On 9/10/2025 at 9:06 PM, cdemundo said:

Sorry, didn't realize how dim it is where you are.

Not about you.

I was referring to people who killed themselves with the guns they brought into their homes.

Well known that the most likely person to be shot by a gun in private hands is the gun owner.

Hence...

 

 

Wheres your source for that ?

1 minute ago, Slowhand225 said:

 

Wheres your source for that ?

querying Google (takes about 1 minute by the way)

"is the gun owner the most likely person to be shot by a gun in private hands?"

 

"Yes, research indicates that living in a household with a gun increases the risk of homicide and suicide for all residents, including the owner. Studies show that people living with handgun owners are more likely to die by homicide from within the home, particularly being shot by a spouse or intimate partner, with women at higher risk in these cases. Additionally, gun owners have a significantly higher risk of death by firearm suicide compared to non-owners. "

 

from Google AI Summary response to above query.

 

 

 

 

 

So you have nothing other than your emotions. Noted.

You're AI didn't provide a single fact to support your claim. Don't be lazy, find a source for your claim.

 

12 minutes ago, Slowhand225 said:

So you have nothing other than your emotions. Noted.

You're AI didn't provide a single fact to support your claim. Don't be lazy, find a source for your claim.

 

I'm a gun owner, and sold guns for years, along with hunting for 50, and believe that having a gun, in the right hands, trained and smart enough to avoid dangerous areas, can save your life. The truth, on average, is that some who own guns do not know how to use them properly, might put themselves into a possibly dangerous situation, thinking since they're armed, they are safe.

 

Taking away suicides, which are a little more likely to happen if a gun is available, the suicidal person will still find a way.

 

Taking away the fact that some gun owners might kill in their own house from a domestic dispute more readily than if a gun wasn't available.

 

And noting the fact that some, armed with guns, have saved lives, their own and others, because they were armed.

 

Some should not own guns, at least until they have trained themselves both physically and emotionally, that they are still a tool that can either save or hurt themselves or others. This is from a link I'll provide, which is study done in the Philadelphia area................

Conclusions

On average, guns did not protect those who possessed them from being shot in an assault. Although successful defensive gun uses are possible and do occur each year,^33,57 the probability of success may be low for civilian gun users in urban areas. Such users should rethink their possession of guns or, at least, understand that regular possession necessitates careful safety countermeasures. Suggestions to the contrary, especially for urban residents who may see gun possession as a surefire defense against a dangerous environment,^61,67 should be discussed and thoughtfully reconsidered......................https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2759797/

.

On 8/27/2025 at 11:31 PM, bannork said:

Three people have died in a shooting at a US primary school, including the shooter, and 20 have been injured.

 

The Minneapolis city government said the shooter had been “contained” after gunfire at the Annunciation Catholic School, and there was no longer any “active threat” to residents.

Police, ambulances, FBI and other federal agents were on the scene as a person answering the phone there said students were being evacuated.

 

“There is no active threat to the community at this time. The shooter is contained,” the City of Minneapolis said on X.

 

Three dead and 20 injured in US primary school mass shooting

 

For God's sake Americans, just ban guns. It ain't that difficult. Most developed countries have strict gun laws. 

The UK has a problem with knives, but not with guns which will kill or injure far more.

After every incident where innocent people, including kids, are shot and killed, the usual high profile US public figures come out and announce they're praying for the victims. 

Before they do that, ban the damn guns, if anything for Christ's sake.

Do you really think these kids got their guns legally and with permits? Banning guns is not the solution. it is not the gun that kills people. It is the person. It is Americans god given right to have guns for self defense. If the US were to ban guns, Imagine how many black market guns will be sold with illegal owners not checked. What you suggest is ridiculous.

12 minutes ago, fredwiggy said:

I'm a gun owner, and sold guns for years, along with hunting for 50, and believe that having a gun, in the right hands, trained and smart enough to avoid dangerous areas, can save your life. The truth, on average, is that some who own guns do not know how to use them properly, might put themselves into a possibly dangerous situation, thinking since they're armed, they are safe.

