent fisking.
Comment by BobG — March 29, 2007 #
Thanks guys, I call ‘em like I see ‘em!
I’m not surprised that my comment wasn’t posted. It seems that the people behind the East Tennessean don’t believe in posting viewpoints other than their own.
Scott, I too would like to see your cite, as everything I have says something completely opposite.
Comment by Yuri Orlov — March 30, 2007 #