Suicide without a gun...

[GojuBrian]

In taking away the equalizing tool you create victims.

This needs to be sub-stantiated. It is clearly not self-evidently true. It is easy to construct a hypothetical that shows that, in some circumstances, society as a whole is best served by taking away the "equalizing tool".

Remember - the equalzing tool does not magically appear when one is attacked in one's home and then magically disappear when one is enraged at a cheating spouse.

www.gunfacts.info and neither does a car.

 

[John]

 

[Drew]

This has been repeatedly addressed. As Jesus Himself explcitly states, the arming was done very specifically to make Himself appear to be one of a band of revolutionaries. Why people do not accept what Jesus says, and super-impose their own interpretation, shows that they should re-think their exegetical method.

Even though I disagree with you on a number of points, I do appreciate your answering my question.

Drew, could you provide the chapter/verse where Jesus explicitly states this? Not that I don't trust you, but you know me, gotta check things out for myself.

Certainly.

The following text, from Luke 22, is often used to support the right to bear arms:

And He said to them, "But now, whoever has a money belt is to take it along, likewise also a bag, and whoever has no sword is to sell his coat and buy one.
37"For I tell you that this which is written must be fulfilled in Me, 'AND HE WAS NUMBERED WITH TRANSGRESSORS'; for that which refers to Me has its fulfillment." 38They said, "Lord, look, here are two swords." And He said to them, "It is enough."

Obviously a “superficial†reading suggests that Jesus is advocating the “right†to carry a weapon. However, the fact that such a reading is deeply at odds with other things Jesus teaches should be a tip-off that things are not as they appear. And indeed, such is the case here. When this text is understood in broader context, we realize that Jesus is not making any kind of a case for the right to bear arms (swords or otherwise).

In order to arrive at the correct interpretation, we really need to step back and ask ourselves what Jesus’ larger purpose was in this dialogue. Note the connective “for†at the beginning of verse 37. It suggests that the material which follows is an explanation or amplification on the point just made – that the followers of Jesus are to sell their coats and buy a sword. So what is Jesus’ larger purpose?

It is that He been seen as a transgressor. Jesus is intentionally orchestrating things so that the Jewish authorities will have plausible grounds for arresting Him. Of course, appearing as part of an armed band would be precisely the ideal scenario to ensure Jesus’ arrest. Remember the “for†at the beginning of verse 37. If we are to be careful students of what Jesus is saying, we need to take seriously what Jesus says in verses 37 and 38 as qualifying and explaining his statement about buying a sword. We cannot simply gloss the text and conclude “Look, Jesus is making some kind of general statement about the right to self-defence with weaponsâ€.

In fact, this very specific focus on the intent to be seen as a transgressor is powerfully sustained by Jesus’ statement that there is prophecy that He (Jesus) must be seen as a transgressor.

Remember the incident in the temple with Jesus overthrowing the tables of the moneychangers. This is not, as many people think, merely a repudiation of the sin of materialism. It is also a shrewd provocation on the part of Jesus. By creating a ruckus in the temple, He is forcing the hand of the Jewish leaders – they cannot allow such behaviour, Jesus must be arrested soon.

This is why, in the next verse, when the disciples say they have two swords, Jesus says “It is enough.†Obviously, if Jesus ever intended for the disciples to use the swords, two swords would not be nearly enough in any kind of armed action. But it’s enough to fulfill the prophecy by making Jesus appear to be participating in a violent revolutionary movement of some kind.

Unlike the “Jesus is supporting the right to bear arms†interpretation, note how the above interpretation makes sense of the entire account. If Jesus was really making some general statement about a “right to bear armsâ€, how exactly does that contribute to His being numbered with transgressors? And how does that make sense of the limit of two swords? Such a “right to bear arms†interpretation makes sense of neither. So it is almost certainly an incorrect interpretation of Jesus’ statement about buying a couple of swords.

 

[follower of Christ]

In taking away the equalizing tool you create victims.

This needs to be sub-stantiated. It is clearly not self-evidently true.

The second ONE person has stopped a crime with a gun the fact IS substanciated, friend...whether you can accept it or not.

Maybe I need to REPOST all that data showing the MANY THOUSANDS of time a year that a gun is used for self defense >?
Do I ?

.

 

[Drew]

Drew, could you provide the chapter/verse where Jesus explicitly states this? Not that I don't trust you, but you know me, gotta check things out for myself.

