Paplebon on Politico and guns.

[TerpEagle]

You glance by it here. The question is what are the odds of accidental death by firearm vs defending a home intrusion in a household with responsible gun ownership? The stats you continue to rely on do not apply, period.

The stats say that you're more likely to have a death if you DO have a firearm in the house.

How is that possible over the entire population?

For whatever reason - the chance of having someone break in and kill you or a loved one is far less probable if you're unarmed compared to any type of death in the home if there is a gun.

So what's the reason? You can be the safest gun owner in the world - that doesn't make the statistics disappear. There are either a lot of irresponsible gun owners out there or the chance of a home intrusion resulting in death is SO rare that even if most gun owners are responsible, enough accidents happen to make overall possession in the home less safe.

You can't have it both ways and say: Well I'm safe so my home is safe therefore it's more safe "outside of a vacuum" when overall it's less safe. The outliers are a) an incredibly small but either incredibly dangerous group of gun owners who shift the average or b) an incredibly small and incredibly safe group of gun owners who don't.

[AthensEagle]

I believe you are both correct. You're just repeating the same argument I hear every time the quantitative researchers drink beer with the qualitative researchers.

[Irish George]

bwah!!!

Guns! Guns! Guns!

[TerpEagle]

I believe you are both correct. You're just repeating the same argument I hear every time the quantitative researchers drink beer with the qualitative researchers.

I'm going to try to get to the gayte this year so we can duke/drink it out then. Or just bitch about the Eagles.