White House Study Finds Guns Save Lives: “Consistently Lower Injury Rates Among Gun Using Crime Victims”


Though statistics prove time and again that disarming a free people leads to more violent crime and the potential for mass government democide, it hasn’t stopped President Barrack Obama and his Congressional entourage from doing everything in their power to make it more difficult for Americans to legally own firearms.

Citing the Sandy Hook mass shooting last year, democrats on the hill have claimed that we must restrict gun ownership and strip the Second Amendment for the safety of our children and the general public.

But a new report commissioned by the White House titled Priorities for Research to Reduce the Threat of Firearm-related Violence suggests what many self defense gun proponents have been saying for years. The report, ordered under one of President Obama’s 23 Executive Orders signed in the wake of the Sandy Hook incident, asked the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), the National Research Council and other federal agencies to identify the “most pressing problems in firearms violence.”

To the surprise of the authors and those who would no doubt have used the report to further restrict access to personal defense firearms, the study found that gun ownership actually saves lives and those who have a firearm at their disposal improve their chances of survival and reduce their chance of injury in the event they are confronted by a violent criminal:

Almost all national survey estimates indicate that defensive gun uses by victims are at least as common as offensive uses by criminals, with estimates of annual uses ranging from about 500,000 to more than 3 million per year…

The estimate of 3 million defensive uses per year is based on an extrapolation from a small number of responses taken from more than 19 national surveys. The former estimate of 108,000 is difficult to interpret because respondents were not asked specifically about defensive gun use.

A different issue is whether defensive use of guns, however numerous or rare they may be, are effective in preventing injury to the gun wielding crime victim. Studies that directly assessed the effect of actual defensive uses of guns (i.e., incidents in which a gun was “used” by the crime victim in the sense of attacking or threatening an offender) have found consistently lower injury rates among gun-using crime victims compared with victims who used other self protective strategies.

Full Study available at the National Academy of Sciences

Via: Blacklisted News / Story Leak

Consider that 3 million people use a gun to defend themselves from harm every year. This means that over 8,000 Americans every day act with potentially deadly force to prevent injury or death to themselves or a family member.

In addition to overwhelming evidence that owning a gun reduces your chances of injury when attacked, regardless of whether you fire your gun or not, the new report proves that there has been a decades’ long obfuscation of national statistics that have been used to determine the importance of guns in self defense. Up until this study became available, anti-gun politicians often cited figures that indicated that just 108,000 people a year used guns in self defense. The new study suggests that those numbers were off by over 2500%.

The new White House report coupled with evidence from Australia, Britain and Canada shows that reduction of personal gun ownership is a road to more violence, injury and death.

The President commissioned this study in the hopes of finding a reason to take more guns from law abiding Americans.

What it found, however, is that the answer to gun violence in America is… arming more Americans.


Written by Mac Slavo


About Author

  • drikk

    Carter handed out a major gun-control research grant to University of
    Massachusetts sociology professor James D. Wright and his colleagues Peter Rossi
    and Kathleen Daly. They spent four years and lots of tax dollars to produce what
    would be the most comprehensive, critical study of gun control ever undertaken.
    Also the most expensive ever done. In 1981, they published the results of their research – an exhaustive,
    three-volume work titled “Under the Gun.” Showed the same results. Aparantly, no matter how hord you study this, you can’t get the reuslts the lib-progs want.

    • m. castleberry

      Thank you for the information!

  • drikk

    Well, THERE’S a researcher who will never get another dime of government grants.

  • Charles P



    Once you HAVE a way to defend yourself, they ARE LESS INCLINED to cause as much trouble (BUT SOME still stupidly cause trouble, for various reasons -insanity/stubbornness/etc)

  • Davis Thompson

    There is and never has been any credible (or shall we say uncooked) evidence to suggest that gun control laws reduce crime. None. Nada. Zip. Zed. All you have to do is look back to 1964, the last time the national murder rate was as low as it is now. back then you could buy guns mail order. Rifles and shotguns were for sale in my local hardware store. Many schools, including some in NYC, had rifle teams with kids bringing rifles to school on the subway. No background checks. No magazine caps. No safe storage laws. Nothing. Yet, a society with a murder rate of 4.8 per 100,000.