 

Taking away suicides, which are a little more likely to happen if a gun is available, the suicidal person will still find a way.

 

Taking away the fact that some gun owners might kill in their own house from a domestic dispute more readily than if a gun wasn't available.

 

And noting the fact that some, armed with guns, have saved lives, their own and others, because they were armed.

 

Some should not own guns, at least until they have trained themselves both physically and emotionally, that they are still a tool that can either save or hurt themselves or others. This is from a link I'll provide, which is study done in the Philadelphia area................

Conclusions

On average, guns did not protect those who possessed them from being shot in an assault. Although successful defensive gun uses are possible and do occur each year,^33,57 the probability of success may be low for civilian gun users in urban areas. Such users should rethink their possession of guns or, at least, understand that regular possession necessitates careful safety countermeasures. Suggestions to the contrary, especially for urban residents who may see gun possession as a surefire defense against a dangerous environment,^61,67 should be discussed and thoughtfully reconsidered......................https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2759797/

.

Not sure why we needed anything before the link you provided.
Speaking of links, props for providing one. Sadly its junk. Full of non facts and opinion.

However, this from your link shows that this statement shows that his statement of

"Well known that the most likely person to be shot by a gun in private hands is the gun owner." 

is not true.

 

"Results. After adjustment, individuals in possession of a gun were 4.46 (P < .05) times more likely to be shot in an assault than those not in possession. Among gun assaults where the victim had at least some chance to resist, this adjusted odds ratio increased to 5.45 (P < .05)."

 

 

1 minute ago, Slowhand225 said:

Not sure why we needed anything before the link you provided.
Speaking of links, props for providing one. Sadly its junk. Full of non facts and opinion.

However, this from your link shows that this statement shows that his statement of

"Well known that the most likely person to be shot by a gun in private hands is the gun owner." 

is not true.

 

"Results. After adjustment, individuals in possession of a gun were 4.46 (P < .05) times more likely to be shot in an assault than those not in possession. Among gun assaults where the victim had at least some chance to resist, this adjusted odds ratio increased to 5.45 (P < .05)."

 

 

One thing a person cannot do, is dismiss studies done by those in the business, professionals, unbiased and only looking for facts. That's what I do, as opinions mean nothing. Again, I'm a gun owner and user and believe they are necessary for hunting, targets and protection, IN the right hands.

 

If you read the whole link, and not just skim, which doesn't show the whole picture, they did say a responsible, trained gun owner is different than what the study shows.

 

A person who doesn't intentionally put themselves in a possible dangerous situation, thinking because they have a gun means they're somehow bulletproof.

 

A person who locks their guns away from other family members, meaning children, has a much better chance of them not getting them in their untrained, immature hands and causing danger.

 

If there's a gun in the house, and there's a mentally ill person living there, or an abusive, controlling one, that gun might be a danger to others.

 

This was just one study, which takes all shootings into consideration, and the facts are all out for anyone to see, the results of that study.

 

I'm fully aware of all things that happen with guns in the US as I did sell guns and was around shooters and hunters, along with police, sheriffs and border patrol officers, who were in the game daily. Again, studies are not opinions. They are data from all the shootings that happen, why they happen, to whom, and from whom. Studies are meant to be unbiased because bias doesn't end up with facts.

 

Many who own guns don't want them in irresponsible hands, as this is why things go awry. Kids who are neglected, abused or spoiled end up with legitimate guns in their hands and sometimes shoot innocents, or in this Charlie Kirk case, he became a radical, opposing another's viewpoints and shooting him because of them, at least from what we know now, which is disturbed thinking, seeing he'll likely pay for this with his life.

 

Millions of gun owners aren't the ones shooting innocent people. it's still the mentally ill, those who take their own lives from suicide, and gangs which are most of the gun killings in the US. Some people think they need to ban all guns, but this won't solve the whole problem, as mental illness is going to happen anyway, and killings will never stop. The studies done are fact based, and again, if guns are respected and people are better trained with them, less deaths will occur. A person with an open mind will see the truth. One who is blindsided, a hero worshiper, in denial or doesn't have the knowledge on a subject won't see the truth. 

