Martin Matter Latest to Fuel Firearms Debate

Regardless of who is right or wrong, a man with a firearm pulled a trigger...


The circus that is the Trayvon Martin affair is just the latest to bring our national obsession with firearms (whether one be pro or con) to the forefront of the discussion. I won’t belabor the Martin matter any further as I think so much misinformation and disinformation has been bandied about that there is not enough hard evidence for the casual observer to employ basic scientific method before formulating an opinion.

That a young man was killed with a firearm is simply enough of a starting point.

Let me attest, however, that I am not a rabid NRA member (or even a member at all), not a hunter (though I don’t begrudge those who are) and have owned firearms used for target shooting and, yes, personal protection. I am more than familiar with their care and use, having been an Expert Marksman with every small arm in the Army’s inventory when I served. I am also very much in favor of reasonable gun control, permitting and criminal background checks. I wouldn’t own nor would I purchase an illegal firearm.

Rather than offer any hard conclusions, my intent then will be to spur some thought and debate on the subject.

I also know full well that we have nearly as many firearms floating around in our country as we do automobiles and a good many of both aren’t legally owned, transferred or operated. Fine upstanding citizens buy, register and insure their cars legally and operate them safely with a valid driver’s license.

The less than “stand-up” among us?

Not so much … and the exact same thing can be said about guns. The people that none of us want to have them can get them if they want them, the niceties of the rule of law be damned. Trying to get illegal firearms off the street is as much an exercise in futility as would be confiscating all the illegal cars … and the numbers of both would be equally daunting.

I believe the latest statistics show that +/- 13,000 people were killed by firearms, in the USA, last year (a fraction of those killed by automobile, by the way). Conversely (depending upon which study one believes) there are purportedly somewhere between 800,000 and 2.1 million successful defenses of life and property, using a firearm, each year across the nation. If anywhere near true, that’s a startling ratio and, if incidence of cause and effect is the barometer, a hell of a case in support of gun ownership, no?

Keeping in mind, too, that some portion of that 13,000 met that fate with legal justification, it doesn’t appear the bad guys with guns (killing people, at least) are even statistically significant; representing 1/100 of one percent of the low-ball number of 800,000 “successful defenses.”

With firearms, like most everything else, there’s no substitute for training and experience but, how much of a factor this played in any of the so-called “successful defenses” is anyone’s guess. 

The simple fact of the matter remains, however, that there are circumstances in which there is simply no substitute for, or better option than, the ready availability of a firearm. 

Sadly, we do inhabit that kind of world and I truly hope that such circumstances never befall anyone, with or without a firearm close at hand.

This post is contributed by a community member. The views expressed in this blog are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Patch Media Corporation. Everyone is welcome to submit a post to Patch. If you'd like to post a blog, go here to get started.

Gary Englert March 29, 2012 at 11:09 PM
@b:First, I'm not convinced that a definitive study (concerning "successful defense" by firearms) exists, given the disparity in the studies/data available, let alone their age. Second, whether it be 13,000 in a year or 130,000 in a decade, that many deaths by firearms is statistically insignificant in a population exceeding 300,000,000. Then too, even the high estimate of 2.1 Million "successful defenses" anually (using fireams) represents involvement by less than 1 perecent of the population. Again, my intent here was not to take a definitive position here but, rather to spur discussion and debate on the subject.
Paul H March 30, 2012 at 02:00 AM
How do you expect to survive without a gun when they bad guys come aknocking ? They got guns....without permits...but they got em !
Gary Englert March 30, 2012 at 04:05 AM
@ Paul H: Nothing I've written should be misconstrued to mean that I'm opposed to legal gun ownership. I think the larger question (given the statistics available) is whether or not the entire gun debate is disproportinate to the realties of legal ownership and use.
Joe Gonzalez March 30, 2012 at 03:30 PM
Its time to confront the banks who take our collective deposits & make business loans to the gun companies who make far more firearms than the legitimate market needs. The result is the oversupply ends up on USA streets in the hands of crooks hellbent on causing death & destruction.There is a long history of people uniting & using their bank deposits to change corporate behavior. The Montgomery Bus Boycott and the South African Apartited Movement are two such examples. Let's come together & tell the banks that if they take our collective deposits & make business loans to the firearm makers--we the people will pull our money out their banks. Occupy the Banks!
Gary Englert March 30, 2012 at 07:23 PM
@ Joe Gonzalez: Yours is certainly an interesting take on things but, I would've hoped to spur some discussion on just how big a problem gun ownership and use actually is in this country. Again, if there's validity in any of the data out there, how truly significant are the actually number of incidents in a country 0f 300,000,000 people?


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »