Deltoid

Steve D. Fischer writes:

The NCVS is clearly the most lied-to study in the manifold of studies we have available to date. Even your pal, Colin Loftin has accused it of undercounting your "direct family" spousal abuses by a factor of 12 and rapes by a clean factor of 33. I'd call that lying of a pretty massive scale, wouldn't you?

The NCVS has been around for long enough for criminologists to be aware of crimes that it undercounts. It is known to significantly undercount non-stranger crimes, but no-one until now has suggested that it massively undercounts stranger crimes like robbery and burglary. Kleck's study suggests that well over half of all robberies result in a defensive gun use. This seems unlikely.

Nor is it the case that Kleck is picking up DGUs against non-strangers that the NCVS misses, since 75% of the uses he counted were against strangers.

Here is the procedure that NCVS interviewers use, according to Kleck:

"Interviewers identify themselves to R's (respondents) as federal government employees, even displaying, in face-to-face contacts an identification card with a badge. R's are told that the interviews are being conducted on behalf of the U. S. Department of Justice, the law enforcement branch of the federal government. AS A PRELIMINARY TO ASKING QUESTIONS ABOUT CRIME VICTIMIZATION EXPERIENCES, INTERVIEWERS ESTABLISH THE ADDRESS, TELEPHONE NUMBER, AND FULL NAME OF ALL OCCUPANTS, AGE TWELVE AND OVER, IN EACH HOUSEHOLD THEY CONTACT. In short, it is made very clear that R's are in effect speaking to a law enforcement arm of the federal government, whose employees know exactly who they are, where they live, and how they can be contacted."

You seem to have forgotten to mention a few things about the NCVS. It is conducted by the Census Bureau (not law enforcement) for the Bureau of Justice Statistics (not law enforcement either). Since interviewers identify themselves respondents know that they are NOT talking to law enforcement and the confidentiality of responses is guaranteed by law. Participants in Kleck's survey have no such guarantee and no way of knowing that they are not talking to law enforcement.

I don't have to tell you what THAT means when R's live in an area where gun ownership is illegal or highly proscribed. R's would be admitting to a crime. Even though the interviewer suggests that nothing they say can be used against them, how many people are likely to believe that if their freedom is at stake?

64.2% of Kleck's respondent said that the police knew about the incident. It is absurd to suggest that 97% of defensive gun users would not tell the NCVS about the incident because they were afraid of law enforcement finding out when in the majority of cases LAW ENFORCEMENT ALREADY KNEW ABOUT IT. Absurd.

The R is not asked about self defense until AFTER he has been asked about the LOCATION of a crime. Thus, if it was illegal for the R to have had a gun in that location, the R would be admitting to a crime. Since 88% of all crimes are committed away from the home, and carrying a weapon is a serious crime in at least 10 states, most out of home defenses would get the R thrown in jail if the cops had caught the person at the time of the DGU.

Kleck's count of DGUs against burglary is also 30 times that of the NCVS. Is having a gun in your home a crime in 97% of American homes?

[Note: The BATF is already computerizing records it's not supposed to computerize. Are we really expected to believe that at some time in the future, they won't be able to READ NCVS file information? Most Americans would laugh at the the suggestion that they wouldn't.

But apparently Americans have not considered the possibility that the BATF might pretend to conduct a survey on defensive gun use....