Don Foreman wrote:
On Sun, 26 Jul 2009 12:35:40 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:

"Don Foreman" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 26 Jul 2009 10:32:38 +0100, Mark Rand
wrote:

'Twas a serious thought and is followed by a serious question:-
If a victim is robbed/mugged at gunpoint and offers no resistance, what
are
the probabilities of getting shot/not getting shot?

We don't have the direct experience on this side of the pond to any great
extent, since even ownership of a hand gun can get you five years of free
accommodation at Her Majesties pleasure. Use of it in furtherance of a
crime
gets you a longer holiday away from society.

I can't authoritatively answer that other than that it is considerably
higher than zero. The risk is greatest if the assailant is already a
twice-busted felon because a third conviction could get him life as a
habitual criminal. Therefore, for him anyway, the assault or robbery
carries about the same penalty as homicide and killing any witnesses
may reduce his risk of being caught and convicted.

The data on this point is available. I don't recall it well enough for a
quote, but my recollection is that your chance of being shot if you put up
resistance (including resistance with a gun) is slightly *lower* than if you
put up no resistance.

That's a statistical conclusion and it would be worth investigating it
further. Nevertheless, it's suggestive of the efficacy of being armed in
self-defense.

It's consistent with Ayoob's assertion/observation that predators
seek easy prey. The assailant may disengage, flee and seek easier
prey if credible resistance is presented before any actual crime has
been committed.
FWIW, and to avoid confusing anyone who thinks I'm arguing the opposite,
this has nothing to do with the availability or propensity of criminals to
use a gun. That's a whole other kettle of fish, and the experience of the UK
and most continental European countries contrasts sharply with that of
countries where there are lots of guns available to nearly anyone who isn't
a criminal or insane -- such as the US. (Of course, guns are readily
available here to criminals and to the insane, as well.)

No ****! I watched "60 Minutes" tonight which billed a segment
something like "a sector that is flourishing in a down economy: guns
and reloading" They did touch on the economics a bit (prices are up)
but it was mostly about how easy it is for anyone at all to get guns,
including assault rifles, at gun shows in Virginia with no background
check. One person interviewed said it was as easy as buying a candy
bar. Yikes! That isn't a loophole, that's a gaping gash.

You do realize that 60 minutes has the same credibility as Spongebob
Squarepants, right?

I go to gunshows regularly here in Texas. They are all crawling with
uniformed LEOs and plainsclothes LEOs of indeterminant stripe, just
hoping some private seller will sell a firearm to one of the few
gang-banger types that sometimes are present. I have yet to see or hear
of any arrests at or near a gunshow resulting from selling a firearm to
an inelligible buyer. And you know if it happens at all it would be
headline news in every major paper.
Fact is, 80% of the sellers in a gunshow are FFLs. They probably
account for 95% of the firearms for sale. Buying a firearm without
filling out a 4473 at a gunshow is a low-percentage pursuit. But even
then, the private sellers are careful. Most ask for a Texas CHL.
It is much easier to buy or sell a firearm in a private transaction
resulting from an online ad. And most people still take the same
precautions about who they sell to. You can get a feel about who is
responding to your ad before the conversation advances very far.