Whats funny about Drew views is it is entirely contradictory.

He CLAIMS that Jesus is supposedly against using the sword for violence, but by his own views Jesus KNOWINGLY set Peter up WITH a sword to COMMIT VIOLENCE !




.

You are, of course, entirely misrepresenting my view.

 

[Drew]

You simply have to look at the worlds countries who are leading in suicide rates............ countries like China, Japan, and many others which are not gun friendly.

Not the point. I made a specific argument that FoC has dismissed without argument.

So I asked him to show me where that pariticular argument is wrong.

What you assert in your post has repeatedly been shown to be an incorrect line of argument. I will not repeat what I have already repeated multiple times.

 

[follower of Christ]

This has been repeatedly addressed. As Jesus Himself explcitly states, the arming was done very specifically to make Himself appear to be one of a band of revolutionaries. Why people do not accept what Jesus says, and super-impose their own interpretation, shows that they should re-think their exegetical method.

Even though I disagree with you on a number of points, I do appreciate your answering my question.

Drew, could you provide the chapter/verse where Jesus explicitly states this? Not that I don't trust you, but you know me, gotta check things out for myself.

Certainly.

The following text, from Luke 22, is often used to support the right to bear arms:

And He said to them, "But now, whoever has a money belt is to take it along, likewise also a bag, and whoever has no sword is to sell his coat and buy one.
37"For I tell you that this which is written must be fulfilled in Me, 'AND HE WAS NUMBERED WITH TRANSGRESSORS'; for that which refers to Me has its fulfillment." 38They said, "Lord, look, here are two swords." And He said to them, "It is enough."

Obviously a “superficial†reading suggests that Jesus is advocating the “right†to carry a weapon. However, the fact that such a reading is deeply at odds with other things Jesus teaches should be a tip-off that things are not as they appear. And indeed, such is the case here. When this text is underâ€....................
.

Utterly contradictory with your views....yet you seemingly dont see that fact

Jesus KNEW Peter would do what he did. We BOTH know it.
You CLAIM that Jesus is against violence with the sword, but JESUS IS THE ONE who had them make sure they HAD SWORDS !

.

 

[Drew]

Do you really believe you can't be a gunowner and a servant? Military, police agencies, etc.......

I am coming to believe that use of weaponry is not something "kingdom people" should be doing. I know that sounds insane, but I think there are lot of things Jesus says that seem insane.

 

[GojuBrian]

In taking away the equalizing tool you create victims.

This needs to be sub-stantiated. It is clearly not self-evidently true.

The second ONE person has stopped a crime with a gun the fact IS substanciated, friend...whether you can accept it or not.

Maybe I need to REPOST all that data showing the MANY THOUSANDS of time a year that a gun is used for self defense >?
Do I ?

.

Firearms are used more than 2 MILLION times a year to prevent crime!!

 

[follower of Christ]

Not the point. I made a specific argument that FoC has dismissed without argument.

please.
Ive completely destroyed your pitiful case in these multiple threads, gent.
I stopped speaking TO you because I was informed of something that I didnt see earlier...

So I asked him to show me where that pariticular argument is wrong.

Sort of like your claiming that the moon is made of cheese and demanding that I prove the assertion false.

The facts have blown your ridiculous arguments into oblivion....even if you cant accept that fact.

 

[Drew]

Do you really believe you can't be a gunowner and a servant? Military, police agencies, etc.......

Whats amazing is how often Drew and others rip out so much of scripture entirely out of context to push their agenda/

Well, if that is so, please feel free to point out exactly where I have erred in my detailed lengthy argument about Luke 22.

Or please feel free to engage any of the other scriptural arguments I have given.

But to dismiss them without actually engaging them is not proper debate.

 

[follower of Christ]

I am coming to believe that use of weaponry is not something "kingdom people" should be doing. I know that sounds insane, but I think there are lot of things Jesus says that seem insane.

uh....drew.....Gethsemane.....Peter and a sword that Jesus set him up with..... ;)

 

[GojuBrian]

Do you really believe you can't be a gunowner and a servant? Military, police agencies, etc.......

I am coming to believe that use of weaponry is not something "kingdom people" should be doing. I know that sounds insane, but I think there are lot of things Jesus says that seem insane.

Yes, but Jesus doesn't say that. ;)

"Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God."

