George Zimmerman is NOT the Typical Story of Defensive Gun Use

thebelltowers.com ^ | 25 July, 2013 | Matt MacBradaigh

[marktwain]

The trial of George Zimmerman over the shooting of Trayvon Martin has stirred national debate on race relations and on guns and violence in America. President Obama, who by many accounts has lost politically in his push for tighter gun control, has exploited the incident stating after the not-guilty verdict that “We should ask ourselves if we’re doing all we can to stem the tide of gun violence that claims too many lives across this country on a daily basis.”

Anecdotal stories are interesting because they’re relatable; they help us see the human side of things by putting names and faces to what can otherwise be boring information. But no serious scientist, researcher, or analyst will rely on anecdotes because for every one that makes a certain conclusion seem right, there’s another that makes a conflicting conclusion seem right. In many ways, coverage of the Zimmerman trial is about moving one agenda or narrative forward, and the gun control narrative is no different; but the facts demonstrate that citizens plus guns is not bad for society. In fact, it’s quite the opposite – both anecdotes as well as the substantial body of hard data demonstrate that the Zimmerman narrative of reckless gun use is the aberration, not the model, of defensive gun use

In contrast to the anecdote evidence that guns embolden overzealous neighborhood watch members to harm innocent people, consider this: In January this year, Melinda Herman shot Paul Ali Slater, an ex-con, while defending herself and her two 9-year old children in their Loganville, Georgia home. Though she shot at him six times, striking him five times, he survived. CNN reported that “Walton County Sheriff Joe Chapman — whose office responded to the shooting

[marktwain]

Decent summation of the studies of numbers of defensive uses of guns.

[stephenjohnbanker]

B U M P

[JimRed]

Though she shot at him six times, striking him five times, he survived.

Heavier caliber and better shot placement would have righted THAT wrong!

[I cannot think of a name]

“the Zimmerman narrative of reckless gun use”

WTF are these people talking about!

I am so sick of this kind of crap. Since when did it become “reckless” to use a gun to save yourself from some out of control jackass.

[DoughtyOne]

One thing is certain.  There are not enough of these types of articles being written.  You would think the NRA or other gun rights groups would do a much better job of bring this to the forefront.  There should be many books and endless studies outing statistics like this.  I'm not saying they don't do them.  I'm just saying they should be a lot more prevalent.

One aspect of the article I found interesting for serveral reasons was: The trial of George Zimmerman over the shooting of Trayvon Martin has stirred national debate on race relations and on guns and violence in America. President Obama, who by many accounts has lost politically in his push for tighter gun control, has exploited the incident stating after the not-guilty verdict that “We should ask ourselves if we’re doing all we can to stem the tide of gun violence that claims too many lives across this country on a daily basis.”

One article on the forum today LINK stated that 52% of all gun deaths in the United States are being perpetrated by only 0.02% of Blacks.  Gee Mr. Obama, I wonder if somewhere in this nation there is a small group of people, who if addressed and corrective measures were taken might impact the number of deaths the most?  Hmmmmm?  Let's not mention them huh.  Let's just demagogue the issue even though we all know what the problem is.

Obama is one squirrel that couldn't find a chestnut with the help of every other squirrel in the forest.

References at LINK: ...

Snipet one:

The FBI also has some data on the demographics of who commits these murders. According to the FBI's Expanded Homicide Data Table 3, the race of the "offender" was known in 10,471 cases. Blacks accounted for 5,486 of them, or 52%.

Snipet two:

(By the way, please spare me any "Hoven thinks all blacks are murderers" talk. The statistics say that 99.98% of blacks did not commit murder in 2011. When looking at murderers, we are looking at a very tiny slice of the population, regardless of race. It is unwise to extrapolate much of anything about a population based on how 0.02% of it behaves.)

FOLKS, THOSE OF YOU WHO CAN, PLEASE CLICK HERE AND PENCIL IN YOUR DONATION TO HELP END THIS FREEPATHON.  THANK YOU!
...this is a general all purpose message, and should not be seen as targeting any individual I am responding to...