1 hour ago, thesetat said:

Do you really think these kids got their guns legally and with permits? Banning guns is not the solution. it is not the gun that kills people. It is the person. It is Americans god given right to have guns for self defense. If the US were to ban guns, Imagine how many black market guns will be sold with illegal owners not checked. What you suggest is ridiculous.

It must be the American God right?

Is it mentioned in the American Bible anywhere that God gives you the right to have guns?

Please send a link to that because i can not find it in my Bible.

 

 

2 hours ago, thesetat said:

Do you really think these kids got their guns legally and with permits? Banning guns is not the solution. it is not the gun that kills people. It is the person. It is Americans god given right to have guns for self defense. If the US were to ban guns, Imagine how many black market guns will be sold with illegal owners not checked. What you suggest is ridiculous.

So the killings will go on and on in the US. Innocent people will continue to die because you need the guns for self defence!

Did Charlie Kirk have time to reach for his gun before being shot dead?

You say it's not the gun that kills people, it is the person. Really?

If Tyler Robinson didn't have a gun, how would he have killed Charlie Kirk? 

He could have rushed the stage with a knife but it certainly would have been much harder to kill Charlie Kirk.

It's undeniable that people with guns kill people ( very easily).

To prevent black market guns with illegal owners, penalties have to be severe, like they are in many countries.

Imprisonment up to life. 

Nobody has the right to be able to kill other people with ease.

 

 

People that own automobiles are more likely to die in automobile accidents. 

 

The studies typically only include results of assaults where someone is shot. 

 

The studies do include the results of would-be attackers that are chased away. 

 

Like virtually all studies, the authors only include the data that promotes their agenda. 

4 hours ago, Slowhand225 said:

So you have nothing other than your emotions. Noted.

You're AI didn't provide a single fact to support your claim. Don't be lazy, find a source for your claim.

 

 

"is the gun owner the most likely person to be shot by a gun in private hands?"

 

 

Based on multiple studies, gun owners are at a significantly higher risk of being shot by a gun in private hands than non-gun owners, primarily due to an elevated risk of suicide, domestic violence, and accidental shootings

. The majority of gun-related deaths in the United States are suicides, not homicides. 

 

 

Suicide risk

• A major factor for gun owners: The primary reason gun owners are more likely to be shot is the increased risk of suicide. In 2023, 58% of all gun deaths in the U.S. were suicides.
• Presence of a gun is a risk factor: A Stanford University study of California handgun owners found that men who own handguns are eight times more likely to die of suicide by firearm than men who do not own handguns.
• Especially high risk for women: The same study found that women who own handguns are 35 times more likely to die by suicide with a gun than their non-gun-owning counterparts. 

Accidental shootings

• The gun owner's home is a high-risk location: In the case of unintentional shootings, the gun owner's home is the most common location where victims are fatally injured.
• Unsecured firearms: Research consistently shows that easy access to unsecured firearms increases the risk of unintentional injury and death.
• Children at particular risk: Children who gain access to an unsecured firearm are frequently the victims of unintentional shootings, which can be either self-inflicted or inflicted by another child.

 

Domestic and intimate partner violence

• Increased homicide risk for cohabitants: People who live with handgun owners are more than twice as likely to die by homicide than those in gun-free homes, with the risk being three times higher for homicides occurring inside the home.
• Partner-on-partner shootings: Individuals living with a handgun owner are seven times more likely to be shot and killed by a spouse or intimate partner. Women bear the brunt of this risk, making up 84% of the victims in these shootings.
• No evidence of protective effect: Several studies have found no evidence that having a handgun in the home offers any protective benefits against homicide. 

Conclusion

While guns are often purchased for self-defense, decades of public health research show that owning a firearm introduces significant risks for the owner and those living in the same home. The danger of suicide, accidental shootings, and lethal domestic violence largely outweighs any potential protective benefit against harm from an intruder.

[End of content from Google AI]

[ sources that Google AI references follow:]

 

 

 

 

 

There you go Mr. Skeptic, there are the source that Google AI used to reach those conclusions.