 

[follower of Christ]

Well, if that is so, please feel free to point out exactly where I have erred in my detailed lengthy argument about Luke 22.

Or please feel free to engage any of the other scriptural arguments I have given.

But to dismiss them without actually engaging them is not proper debate.

Please gent...youve BEEN exposed here already.

Your claim is that Jesus is AGAINST violence with a weapon but you then ADMIT that JESUS kNOWINGLY set Peter up with a SWORD with which to COMMIT VIOLENCE !

 

[Drew]

Utterly contradictory with your views....yet you seemingly dont see that fact

Jesus KNEW Peter would do what he did. We BOTH know it.
You CLAIM that Jesus is against violence with the sword, but JESUS IS THE ONE who had them make sure they HAD SWORDS !

.

I suggest that you read my post with more care.

I never suggested, in any way, that Jesus wanted Peter to actually commit any act of violence with the sword. Jesus was orchestrating events so that He would appear to be part of an armed challenge to the authorities.

 

[follower of Christ]

.

Myth 3: The proliferation of guns is responsible for an increase in suicides.

The availability of guns is often presumed to increase the suicide rate. In fact, our suicide rates are higher than our homicide rates. Nonetheless, between 1974-1994, while the civilian gun stock increased 75 percent, the total suicide rate in this country fluctuated very little and amounted to 12 deaths per 100,000 persons in 1974 and 1994. Evidently, the remarkable increase in the number of guns in this country has not increased the rate of suicide.

If gun availability does influence suicide, one would have to explain why countries with strict gun control laws, such as West Germany, France, Austria, Finland, Belgium, Denmark, Hungary, Luxembourg, Norway and Canada, have higher suicide rates than the U.S. If we group the suicides and homicides together as an indicator of handgun availability, the U.S. falls below the international median in this statistic. The view that gun availability has a direct effect on total suicide rates, here and abroad, is not supported by any empirical evidence or technically sound studies.

It is worth noting, however, that the rate of suicides committed with guns, or the gun suicide rate, increased slightly from 6.7 to 7.2 deaths per 100,000 persons in the last twenty years. Similarly, the percentage of suicides committed with guns increased slightly from 55.4 percent in 1974 to 60.3 percent in 1994. The slight increase in the rate and percentage of gun suicides demonstrates that increased gun availability does correlate with an increase in the number of suicides committed with guns. Additionally, nine of thirteen studies conducted between 1984 and 1993 also found a positive association between gun levels and the gun suicide rate. However, only one of the studies found a direct correlation between gun levels and the total suicide rate, and there is reason to believe that this study is flawed technically, having used an invalid method to measure gun availability. A study of state level data in 1990 also found a direct correlation between gun levels and gun suicides but not total suicides.

It should be reemphasized that the increases in the number of suicides committed with guns and the gun suicide rate represent firearms being chosen more often in suicides, and not an increase in total suicides. So, while people in this country are more frequently choosing firearms as the means of self-destruction, the number of total suicides remains relatively unchanged.

Sources: Gary Kleck, Targeting Guns: Firearms and Their Control, (New York: Walter de Gruyter, Inc., 1997). Don B. Kates Jr. and Gary Kleck, The Great American Gun Debate: Essays on Firearms and Violence, (San Francisco: Pacific Research Institute for Public Policy, 1997).

http://www.dsgl.org/Articles/oteromyths.htm

 

[follower of Christ]

Utterly contradictory with your views....yet you seemingly dont see that fact

Jesus KNEW Peter would do what he did. We BOTH know it.
You CLAIM that Jesus is against violence with the sword, but JESUS IS THE ONE who had them make sure they HAD SWORDS !

.

I suggest that you read my post with more care.

I never suggested, in any way, that Jesus wanted Peter to actually commit any act of violence with the sword. Jesus was orchestrating events so that He would appear to be part of an armed challenge to the authorities.

It doesnt MATTER if you wont admit the details D... ;)

1. You KNOW that Jesus made sure they HAD swords
2. You KNOW that Jesus KNEW Peter would USE that sword.
3. Thus you cannot believe anything less than the fact that Jesus set Peter up into a position to COMMIT violence with that sword.
4. yet you claim that Jesus is AGAINST violence with the sword.

I dont care what you will or wont say, the details are OBVIOUS....of course youarent going to SAY that you believe them if they expose your fallacy.

