Talk:Gary Kleck

message: Would that be gun control just in the US or world-wide?
The article makes clear now that he is an expert on gun control in the USA. NDM (talk) 23:07, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: US or world-wide?

message: Someone removed this, which is sourced, can someone explain? 
:By the Kleck study, however, most successful preventions of victimizations are accomplished without a shot being fired, which are not counted as a self-defense firearm usage by either the Hemenway or McDowell studies.
Arthur (talk) 20:18, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, it should definitely be re-instated, assuming no one else has already done so (in which case I will probably do so).KevinOKeeffe (talk) 22:50, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't re-instate it...that would make the article accurate, not biased, and thus inconsistent with typical Wikipedia style. 68.83.72.162 (talk) 07:21, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

text: Often Kleck's critics point to the FBI UCR table of justifiable homicides, ~170 per year shooting death of a felon during commission of a felony by a citizen as listed by police report (ignoring eventual adjudication by the courts). Prof. Marvin "I hate guns" Wolfgang pointed out that when and where shooting homicides were tracked through the the judicial system, 20% to 30% were found to be in self-defense. Kleck estimated the FBI UCR table under-reports justifible homicide by 4 times to 7 times the actual number, simply by not tracking homicide or manslaughter through the judicial system (which of course is not a function of Uniform Crime Reports which focuses on reportes by police, not by judicial systems). Kleck points out that for every dead felon there are over a thousand successful defensive gun uses without a dead felon (woundings, misses, warning shots, brandishment, or verbal "Back off I have a gun" warning).Naaman Brown (talk) 13:04, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Removal of sourced info

message: As of 3 Feb 2009:
One sentence on bio.
One sentence on career in field.
Six sentences on criticism.
Two references: one a critical article and one a book by the author (who has written much more than that). 76.7.179.74 (talk) 15:48, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  neutrality is disputed 

message: The FSU defense survey was a phone survey of 5,000 people.  Further study showed that the people that responded to the study overstated their use of firearms in self defense, basically destroying the foundation of the study.  Yet here it's presented as reliable?  Why? (posted by -- 108.28.169.102 22:31, 12 October 2011‎)
: The WP article only states the results of the survey. Also "debunked" and "basically destroyed" is overstatement. As the Kleck & Gertz 1995 study itself pointed out in Table 1, there were ten national surveys (some conducted by pro-control groups) that gave 764,000 to 3.6 million defensive gun uses (DGUs): Kleck & Gertz got ~2.4 million. All those surveys had questioning protocols that measured different things. Further study? Kleck & Gertz 1995 article admitted there may be a false positive bias in their question protocol (just as there is an alleged false negative bias in the NCVS survey question protocol: "Most NCVS respondents never have a chance to answer the DGU question, falsely or otherwise."--Cook & Ludwig 1997 NSPOF survey.) Kleck & Gertz urged caution in evaluating all these surveys, including their own. On the other hand, gun-hater Marvin Wolfgang commenting on the Kleck & Gertz 1995 article expressed "admiration for the care and caution expressed in this article and this research".
:: Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, Fall 1995, Vol 86 No 1. 
:: Northwestern University, School of Law; Guns and Violence Symposium.
:: Gary Kleck and Marc Gertz, "Armed Resistance to Crime: The Prevalence and Nature of Self-Defense with a Gun," p. 150
:: Marvin E. Wolfgang, "A Tribute to a View I Have Opposed," p.188
: Naaman Brown (talk) 20:21, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: An empirical study of this type of research shows that DGU survey work is an unsettled area of research, that all work in the field has its faults, that Kleck himself identfied short comings and suggested improvements. National Academy of Sciences, "Firearms and Violence: A Critical Review", NAS 2004, NAP 2005. Chapter 5 The Use of Firearms to Defend Against Criminals. -- Naaman Brown (talk) 03:32, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  The FSU defense survey was debunked, but it's presented here as reliable 

message: I came here to get some Kleck-related info and got drawn into the DGU section. I haven't settled on an opinion about the material, but I have removed some WP:EDITORIALIZING language and verbosity. It needs more work in these areas, so I'll be back. Also to see if there are any questions. Lightbreather (talk) 05:48, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Defensive gun use section 

message: 40% shows up a lot in gun stats. 
Tom Smith questioned Kleck's 40% defensive gun use by women by claiming surveys show that only 20% of women report owning a gun. 
The WikiP article included: "Hemenway said that Kleck stated armed women prevented 40% of all sexual assaults, a percentage Hemenway said is unlikely because few women report going armed."
WP:OR I know four women who used guns in self defense. Two owned the gun they used. One used a gun that belonged to her employer. Another used a gun that belonged to her significant other. You don't have to own the gun to use it defensively. I am not sure how Hemenway is using "going armed" but under the law in my home state the "going armed" statute covers having a gun on the person outside one's home or place of business for protection. Only one of the women was "going armed" outside her home.
A woman defending herself in her home with a gun that belonged to her spouse (a) would not be a gun owner (Smith objection) and (b) would not be "going armed" (Hemenway objection).
Official stats on rape are notoriously under reported (FBI UCR); so a survey (NCVS) can get a higher number of rapes than appear in the official stats. Self reporting on whether a rape was prevented NSDS? Comparing reported defense in cases of fear of rape against rape stats is hard to quantify.
The question "Have you used a gun in self defense?" is going to get more positive responses than the question "Do you own a gun? (if yes, have you used it in self defense?)" or the question "Do you go armed with a gun? (if yes, have you used it in self defense?)" There is a reason why over a dozen private DGU surveys yield estimates of 764,000 to 3,600,000 DGUs per year, while the government's NCVS gave 108,000 and it's NSPOF survey gave 4,700,000. The questioning protocols measure different things.--Naaman Brown (talk) 18:02, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Beyond that, Hemmenway's interpretation of Kleck's research is disputed, with Kleck explicitly saying that his sample sizes are not sufficient to make analysis of sub-criteria, but only for the larger DGU question. Kleck's dispute of the 40% number is already directly covered in the article. Gaijin42 (talk) 18:12, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

text: You're reading to much into the specific wording of some quotes on a talk page. Perhaps original sources can provide and idea of how the surveys were conducted and worded. Personal anecdotes, I should add, are pretty meaningless. - 101.169.42.152 (talk) 14:46, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kleck's 40% DGU by women 

message: I find it annoying when I read a WP article (any article, anywhere, really) that gives incomplete source citations. One thing leads to another and I ended up on this page. Hope not to stay too long as I have other things at the top of my list, but I'm going to take an hour or two to improve some of the citations in this article using WP:CS1. Lightbreather (talk) 19:34, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Source citations