If they have a case, why do victim disarmers have to lie?

As you may have noticed from previous number-crunching, I’m quite analytically inclined. When I see or hear something that doesn’t sound right, it gnaws at me until I check it out. Like this:

Emotions run high during Politech’s gun control forum
“So it’s really a touchy issue on a sense of security. Also if you want to go to domestic violence, most women who are around guns, 50 percent of the time will be shot using their own weapon,” Gavran said. “So there are a lot of challenges with that.”

Really? 50% of women around guns will be shot with their own weapon?

My guess is that emotions ran high because lies like that were allowed.

According to a MarieClaire.com and Harvard Injury Control Research Center survey 32% of women live in households with firearm. I think that counts as being “around” guns. 32% of 162,000,000 women would be 51,840,000. 50% of those would be 25,920,000 women shot.

The FBI’s 2016 Uniform Crime Report says there were only 1,217,400 violent crimes (male and female; murder and nonnegligent manslaughter, rape, robbery, and aggravated assault) last year. Yet ditz Gavran claims that just women shot is more than 21 times that.

But maybe Gavran meant 50% of the MC/HIRC reported 12% of women who own guns. That gets us down to 9,720,000 to about 8 times the number of total violent crimes for males and females alike.

Let’s stroll over to the CDC’s WISQARS and see what they say about it. 6,368 total nonfatal firearms assaults, and 1,950 fatal firearms assaults, for a total of 8,318. A far cry from 25,920,000 or even 9,720,000.

OK, I’ll be generous. Rather than what she said, maybe she meant to limit the population strictly to domestic violence cases; so 50% of female domestic violence victims.

Uh oh. It says here that females are the victims in 85% of 960,000 estimated annual domestic violent incidents, giving us 816,000 victims, half of which would be firearms by Gavran’s claim: 408,000. Only 49 times the number of fatal and nonfatal female firearms injuries the CDC reports.

Wait. 12% of women own guns. So .12 times 816,000 is 97,920. Half of that is 48,960. Only six times as many as the total the CDC reports.

Pure. Effing. B. S.

But as the man said, there’s more.

Perry was able to speak on what he considered naivety in regards to fears of students carrying guns around the campus. Gavran responded to Perry, saying there were accidental discharges around some universities in Texas.

She went on to say there is no way of knowing all of the effects of Campus Carry because the Clery Act legislation does not require reporting of accidental discharges.

I searched. I found one. More than a year ago. If the ditz has better data, she should cite it.



5 thoughts on “If they have a case, why do victim disarmers have to lie?”

  1. I also vote STFU. I’ve always wondered about the “sisterhood” that betrays the sisters. I can bring home the bacon, fry it up in a pan and never let you forget you’re a man?? The old Charlie perfume commercial?? Some drive down the highway on the phone, putting on mascara and drinking coffee. But handling a firearm is too complicated or too hard or two dangerous or you won’t have the courage to use it and will stand there and let someone take it away from her? That gets a STFU as well.

  2. She went on to say there is no way of knowing all of the effects of Campus Carry because the Clery Act legislation does not require reporting of accidental discharges.

    She is probably correct about the Clery Act not requiring reporting of “accidental” discharges.

    – As firearm discharges in towns (read: not at firing ranges) are ALWAYS investigated, there’s going to be a report somewhere.
    – With as emotionally-charged as campus carry tends to be, and with all the Chicken-Littling (“Shootouts over bad grades!! Blood in the streets and classrooms!! The sky is falling!!”) over it, any newspaper or media outlet worth its salt will probably be on-site conducting interviews before the police investigators have finished up, and it WILL be a headline.

    It will be a headline not just because of the Chicking-Littling or liberal bias in journ-o-lism, but also because such discharges are extremely rare (outside of certain police departments). As your search shows, ONE since the law was enacted, over a year ago (how many “accidental” discharges has the NYPD had so far this year?).

    So if she has different numbers, I’d really like to see them, and see why all those “accidental” discharges weren’t recorded by police, or even in the local papers.

    If she doesn’t have different numbers, then the STFU response is 100% appropriate.

    1. I decided to look that up. The last data the NYPD has published is 2015.


      They had 34,440 uniformed officers in 2015. That’s a UD rate of .436/1,000 for one year.

      The University of Texas system has roughly 215,000 students, with probably 1 percent or less with CCW: 2150. That’s a rate of .465/1,000 for approximately 14 months, or 0.399/1,000 per year.

      So these “immature” and “untrained” college students have a lower UD rate than the highly trained Only Ones.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *