One in Ten People have anger issues and own guns

[howdy]

This is one article where you have to sign in to read the entire thing. I have included the part that is hidden. Moderators can delete this if it is not allowed.

http://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/na ... ron-result" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



"Those are the key findings of a new study by researchers from Harvard, Columbia and Duke University. "Anger," in this study, doesn't simply mean garden-variety irritation. It is "impulsive, out of control, destructive, harmful," lead author Jeffrey Swanson of Duke University said in an interview.

"You and I might shout. These individuals break and smash things and get into physical fights, punch someone in the nose."

"To have gun violence you need two things: a gun and a dangerous person," Swanson says. "We can't broadly limit legal access to guns, so we have to focus on the dangerous people."

Startling statistics

Taken at face value this isn't a controversial claim. After all, guns don't kill people, people kill people, as gun rights advocates are fond of saying. But in practice we haven't done a great job of identifying these dangerous people.

In addition to the startling findings about the share of the overall population with both gun access and serious anger issues, the researchers also found that people with lots of guns - six or more - are more likely to carry their guns in public and to have a history of anger issues. And people with more than 11 were significantly more likely to say that they lose their temper and get into fights than members of any other gun ownership group.

One step further

Federal law already limits gun access for individuals convicted of a felony, and for people with misdemeanor domestic violence convictions.

Swanson and his colleagues suggest taking that one step further and placing additional misdemeanors on the restriction list: assault, brandishing a weapon or making open threats, and especially DUI, given the well-documented nexus between problematic alcohol use and gun violence.

Swanson's research suggests it's time to move the conversation past the low-hanging fruit of serious mental illness, and start asking which other types of behavior might reasonably disqualify a person from owning a gun"

[AJSully421]

Typical hit piece.

If these "Angry, gun-toting, folks" are such a big problem... why are these 3.7 million angry gun carriers not convicted of assault or murder on a consistent basis? Why are simple disagreements not turning into gun fights? Why is there not blood in the streets?

Answer: every single word of this article is pure BULL!

The timing is interesting with national reciprocity being introduced. That is all that this is about. "If those people from Texas are allowed to conceal carry in NYC... there will be blood in the streets".

"We should add assault and DUI to the list of things that make a person unqualified to buy a gun... and we should add littering and jaywalking too."

Liberalism is a mental disorder.

[mojo84]

I've seen in the past that the Chronicle will make the article available to nonsubscribers if it has been "shared".

Not sure exactly how one has to " share" it in order for it be become available.

Thanks for posting.

[Abraham]

The first thing that came to mind after reading this article, was ye old "they'll be blood in the streets" mantra of the anti-gun left.

I wonder how they arrived at their "statistics"?

My guess: Grabbed out of thin air...

However, if the statistics do have credibility, the "angry 10 percent" display remarkable discipline when armed or we actually would "have blood in the streets".

[treadlightly]

Nine out of ten doctors agree Lucky Strikes are best for sore throats.

Obviously, healthy doctors have anger issues and guns.

[mojo84]

Of the while article, this is the most telling to me.

Swanson's research suggests it's time to move the conversation past the low-hanging fruit of serious mental illness, and start asking which other types of behavior might reasonably disqualify a person from owning a gun"

They will use any little thing to deny gun ownership if given the chance.

[Abraham]

"Swanson's research suggests it's time to move the conversation past the low-hanging fruit of serious mental illness, and start asking which other types of behavior might reasonably disqualify a person from owning a gun"

So once we get past the low-hanging fruit of serious mental illness, we could also be disqualified from owning a vehicle, a baseball bat, an ax, eating utensils and on and on - what absurd illogic...

The left is all about "CONTROL"!

[ScooterSissy]

I'm not sure that 1 in 10 people legally own a gun, I'm just about positive that one in 10 people legally own a gun and have serious anger issues.

If that were the case, and there was any real cause effect of that combination, we would be hearing constant stories about people legally carrying a gun and killing someone.

[TexasCajun]

This is a perfect example of why we need to keep public money out of so-called gun violence research. These eggheads find a couple of distant correlations and extrapolate them several times over to provide the predetermined conclusion, collect $50k, pass GO, and have their "findings" repeated ad nauseum. If I'd run into one of these bozos in person, I'd probably prove them right.

[VMI77]

Again, lies are all the left has. Well, lies and a MSM willing to spread them. But these phony researchers seem especially confused. According to the narrative progressive don't own guns, and since study after study has shown that 99% of the 10% of people with anger issues are progressives, it appears they've added 2 plus 2 and gotten -1 as a total. The best way to deal with a progressive is to laugh at him.

[LaUser]

Typical hit piece.

every single word of this article is pure BULL!

I understand that this article is disagreeable to many, but that does not make it false. I would like to see the study and the statistics gathered before I would make such brash statements. Disagreement does not equate being wrong.

[PBratton]

does it give an age range for their subjects?

[mojo84]

Hers the WAPO version. Not sure it's the exact article.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/won ... s-to-guns/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The study I want to see is how many people own at least one car experience rage. Then we can start taking their cars away.

[Texsquatch]

What is the percentage of the general population with anger issues? Gun owners are just a sample of the whole, but just because 1 in 10 may have some attribute, that doesn't mean they're unique from the rest of the population.

[MeMelYup]

If we (gun owners with CHL) have such anger issues why are we 15 times less likely to become criminals than the average person?