 

[follower of Christ]

Myth 6: Few people actually use guns for self-defense.

The National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) predicted in 1987 that 83 percent of people in this country would be a victim of violent crime during their lifetime. Considering the violent crime rate has not changed significantly, about 80 percent of the citizenry, in possession of over 230 million guns, with nearly half the households having a gun, are going to come face to face with a violent criminal one day. This situation makes one think that there would be many instances of defensive gun use in this country. In fact, thirteen studies conducted between 1976 and 1994 estimated that there were between 770,00 and 3.6 million civilian defensive gun uses per year.

The National Self-Defense Survey (NSDS), conducted by Gary Kleck and Marc Gertz in 1993, has yielded the most accurate estimate of defensive gun use to date. While designing this landmark study, the authors corrected many flaws found in several previous surveys. In doing so, the authors constructed the first survey ever specifically designed to tally the number of defensive gun uses in this country.

The survey revealed that between 1988-1993 civilians used guns in self-defense 2.2-2.5 million times per year, saving between 240,000- 400,000 lives each year. Based on their results, Kleck and Gertz estimated that the number of defensive gun uses is three to four times that of illegal gun uses.


Sources: Gary Kleck, Targeting Guns: Firearms and Their Control, (New York: Walter de Gruyter, Inc., 1997). Don B. Kates Jr., and Gary Kleck, The Great American Gun Debate: Essays on Firearms and Violence, (San Francisco: Pacific Research Institute for Public Policy, 1997). Michael R. Rand, "Guns and Crime: Handgun Victimization, Firearm Self-Defense, and Firearm Theft," U.S. Department of Justice, 1994

http://www.dsgl.org/Articles/oteromyths.htm

 

[GojuBrian]

The sword wasn't for committing violence no more than my gun is FoC.

My gun is a tool that is there if I need it. I know that's what you meant.

Most anti-gun people do not even realize what our gun laws are or are not.

[youtube:2n5zcwqs]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3EdiTK4PRJM&feature=related[/youtube:2n5zcwqs]

 

[follower of Christ]

.

Fact Sheet: Guns Save Lives

A. Guns save more lives than they take; prevent more injuries than they inflict

* Guns used 2.5 million times a year in self-defense. Law-abiding citizens use guns to defend themselves against criminals as many as 2.5 million times every year -- or about 6,850 times a day.1 This means that each year, firearms are used more than 80 times more often to protect the lives of honest citizens than to take lives.2

* Of the 2.5 million times citizens use their guns to defend themselves every year, the overwhelming majority merely brandish their gun or fire a warning shot to scare off their attackers. Less than 8% of the time, a citizen will kill or wound his/her attacker.3

* As many as 200,000 women use a gun every year to defend themselves against sexual abuse.4

* Even anti-gun Clinton researchers concede that guns are used 1.5 million times annually for self-defense. According to the Clinton Justice Department, there are as many as 1.5 million cases of self-defense every year. The National Institute of Justice published this figure in 1997 as part of "Guns in America" -- a study which was authored by noted anti-gun criminologists Philip Cook and Jens Ludwig.5

* Armed citizens kill more crooks than do the police. Citizens shoot and kill at least twice as many criminals as police do every year (1,527 to 606).6 And readers of Newsweek learned that "only 2 percent of civilian shootings involved an innocent person mistakenly identified as a criminal. The 'error rate' for the police, however, was 11 percent, more than five times as high."7

* Handguns are the weapon of choice for self-defense. Citizens use handguns to protect themselves over 1.9 million times a year.8 Many of these self-defense handguns could be labeled as "Saturday Night Specials."

B. Concealed carry laws help reduce crime

* Nationwide: one-half million self-defense uses. Every year, as many as one-half million citizens defend themselves with a firearm away from home.9

* Concealed carry laws are dropping crime rates across the country. A comprehensive national study determined in 1996 that violent crime fell after states made it legal to carry concealed firearms. The results of the study showed:

* States which passed concealed carry laws reduced their murder rate by 8.5%, rapes by 5%, aggravated assaults by 7% and robbery by 3%;10 and

* If those states not having concealed carry laws had adopted such laws in 1992, then approximately 1,570 murders, 4,177 rapes, 60,000 aggravated assaults and over 11,000 robberies would have been avoided yearly.11

