The odds are getting higher

[cce1302]

I've lived just outside South Bend since May of 2007. I hear a lot of people say things like "why do you carry a gun? it's one in a million that you'd ever use it to defend yourself."
Well, it's getting pretty likely that I'll either be a victim or will successfully defend myself here in South Bend. We've had over a dozen shootings, some stabbings, a bunch of armed robberies, etc. in the last few weeks/month. I have to live here; I have to work here. I don't have to be a victim.

South Bend Tribune: South Bend Police look for link in five armed robberies

At 8:15 p.m., a 42-year-old Notre Dame employee was walking home from campus and was robbed near the intersection of Rose Street and Maple Lane, just north of the city limits.

At 8:20 p.m., a 17-year-old Mishawaka man was walking in the 1800 block of East Colfax Avenue when he was robbed.

At 8:30 p.m., a 66-year-old man was robbed of his wallet while standing in the driveway of his home in the 1700 block of East Belmont Street.

In all three incidents, police said the victim was approached by a man who got out of a car and pointed a gun, demanding money.

At 9:46 p.m., a man walked into the Burger Dairy Store, 4023 W. Sample St., and demanded money from the cash registers.

At 12:10 a.m. Thursday, two men were robbed outside the Discount Liquor Store at 1119 S. Bendix Drive.

*By the way, I can't remember if the odds getting lower or higher means there's more of a chance of something happening. What the title means is that it is MORE likely to happen, not less.

 

[Scutter01]

In all three incidents, police said the victim was approached by a man who got out of a car and pointed a gun, demanding money.

Well obviously the problem here is that the man had access to a gun! If we had banned guns, he wouldn't have turned to a life of crime!

 

[ATM]

This demanding of money seems to be a recurring theme of the robberies as well. This type of crime should go away once the wealth is redistributed by Obama. But guns may still cause people to go bad.

I hear a lot of people say things like "why do you carry a gun? it's one in a million that you'd ever use it to defend yourself."

Make them quote their sources.

 

[dburkhead]

"One in a million"?

I took a look at that, actually. I looked up the violent crime rates in the US. If you just look at violent crime, that's 1,408,337 crimes committed out of a population of 301,621,157 in 2007. Thus, for an "average" person in the United States, there is just about a 0.5% (a one in 200) chance of being a victim of a violent crime in a given year. This is a strict lower bound since it assumes only one victim per crime. (Violent crimes, by defintion, have at least one victim.)

But wait, there's more. The average family size is 3.14. So the odds that one or more individuals in the that average person's family will be the victim of a violent crime rises to 1.8% in a given year.

And going on from there, the average life expectancy in the US is 77.8 years. With that, the likelihood that someone in the average person's family, during that persons lifetime, will be the victim of a violent crime is 76%.

A 76% chance, on average, of being the victim of a violent crime. That doesn't count crimes that are stopped, that never happen, because one is armed.

Now, there's more to the picture than this simplistic view--some portions of the population have higher risks while others have lower, and there is much one can do, in addition to being armed, to improve those odds. Still, the case is clear. There are real dangers, significant dangers, that make being armed an entirely rational choice. In fact, it makes notbeing armed look rather Pollyanna-ish.

 

[ATM]

^ Yeah, then hit them with those numbers.
And call them Pollyanna... or polyamorous... whatever, just call them a name before you walk away


ETA: and rep'd for researching those numbers!

 

[Bill of Rights]

dburkhead,

This is good number-crunching. Sadly, the other side will ignore it on it's face, because it is cold, logical, and works totally without regard to or for their feeeeeeeelings.

Put another way, as a friend of mine quotes, "Facts are stubborn things."

ATM,

Wouldn't either one of those examples translate to "liberal"?

Blessings,
B

 

[ATM]

I love agitation and investigation and glory in defending unpopular truth against popular error.

James Garfield

 

[Kirk Freeman]

It's not the odds; it's the stakes.

 

[ATM]

It's not the odds; it's the stakes.

And I find it odd that some are willing to stake their life on the bet that it won't happen to them.

 

[esigler]

I live in Goshen and often travel to South Bend, I would never travel there without a gun, never!

 

[Dogman]

And I find it odd that some are willing to stake their life on the bet that it won't happen to them.

A lot of people believe that if they don't acknowledge that there is a problem then there isn't a problem. They think it only happens to someone else. JMO

 

[ATM]

A lot of people believe that if they don't acknowledge that there is a problem then there isn't a problem. They think it only happens to someone else. JMO

This kinda blurs the distinction between sheep and ostriches.
It also begs the question: If there isn't a problem, WHY TAKE AWAY MY GUNS?

 

[Dogman]

This kinda blurs the distinction between sheep and ostriches.

With BBQ sauce you can't tell the difference.
I don't know why I said that, it was the first thing that came to mind.