Guns for Safety? Dream On, Scalia.

This has long been known

"A subsequent study conducted in three U.S. cities found that guns kept in
the home were 12 times more likely to be involved in the death or injury
of
a member of the household than in the killing or wounding of a bad guy in
self-defense."

Yes, people get shot with guns in the home, they shoot themselves
or other household members.

The denier community dominate the rational community in this
gun owning paradise.

*****
 

Guns for Safety? Dream On, Scalia.
  
Sunday, June 29, 2008; Page B02

 The Supreme Court has spoken: Thanks to the court's blockbuster 5 to 4
decision Thursday, Wa****ngtonians now have the right to own a gun for
self-defense. I leave the law to lawyers, but the public health lesson is
crystal clear: The legal ruling that the District's citizens can keep
loaded
handguns in their homes doesn't mean that they should.

 In his majority opinion, Justice Antonin Scalia explicitly endorsed the
wisdom of keeping a handgun in the home for self-defense. Such a weapon,
he
wrote, "is easier to store in a location that is readily accessible in an
emergency; it cannot easily be redirected or wrestled away by an attacker;
it is easier to use for those without the upper-body strength to lift and
aim a long rifle; it can be pointed at a burglar with one hand while the
other hand dials the police." But Scalia ignored a substantial body of
public health research that contradicts his assertions. A number of
scientific studies, published in the world's most rigorous, peer-reviewed
journals, show that the risks of keeping a loaded gun in the home strongly
outweigh the potential benefits.

In the real world, Scalia's scenario -- an armed assailant breaks into
your
home, and you shoot or scare away the bad guy with your handy handgun --
happens pretty infrequently. Statistically speaking, these rare success
stories are dwarfed by tragedies. The reason is simple: A gun kept loaded
and readily available for protection may also be reached by a curious
child,
an angry spouse or a depressed teen.
 

More than 20 years ago, I conducted a study of firearm-related deaths in
homes in Seattle and surrounding King County, Wa****ngton. Over the study's
seven-year interval, more than half of all fatal shootings in the county
took place in the home where the firearm involved was kept. Just nine of
those shootings were legally justifiable homicides or acts of
self-defense;
guns kept in homes were also involved in 12 accidental deaths, 41 criminal
homicides and a shocking 333 suicides. A subsequent study conducted in
three
U.S. cities found that guns kept in the home were 12 times more likely to
be
involved in the death or injury of a member of the household than in the
killing or wounding of a bad guy in self-defense.

Oh, one more thing: Scalia's ludicrous vision of a little old lady
clutching
a handgun in one hand while dialing 911 with the other (try it sometime)
doesn't fit the facts. According to the Justice Department, far more guns
are lost each year to burglary or theft than are used to defend people or
property. In Atlanta, a city where approximately a third of households
contain guns, a study of 197 home-invasion crimes revealed only three
instances (1.5 percent) in which the inhabitants resisted with a gun.
Intruders got to the homeowner's gun twice as often as the homeowner did.

The court has spoken, but citizens and lawmakers should base future
gun-control decisions -- both personal and political -- on something more
substantive than Scalia's glib opinion.

-- Arthur Kellermann, a professor of emergency medicine and public health
at
Emory University