Are you gonna go through those and evaluate the date with you expertise in evidence evaluation?

 

Irony    at its best.

 

An extrem right wing REP,  Kirk,  supported the policy and law  to own guns/weapons.

Now he has been killed by a weapon .

 

8 hours ago, Yagoda said:

Taking the fake Biden racist stuff down...

 

So your post has no support, as usual.

Blah blah.

I linked two other sources..🙂

7 hours ago, mogandave said:

That’s rich. Just more deflection coming from a lame deflector.

 

Just look at your own charts and see how silly they are. 

 

First, they only include deaths, so other violence, like leftist riots are not counted.

 

Second, why are the 35 BLM riot deaths counted as right wing? 

 

 

Blah blah. You have nothing! 🤣

11 hours ago, Slowhand225 said:

Not sure why we needed anything before the link you provided.
Speaking of links, props for providing one. Sadly its junk. Full of non facts and opinion.

However, this from your link shows that this statement shows that his statement of

"Well known that the most likely person to be shot by a gun in private hands is the gun owner." 

is not true.

 

"Results. After adjustment, individuals in possession of a gun were 4.46 (P < .05) times more likely to be shot in an assault than those not in possession. Among gun assaults where the victim had at least some chance to resist, this adjusted odds ratio increased to 5.45 (P < .05)."

 

 

The arithmetic might be challenging but here is the most important fact.

The majority of gun-related deaths in the United States are suicides, not homicides.

11 hours ago, Slowhand225 said:

Not sure why we needed anything before the link you provided.
Speaking of links, props for providing one. Sadly its junk. Full of non facts and opinion.

However, this from your link shows that this statement shows that his statement of

"Well known that the most likely person to be shot by a gun in private hands is the gun owner." 

is not true.

 

"Results. After adjustment, individuals in possession of a gun were 4.46 (P < .05) times more likely to be shot in an assault than those not in possession. Among gun assaults where the victim had at least some chance to resist, this adjusted odds ratio increased to 5.45 (P < .05)."

 

 

Do you understand what your quote states?

 

It is talking about being shot in an assault.

It says that individuals in possession of a gun were between 4.46 to 5.45 times more likely to be shot than those not in possession of a gun.

 

Let's simplify the statement for those who are having difficulty understanding it.

 

People who are in possession of a gun when assaulted are approximately 5 times more likely to be shot than those who don't have a gun.

 

This is not discussing gun owners being shot by their own gun which is what you were originally arguing about.

 

You can't seem to correctly interpret 4 line text, yet you blather about lack of supporting facts.

 

8 minutes ago, cdemundo said:

The arithmetic might be challenging but here is the most important fact.

The majority of gun-related deaths in the United States are suicides, not homicides.

Do you understand what your quote states?

 

It is talking about being shot in an assault.

It says that individuals in possession of a gun were between 4.46 to 5.45 times more likely to be shot than those not in possession of a gun.

 

Let's simplify the statement for those who are having difficulty understanding it.

 

People who are in possession of a gun when assaulted are approximately 5 times more likely to be shot than those who don't have a gun.

 

This is not discussing gun owners being shot by their own gun which is what you were originally arguing about.

 

You can't seem to correctly interpret 4 line text, yet you blather about lack of supporting facts.

 

So the data includes one gang-banger shooting another, and shop owners being robbed, and has little to do with people being robbed in there homes. 

 

It would also include altercations where both the attacker(s) and the attacked end up being shot. One can save themselves and their families and still end up shot. 

 

Nor does it include any altercation where someone protects themselves against an assailant, but no one is shot. Far and away, most robbers run away when they see a gun. 

You missed the point of my post.

He quoted a stat that supported the opposite of what he was trying to say.

I pointed out that the stat was not on the topic gun owners being shot by their own guns.

 

"Far and away, most robbers run away when they see a gun. "

Please provide a reference, maybe a number to qualify "far and away".

 

4 minutes ago, cdemundo said:

You missed the point of my post.

He quoted a stat that supported the opposite of what he was trying to say.

