MikeB points to a recent bulletin in the Harvard Injury Control Research Center (Joyce Funded), suggesting that criminal use far exceeds civilian defensive gun use.Â It’s really a difficult number to come up with, because there doesn’t seem to be much good data on the amount of unreported crime.Â But just looking at some bare statistics, you have approximately 2.2 million residential burlaries a year, of which about 20 percent will be done while the resident is home.Â Â Presumably about 40% of those households will have guns.Â If you figure even half of those households have residents who become aware of the breakin, that’s 88,000 DGUs right there.
But either way, some of the conclusions in this bulleten are pretty sweeping, like this:
By contrast it appears that the large majority of the self-defense gun uses reported using Approach 1 are socially undesirable; they are largely escalating arguments, or preemptive gun use out of fear rather than a response to an attempted crime. Most would appropriately be missed by Approach 2, and should not be considered genuine self-defense gun uses. They are actually reports of inappropriate or criminal gun use.
So basically, after arguing that there’s quite a lot of self-presentaiton bias, which is true, we’re going to conclude that just about any DGU reported by Kleck’s method is socially undesirable, and therefore should be considered criminal use.