* Vermont: one of the safest five states in the country. In Vermont, citizens can carry a firearm without getting permission... without paying a fee... or without going through any kind of government-imposed waiting period. And yet for ten years in a row, Vermont has remained one of the top-five, safest states in the union -- having three times received the "Safest State Award."12

* Florida: concealed carry helps slash the murder rates in the state. In the fifteen years following the passage of Florida's concealed carry law in 1987, over 800,000 permits to carry firearms were issued to people in the state.13 FBI reports show that the homicide rate in Florida, which in 1987 was much higher than the national average, fell 52% during that 15-year period -- thus putting the Florida rate below the national average. 14

* Do firearms carry laws result in chaos? No. Consider the case of Florida. A citizen in the Sunshine State is far more likely to be attacked by an alligator than to be assaulted by a concealed carry holder.

1. During the first fifteen years that the Florida law was in effect, alligator attacks outpaced the number of crimes committed by carry holders by a 229 to 155 margin.

2. And even the 155 "crimes" committed by concealed carry permit holders are somewhat misleading as most of these infractions resulted from Floridians who accidentally carried their firearms into restricted areas, such as an airport.15

C. Criminals avoid armed citizens

* Kennesaw, GA. In 1982, this suburb of Atlanta passed a law requiring heads of households to keep at least one firearm in the house. The residential burglary rate subsequently dropped 89% in Kennesaw, compared to the modest 10.4% drop in Georgia as a whole.16

* Ten years later (1991), the residential burglary rate in Kennesaw was still 72% lower than it had been in 1981, before the law was passed.17

* Nationwide. Statistical comparisons with other countries show that burglars in the United States are far less apt to enter an occupied home than their foreign counterparts who live in countries where fewer civilians own firearms. Consider the following rates showing how often a homeowner is present when a burglar strikes:

* Homeowner occupancy rate in the gun control countries of Great Britain, Canada and Netherlands: 45% (average of the three countries); and,

* Homeowner occupancy rate in the United States: 12.7%.18

Rapes averted when women carry or use firearms for protection

* Orlando, FL. In 1966-67, the media highly publicized a safety course which taught Orlando women how to use guns. The result: Orlando's rape rate dropped 88% in 1967, whereas the rape rate remained constant in the rest of Florida and the nation.19

* Nationwide. In 1979, the Carter Justice Department found that of more than 32,000 attempted rapes, 32% were actually committed. But when a woman was armed with a gun or knife, only 3% of the attempted rapes were actually successful.20

Justice Department study:

* 3/5 of felons polled agreed that "a criminal is not going to mess around with a victim he knows is armed with a gun."21

* 74% of felons polled agreed that "one reason burglars avoid houses when people are at home is that they fear being shot during the crime."22

* 57% of felons polled agreed that "criminals are more worried about meeting an armed victim than they are about running into the police."23