I pointed out that the stat was not on the topic gun owners being shot by their own guns.

I did not miss that point. 

4 minutes ago, cdemundo said:

 

"Far and away, most robbers run away when they see a gun. "

Please provide a reference, maybe a number to qualify "far and away".

 

Do you not believe it?

On 9/10/2025 at 10:06 AM, cdemundo said:

Sorry, didn't realize how dim it is where you are.

Not about you.

I was referring to people who killed themselves with the guns they brought into their homes.

Well known that the most likely person to be shot by a gun in private hands is the gun owner.

Hence...

 

you said severs me right..

looks like you're the one that is dim, dont even know what your saying!

 

22 hours ago, jvs said:

It must be the American God right?

Is it mentioned in the American Bible anywhere that God gives you the right to have guns?

Please send a link to that because i can not find it in my Bible.

 

 

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2019/09/04/yes-gun-ownership-is-a-god-given-right-228034/

Yes, Gun Ownership Is a God-Given Right. 

haha

1 hour ago, thesetat said:

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2019/09/04/yes-gun-ownership-is-a-god-given-right-228034/

Yes, Gun Ownership Is a God-Given Right. 

haha

Show me proof or is it just in your head?

ha ha ha.

37 minutes ago, jvs said:

Show me proof or is it just in your head?

ha ha ha.

actually... in the bible there are many references to keeping yourself protected and armed for self defense. It does not specify guns because there were none at that time.. It does mention knives and swords to keep at hand to protect yourself. So, perhaps you just do not want to admit that the bible does acknowledge the need to arm yourself in self defense, hence making it your god given right to do so. 

3 minutes ago, thesetat said:

actually... in the bible there are many references to keeping yourself protected and armed for self defense. It does not specify guns because there were none at that time.. It does mention knives and swords to keep at hand to protect yourself. So, perhaps you just do not want to admit that the bible does acknowledge the need to arm yourself in self defense, hence making it your god given right to do so. 

Source for your quote?

7 minutes ago, thesetat said:

actually... in the bible there are many references to keeping yourself protected and armed for self defense. It does not specify guns because there were none at that time.. It does mention knives and swords to keep at hand to protect yourself. So, perhaps you just do not want to admit that the bible does acknowledge the need to arm yourself in self defense, hence making it your god given right to do so. 

 

Wow, did God write the bible?

On 9/12/2025 at 4:18 AM, candide said:

And people are right to "cry" about those extreme right-wing extremists!

 

https://www.adl.org/resources/report/murder-and-extremism-united-states-2024

 

This database lists the names of everyone killed by another person in the city of Chicago. It’s compiled from Chicago Sun-Times reporting and information from law enforcement agencies and the Cook County medical examiner’s office and updated every day. 

 

https://chicago.suntimes.com/graphics/crime/victim-list/

On 9/12/2025 at 4:18 AM, candide said:

And people are right to "cry" about those extreme right-wing extremists!

 

https://www.adl.org/resources/report/murder-and-extremism-united-states-2024

People murdered in Chicago in:

2015:  468

2016: 762

2017: 650

2018: 561

2019: 492

2020: 774

2021: 779

2022: 600 

2023: 632

2024: 573

2025: 262 (with 3 months to go to the end of the year)

 

About 6,553 people murdered in Chicago alone.  Not counting D.C., Baltimore, Oakland, New Orleans, etc.

 

I would say, that number of murders is pretty extremist, wouldn't you?

 

 

2 hours ago, thesetat said:

actually... in the bible there are many references to keeping yourself protected and armed for self defense. It does not specify guns because there were none at that time.. It does mention knives and swords to keep at hand to protect yourself. So, perhaps you just do not want to admit that the bible does acknowledge the need to arm yourself in self defense, hence making it your god given right to do so. 

Since you are hiding behind that,chew on this!

Eye for Eye

³⁸ “You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’^{[h] 39} But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also. ⁴⁰ And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, hand over your coat as well. ⁴¹ If anyone forces you to go one mile, go with them two miles. ⁴² Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you.

Love for Enemies

⁴³ “You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor^[i] and hate your enemy.’ ⁴⁴ But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, ⁴⁵ that you may be children of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. ⁴⁶ If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? ⁴⁷ And if you greet only your own people, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? ⁴⁸ Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.

On 9/13/2025 at 12:54 AM, cdemundo said:

 

 

"is the gun owner the most likely person to be shot by a gun in private hands?"

 

 

Based on multiple studies, gun owners are at a significantly higher risk of being shot by a gun in private hands than non-gun owners, primarily due to an elevated risk of suicide, domestic violence, and accidental shootings

. The majority of gun-related deaths in the United States are suicides, not homicides. 

 

 

 

Suicide risk

• A major factor for gun owners: The primary reason gun owners are more likely to be shot is the increased risk of suicide. In 2023, 58% of all gun deaths in the U.S. were suicides.
• Presence of a gun is a risk factor: A Stanford University study of California handgun owners found that men who own handguns are eight times more likely to die of suicide by firearm than men who do not own handguns.
• Especially high risk for women: The same study found that women who own handguns are 35 times more likely to die by suicide with a gun than their non-gun-owning counterparts. 

Accidental shootings

• The gun owner's home is a high-risk location: In the case of unintentional shootings, the gun owner's home is the most common location where victims are fatally injured.
• Unsecured firearms: Research consistently shows that easy access to unsecured firearms increases the risk of unintentional injury and death.
• Children at particular risk: Children who gain access to an unsecured firearm are frequently the victims of unintentional shootings, which can be either self-inflicted or inflicted by another child.

 

 

Domestic and intimate partner violence

• Increased homicide risk for cohabitants: People who live with handgun owners are more than twice as likely to die by homicide than those in gun-free homes, with the risk being three times higher for homicides occurring inside the home.
• Partner-on-partner shootings: Individuals living with a handgun owner are seven times more likely to be shot and killed by a spouse or intimate partner. Women bear the brunt of this risk, making up 84% of the victims in these shootings.
• No evidence of protective effect: Several studies have found no evidence that having a handgun in the home offers any protective benefits against homicide. 

Conclusion

While guns are often purchased for self-defense, decades of public health research show that owning a firearm introduces significant risks for the owner and those living in the same home. The danger of suicide, accidental shootings, and lethal domestic violence largely outweighs any potential protective benefit against harm from an intruder.

[End of content from Google AI]

[ sources that Google AI references follow:]

 

 

 

 

 

There you go Mr. Skeptic, there are the source that Google AI used to reach those conclusions.

Are you gonna go through those and evaluate the date with you expertise in evidence evaluation?

 

Guns in the Home: 2025 Statistics

By Cassandra McBride

Last Updated: Aug 13, 2025

Cite this Article

Report Highlights: More than 50 million U.S. households have at least one firearm. There's an average of 40,000 firearm-related deaths annually.

• According to recent surveys, 81% of gun owners and 57% of non-gun owners feel safer with a firearm in the home.

• Four in ten U.S. households have at least one firearm (out of 129 million, equalling at least 51.6 million households)

• 55% of homicides where the victim dies at home are firearm-related.

• 0.002% of children who were in a home with a loaded and unsecured firearm were killed in an accidental shooting incident between 2003 and 2021.

 

https://ammo.com/articles/guns-in-the-home-statistics

16 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

I did not miss that point. 

Do you not believe it?

I don't believe it.

I believe that if an unarmed assailant sees that his intended victim is armed, he will flee.

You have made the statement that :

"Far and away, most robbers run away when they see a gun."

The question is not do robbers run away when they see a gun.

The question is how often does it happen?

Far and away would indicate that you know it happens often.

 

7 minutes ago, cdemundo said:

I don't believe it.

I believe that if an unarmed assailant sees that his intended victim is armed, he will flee.

You have made the statement that :

"Far and away, most robbers run away when they see a gun."

The question is not do robbers run away when they see a gun.

The question is how often does it happen?

Far and away would indicate that you know it happens often.

 

No, "often" indicates it would have to happen every moment, it does not.