How often does a gun save from crime?

[MS Fowler]

Piggy-backing on the Colorado tragedy. I hear commentators stating that armed citizens stop or prevent crimes regularly. I understand these events are not covered because the very idea goes against of the MSM's agenda.
But the question is real...can anyone document how much crime is prevented by armed citizens?

[Can't Know]

The NRA's magazine American Rifleman used to have a regular column in which they chronicled the use of a gun (often just the display, not the actual firing) to stop a crime. I've not read it in years, but they might still do that.

In any event, if anyone would have that information, I'd think it would have to be them, so you might poke around on their website or send them an e-mail.

[Benz Fan]

Originally Posted by MS Fowler

Piggy-backing on the Colorado tragedy. I hear commentators stating that armed citizens stop or prevent crimes regularly. I understand these events are not covered because the very idea goes against of the MSM's agenda.
But the question is real...can anyone document how much crime is prevented by armed citizens?

What is the basis of your understanding regarding the conspiracy of the MSM to suppress the coverage of such events?

[BAVBMW]

Yes, the NRA magazines still do that. Generally it's one page a month with 8-12 stories. Sometimes shots are fired, sometimes the mere presence is enough.

I'm not in a position to cite specifics towards any media outlet, but it does seem that these stories don't get the same coverage.

MV

[tbomachines]

Originally Posted by MS Fowler

Piggy-backing on the Colorado tragedy. I hear commentators stating that armed citizens stop or prevent crimes regularly. I understand these events are not covered because the very idea goes against of the MSM's agenda.
But the question is real...can anyone document how much crime is prevented by armed citizens?

Or it's just not newsworthy because nothing happens. Don't put the cart before the horse!

[elchivito]

I don't think it has anything to do with a media "agenda". I've been flipping channels watching everyone's take on the usual hue and cry for hi cap mag bans by congresspersons and others and I find the reporting to be remarkably even handed.

I've seen a number of estimates of crimes prevented with guns, but don't really know how you'd accurately arrive at such a number. I suspect lots of those instances go unreported by people who don't want the headache of dealing with an investigation of themselves when a gun, fired or not, is involved in some kind of incident. On your own property in a state with good castle doctrine laws in place is one thing. In public is another matter. Sticky and time consuming at best.

[Can't Know]

Originally Posted by BAVBMW

Yes, the NRA magazines still do that. Generally it's one page a month with 8-12 stories. Sometimes shots are fired, sometimes the mere presence is enough.

I'm not in a position to cite specifics towards any media outlet, but it does seem that these stories don't get the same coverage.

MV

I would surmise that the reason these stories don't get coverage is the same reason near accidents don't. A sixteen-car pileup after a truck spills its load is news. Slamming on the brakes and swerving to avoid the brain-dead teen texting and stepping off the curb in front of you really isn't. And driving to work uneventfully surely is nothing worth reporting.

Put another way, a deeply-disturbed individual went into a movie house and used firearms to change hundreds of lives, most of them forever, at least in one way or another.

Untold millions of firearms owners did not shoot anyone, in a movie house or otherwise. And only a few displayed or used a firearm to stop or prevent a crime. The reason for non-reporting may be that simple, that it's just not considered "newsworthy."

After all, they have to get back to reporting important things, like which celeb slept with which other or got kicked off dancing/singing/doing makeup/baking/etc. with the stars.

[MS Fowler]

I understand " not news worthy", and while that gives them cover to not report incidents when shots are not fired, it fails to explain the non-coverage of armed citizens shooting the perp and bringing a halt to the incident.

[retmil46]

Remember the saying "If it bleeds, it leads"? Pretty well sums it up.

[tbomachines]

Originally Posted by MS Fowler

I understand " not news worthy", and while that gives them cover to not report incidents when shots are not fired, it fails to explain the non-coverage of armed citizens shooting the perp and bringing a halt to the incident.

That's not at all MSM material, but local news station material. Case in point, from today's local news:

http://abclocal.go.com/wpvi/story?section=news/local&id=8745335
I'm sure this will be sprawling across national headlines in no time right?

[engatwork]

I've used a KelTek 32 to take out a rabid coyote one time. I was carrying concealed and had my permit. Does that count?

[Can't Know]

Originally Posted by engatwork

I've used a KelTek 32 to take out a rabid coyote one time. I was carrying concealed and had my permit. Does that count?

To those not bitten by the coyote because you eliminated the threat, it surely does.

However, PETA will still be knocking down your door.

[kerry]

I don't get the 'media doesn't cover it argument'. Isn't there a ton of coverage of Zimmerman and isn't it the case of a gun used to stop crime?

[Can't Know]

Originally Posted by kerry

I don't get the 'media doesn't cover it argument'. Isn't there a ton of coverage of Zimmerman and isn't it the case of a gun used to stop crime?

Yes to the first question and "we don't know" to the second.

The whole debate in the Zimmerman case is about what Martin was or wasn't doing. It's pretty clear he wasn't committing a crime before Zimmerman got out of his vehicle; whether Martin escalated things to a crime by assaulting Zimmerman -- so that he stood his ground (or continued to lie on the ground) as he defended himself -- is the crux of the entire case.

Of course every other facet of the case has been explored and theorized as well.

[t walgamuth]

Originally Posted by BAVBMW

Yes, the NRA magazines still do that. Generally it's one page a month with 8-12 stories. Sometimes shots are fired, sometimes the mere presence is enough.

I'm not in a position to cite specifics towards any media outlet, but it does seem that these stories don't get the same coverage.

MV

I don't think the NRA any longer qualifies as an unbiased source.