1 Gary Kleck and Marc Gertz, "Armed Resistance to Crime: The Prevalence and Nature of Self-Defense With a Gun," 86 The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, Northwestern University School of Law, 1 (Fall 1995):164.
Dr. Kleck is a professor in the school of criminology and criminal justice at Florida State University in Tallahassee. He has researched extensively and published several essays on the gun control issue. His book, Point Blank: Guns and Violence in America, has become a widely cited source in the gun control debate. In fact, this book earned Dr. Kleck the prestigious American Society of Criminology Michael J. Hindelang award for 1993. This award is given for the book published in the past two to three years that makes the most outstanding contribution to criminology.
Even those who don't like the conclusions Dr. Kleck reaches, cannot argue with his impeccable research and methodology. In "A Tribute to a View I Have Opposed," Marvin E. Wolfgang writes that, "What troubles me is the article by Gary Kleck and Marc Gertz. The reason I am troubled is that they have provided an almost clear-cut case of methodologically sound research in support of something I have theoretically opposed for years, namely, the use of a gun in defense against a criminal perpetrator.... I have to admit my admiration for the care and caution expressed in this article and this research. Can it be true that about two million instances occur each year in which a gun was used as a defensive measure against crime? It is hard to believe. Yet, it is hard to challenge the data collected. We do not have contrary evidence." Wolfgang, "A Tribute to a View I Have Opposed," The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, at 188.
Wolfgang says there is no "contrary evidence." Indeed, there are more than a dozen national polls -- one of which was conducted by The Los Angeles Times -- that have found figures comparable to the Kleck-Gertz study. Even the Clinton Justice Department (through the National Institute of Justice) found there were as many as 1.5 million defensive users of firearms every year. See National Institute of Justice, "Guns in America: National Survey on Private Ownership and Use of Firearms," Research in Brief (May 1997).
As for Dr. Kleck, readers of his materials may be interested to know that he is a member of the ACLU, Amnesty International USA, and Common Cause. He is not and has never been a member of or contributor to any advocacy group on either side of the gun control debate.
2 According to the National Safety Council, the total number of gun deaths (by accidents, suicides and homicides) account for less than 30,000 deaths per year. See Injury Facts, published yearly by the National Safety Council, Itasca, Illinois.
3Kleck and Gertz, "Armed Resistance to Crime," at 173, 185.
4Kleck and Gertz, "Armed Resistance to Crime," at 185.
5 Philip J. Cook and Jens Ludwig, "Guns in America: National Survey on Private Ownership and Use of Firearms," NIJ Research in Brief (May 1997); available at http://www.ncjrs.org/txtfiles/165476.txt on the internet. The finding of 1.5 million yearly self-defense cases did not sit well with the anti-gun bias of the study's authors, who attempted to explain why there could not possibly be one and a half million cases of self-defense every year. Nevertheless, the 1.5 million figure is consistent with a mountain of independent surveys showing similar figures. The sponsors of these studies -- nearly a dozen -- are quite varied, and include anti-gun organizations, news media organizations, governments and commercial polling firms. See also Kleck and Gertz, supra note 1, pp. 182-183.
6Kleck, Point Blank: Guns and Violence in America, (1991):111-116, 148.
7George F. Will, "Are We 'a Nation of Cowards'?," Newsweek (15 November 1993):93.
8Id. at 164, 185.
9Dr. Gary Kleck, interview with J. Neil Schulman, "Q and A: Guns, crime and self-defense," The Orange County Register (19 September 1993). In the interview with Schulman, Dr. Kleck reports on findings from a national survey which he and Dr. Marc Gertz conducted in Spring, 1993 -- a survey which findings were reported in Kleck and Gertz, "Armed Resistance to Crime." br>10 One of the authors of the University of Chicago study reported on the study's findings in John R. Lott, Jr., "More Guns, Less Violent Crime," The Wall Street Journal (28 August 1996). See also John R. Lott, Jr. and David B. Mustard, "Crime, Deterrence, and Right-to-Carry Concealed Handguns," University of Chicago (15 August 1996); and Lott, More Guns, Less Crime (1998, 2000).
11Lott and Mustard, "Crime, Deterrence, and Right-to-Carry Concealed Handguns."
12Kathleen O'Leary Morgan, Scott Morgan and Neal Quitno, "Rankings of States in Most Dangerous/Safest State Awards 1994 to 2003," Morgan Quitno Press (2004) at http://www.statestats.com/dang9403.htm. Morgan Quitno Press is an independent private research and publishing company which was founded in 1989. The company specializes in reference books and monthly reports that compare states and cities in several different subject areas. In the first 10 years in which they published their Safest State Award, Vermont has consistently remained one of the top five safest states.
13Memo by Jim Smith, Secretary of State, Florida Department of State, Division of Licensing, Concealed Weapons/Firearms License Statistical Report (October 1, 2002).
14Florida's murder rate was 11.4 per 100,000 in 1987, but only 5.5 in 2002. Compare Federal Bureau of Investigation, "Crime in the United States," Uniform Crime Reports, (1988): 7, 53; and FBI, (2003):19, 79.
15 John R. Lott, Jr., "Right to carry would disprove horror stories," Kansas City Star, (July 12, 2003).
16Gary Kleck, "Crime Control Through the Private Use of Armed Force," Social Problems 35 (February 1988):15.
17Compare Kleck, "Crime Control," at 15, and Chief Dwaine L. Wilson, City of Kennesaw Police Department, "Month to Month Statistics: 1991." (Residential burglary rates from 1981-1991 are based on statistics for the months of March - October.)
18Kleck, Point Blank, at 140.
19Kleck, "Crime Control," at 13.
20U.S. Department of Justice, Law Enforcement Assistance Administration, Rape Victimization in 26 American Cities (1979), p. 31.
21U.S., Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, "The Armed Criminal in America: A Survey of Incarcerated Felons," Research Report (July 1985): 27.
22Id.
23Id.