    Not only does this demonstrate that there is no causation linking easy access to guns to the crime rate, there’s not even correlation.


    If this study was paid for by the WH, how come we have to pay to get a copy of it. It would seem that it was the tax payer, i.e. “we the people,” who paid the bill for the hours, effort, printing, etc. that it took to product the document and “we the people should be able to get a copy of it without paying twice.

    In the future maybe we should tell the government we will pay on delivery of the document, project, public works, tank, battleship, etc. And if it wasn’t done right then we wouldn’t pay until it worked or was done right. Bet that would shake things up!

    I guess this is just another example of the government ripping “we the people” off!

    • m. castleberry

      If you follow the link in the story to the report, the “Download” link at the left-hand side of the page will allow you to download an unedited copy of the report for no additional charge.

  • blair152


  • Drawer22

    When visiting the Netherlands and being hosted to a VIP tour of the Politie (Police) Station in one of the districts, I was smilingly informed by an Officer that if a civilian owned a firearm, that person, by definition was a criminal ─ and that included off-duty officers! However, if I wished to get a firearm, I could do so by visiting Amsterdam; within 5 minutes of asking, I would be offered an assortment of firearms! Seems “gun control” doesn’t work so well in a supposedly “free” society of monarchical subjects, where only on-duty Politie and “criminals” have firearms!

    Cogito, ergo armatus sum.

  • savetheusa2

    If we take away the guns we will have a lot of sissies and no one to join the military. We are making guns to be so very badddddddd! P.S. If Obama & Mikey W., the atheist, keep attacking Christianity, we will have only the gays, atheists, and transgenders signing on.

  • Average_Joe56

    “What it found, however, is that the answer to gun violence in America is… arming more Americans.”
    Damn skippy!

  • Phillipe Violette

    So there obumer!

  • Johnny

    Freedom means you are unobstructed in living your life as you choose. Anythng less is a form of slavery.
    Regardless of how attained, even in good-faith, politicians have no right to take away “unalienable Rights.”
    Guns have two [2] enemies, politicians and rust.

  • Dave T.

    Soooo…. How do we stop the assult on the second ammendment? We need to replace all the corrupt politicians including the Supreme Court! 1 term president, 2 term congress and senate and recall for judges in ALL levels of court if the will of the people is not followed. When the majotity of the country is for or against something, the law should reflect and honor it. No more overiding “We the People” by 9 appointed people. Judge according to the written law that is approved by the people and stop rewriting the law based on the opinion of a few (9 appointed people).

  • karolh

    I most assuredly am not surprised at this report. What surprised me is that Obama let the report be shown. His past record is to keep honest proof hidden or destroyed and creating a report with what he wants it to say. It stands to reason, if a person is armed, that makes it very difficult for another person to cause harm. No body should get their hopes on this report. It is doubtful that liberals will agree with it or let it stand in their way of continuing with trying to disarm Americans. Remember, the UN and NWO wants us disarmed.

    • Jaclyn Barnes

      I agree with you not the least bit surprised,at the report!!But only that Obama let it be shown which means something FISHY is in the works!!!Because Obama number one as most Americans knew from the start he’s an ILLEGAL who,had big money.Behind him and looked good to George Soros who not only hated Jews,but also America!!!What better way to bring America down with an unknown a man who claimed to be,an American .Would tell the people what they wanted to hear “Hope and Change”,and would.Vote for that so once he got his foot in the door then he could slowly,start the destruction!!
      Funny wonder what happened to Soros and Rev.Wright,who’s church.He and Michelle were married in and children were brought up in.He sat in that church for over 20 years and,heard nothing.But hate of America,Jews and then of all of Obama’s other co horts!!How come we here nothing of them or the two others?