[GrandJediMasterYoda]

They can’t rationalize self-defense because they are so use to the thug winning, so they can’t help but make him out to be reckless or “he got away with murder” or “he is responsible”. It’s all baloney. Like I said, Trayvon committed his own murder. He chose suicide by proxy. He put an individual in a situation where he had no choice.

Just what exactly did Zimmerman do to him? Look at him? Walk in his general direction? Oh wow so I better watch where I look and walk from now on. If I look at a black man or walk in his general direction, that means he has the right to try and kill me, and if I refuse his attempt then I am racist.

[stayathomemom]

If George Zimmerman had been a woman of equal height and stature, would we be even talking about this case?

[the_Watchman]

What is not mentioned is something liberals NEVER get: “deterrence”. Something that cannot be measured, but which can be inferred, is how many times violent crimes were averted due to the possibility of the victims being able to employ firearms.

On a similar vein, today there was a story about an attempted robbery of a gun store by a man wielding a baseball bat and a knife. You certainly don’t see that sort of thing very often.

[alloysteel]

This whole controversy concerning the “guilt” of George Zimmerman is based on the malicious and perverted reasoning from the premise that Zimmerman was stalking Trayvon Martin, when the testimony and later statements of the witnesses and other interested parties indicate that it was Martin stalking Zimmerman.

George Zimmerman stands charged with “self defense”. Even in the most tortured sort of political correctness, this is not a criminal act, in and of itself. In the context of the situation as it has been reconstructed through testimony and verified through examination of the circumstantial evidence, the use of deadly force to stop the attack, in the heat of the moment, was entirely justified. That the deadly force was just that, deadly, in no way negates the immediacy of the judgment call to stop the assault.

Trayvon Martin was, in the vernacular of certain of those persons who choose to pontificate upon the matter, “acting stupidly”.

And stupidity can get you killed. The Universe is an unforgiving and relentless taskmaster, dispensing judgments that may seem callous or excessive, but the delicate balance is swiftly restored.

[supercat]

...the Zimmerman narrative of reckless gun use is the aberration...

The only real aberration is the extent to which some corrupt government officials decided to drag George Zimmerman over the coals for a clearer-than-average case of self-defense.

The events surrounding the Trayvon Martin shooting in the real world were pretty much typical of defensive gun use: someone attacks a person with a gun in a fashion which is clearly intended to create in that person a fear of death or severe bodily harm, and that person prevents such harm by incapacitating the attacker. Further, the events surrounding the shooting in leftist fantasyland were pretty much typical of leftist-fantasyland "defensive" gun uses. To be sure, the events surrounding the shooting in leftist fantasyland aren't typical of defensive gun uses that happen in the real world, but such discrepancy is hardly an aberration.

I wish George Zimmerman's supporters would focus on the fact that tangible physical evidence clearly shows that for at least 45 seconds Trayvon Martin was deliberately preventing Mr. Zimmerman from retreating to safety and was attacking Mr. Zimmerman in a fashion which would clearly be felonious if performed on a non-consenting target that was simply trying to disengage. The evidence further makes clear that during those 45 seconds Trayvon Martin could not plausibly have believed that Mr. Zimmerman was consenting to the attack nor do anything but disengage.

Those facts surrounding that 45 seconds, in and of themselves, would be sufficient to prove the shooting justified almost regardless of anything that could even theoretically have occurred before then. If GZ had engaged in a pattern of persistent harassment that eventually caused TM to snap, that might undermine the legitimacy of his self-defense claim, but other evidence makes clear that there's no way GZ would have had enough time to harass TM sufficiently to justify TM's behavior.

[supercat]

What is not mentioned is something liberals NEVER get: “deterrence”.

That principle/problem applies not only to things like self-defense, but also to many economic scenarios as well. Fear of severe economic loss should serve as a deterrent to financially-risky behavior. Bailouts undermine that deterrent effect, encouraging more people to engage in risky behavior. Consequently, the total level of harm to people engaging in that behavior (i.e. those who were supposed to be helped at the expense of everyone else) will be increased. Since those who have to pay for the bailout will also be harmed, the net effect is that bailout policies hurt just about everyone and should thus be regarded as just plain bad.