I've always had a problem justifying policy and regulations based on surveys and statistics. I also see that there are 3 problems with DGU statistics.
One is the surveys of folks about DGUs where some percentage of people respond with a positive for an incident where a crime was averted because the subject smacked the perpetrator with a briefcase containing an unloaded black powder pistol.
Also a problem is the idea that police reports and perpetrator body counts are the only actual instances of DGUs.
The other problem is folks that want to justify their campaigns for more or fewer restrictions based on those, IMO, invalid collections of data from either end of the spectrum. IMO, there is ample evidence for many valid and justified DGUs. Setting the standards for who can carry open or concealed and where is a great topic for discussion as is the type of training and other requirements that should be enforced. (I'm not a fan of systems where anyone who can legally own a gun is allowed to carry with no licensing requirements.)
YMMV
Edit history
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
= new reply since forum marked as read