« Don't Confuse Them with the Facts | Main | Food Scare Hits Home-Grown Veggies »

June 30, 2008

Reality Check: legal handguns & collateral damage

2000 data from the NYPD found that officers involved in actual on-the-job shootings hit their target less than 16% of the time. And they train regularly at shooting ranges. How much worse would it be among the average gun owner who shoots their weapons much less often?

Additionally, an FBI study found a .223 Remington from a rifle had less chance of over-penetration than a 9mm Luger handgun round. Meaning that even if the handgun bullet finds it's intended target it's more likely, with some, but not all, calibers, to pass through and strike something else.

Last but not least, handgun accuracy is notoriously less than that of rifles even when the weapon is being handled by a bonafide marksman.

As I have stated elsewhere, I fully support the individual's right to own and bear non-handgun firearms.

My question is: Where, in your view, does your apparent right to own and bear that subset of arms known as a handgun butt into my right to not be wounded or killed by stray bullets?

Posted by Kevin at June 30, 2008 11:00 AM