Does having a gun in the home make you safer?

[SkyDekker 1,121]

Quote

Self defense IS the first human right and many of us just aren't going to budge on that principle...no matter the risk.

You mean: using a gun for self defence, right? Cause I am perfectly free to defend myself, just not free to use a gun.

And I don't agree that using a gun for self-defence IS the first human right.

[Andy9o8 0]

Depends.

[champu 1]

Andy9o8

Depends.

This, thank you.

Having a gun in your home does not, in and of itself, make you safer. And (I can't conclude but I can easily surmise based on the acknowledged confounding issues with the studies raised in the article) it likely does not in and of itself make you less safe either.

The article is a bit of a Rorschach test, as most regarding highly politicized topics are. I read it and think, "Hmm, it seems people who keep firearms in their home don't do as good a job at securing them as they should." I believe some read it and think, "Stupid gun nuts... it's a good thing I vote for people with a (D) next to their name, they'll take care of this."

The non-intuitive thing is that the people who don't read these studies in a critical fashion and who cite them in support of "doing something" have a more direct negative impact on my life then the people in the study who are shooting themselves and each other.

[Lefty 0]

champu

Having a gun in your home does not, in and of itself, make you safer. And (I can't conclude but I can easily surmise based on the acknowledged confounding issues with the studies raised in the article) it likely does not in and of itself make you less safe either.

The article is a bit of a Rorschach test, as most regarding highly politicized topics are. I read it and think, "Hmm, it seems people who keep firearms in their home don't do as good a job at securing them as they should." I believe some read it and think, "Stupid gun nuts... it's a good thing I vote for people with a (D) next to their name, they'll take care of this."

The non-intuitive thing is that the people who don't read these studies in a critical fashion and who cite them in support of "doing something" have a more direct negative impact on my life then the people in the study who are shooting themselves and each other.

Well put.

Provoking a reaction isn't the same thing as saying something meaningful.
-Calvin

[kallend 1,621]

jtiflyer

It's a fact my wife and I feel safer and in deed are safer in our home with our firearms at the ready.

I wonder how many of the people shot dead by their partners and/or with their own guns felt exactly the same way.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[winsor 186]

champu

***Depends.

This, thank you.

Having a gun in your home does not, in and of itself, make you safer. And (I can't conclude but I can easily surmise based on the acknowledged confounding issues with the studies raised in the article) it likely does not in and of itself make you less safe either.

The article is a bit of a Rorschach test, as most regarding highly politicized topics are. I read it and think, "Hmm, it seems people who keep firearms in their home don't do as good a job at securing them as they should." I believe some read it and think, "Stupid gun nuts... it's a good thing I vote for people with a (D) next to their name, they'll take care of this."

The non-intuitive thing is that the people who don't read these studies in a critical fashion and who cite them in support of "doing something" have a more direct negative impact on my life then the people in the study who are shooting themselves and each other.

'A Hero ain't nothin' but a sandwich.'

'Heroes just die good.'

And so forth.

My wife just had training regarding people pulling a Columbine at the office, and it seems the trainer (a Philly cop who had been shot on the job) really got it.

The basic idea was to get the hell out of the line of fire, using the most effective means possible. As I have long recommended, the best response to lethal force is high-speed cowardice (run like hell while making the worst target possible).

Without means of egress, cover and concealment were stressed, as was becoming a hard nut to crack. Someone behaving badly in the last few minutes of their life (which will soon be cut short by first-responders) does not have the luxury of breaching every locked door and so forth.

The ONLY times having a firearm make any sense from a defensive standpoint are A) if you have screwed up and have no Plan B (Exit, Stage Right), in which case the outcome is severely in doubt, or B) if an innocent is at immediate risk.

Even if heavily armed, one should disengage if possible. If you hit them 4 times and they only shoot you once, you don't win.

If someone threatens my family such that they cannot retreat, I will engage even if I could depart and call 911. They may find themselves with a chemical fire extinguisher or EZ-Off discharged in their face, or impaled or with their head detached by cooking or gardening equipment. If I die and my family survives, that is an acceptable, if not optimal, outcome.

The thing to remember when resorting to lethal force is that it is only justified if the outcome is distinctly in doubt. Even if you dispatch the threat, your survival is not assured.

Note that if you have little kids around, you may rest assured that, even if you do not remember where you left the firearm and ammunition, THEY could tell you. If you have trouble loading and discharging a particular firearm, the kid will likely persist until they are successful.

In any event, self-defense is most effectively achieved by planning. Having situational awareness, a plan and no firearm is greatly preferable to being armed and clueless.

When involved in the Southeast Asian War Games, the process of 'Vietnamization' included bringing ARVN candidates to the US for training as pilots. Many of these pilots to be had never driven anything more complex than a water buffalo, and viewed helicopters as magic.

The upshot was that the flight instructors had a high rate of alcoholism. After a day of having students cheerfully engage in an endless series of near-death maneuvers, they would hit the Officer's Club and drink themselves unconscious.

Many people who purchase a firearm as a security blanket are about as well schooled as the aforementioned student pilots. They have had a lifetime of Hollywood to guide their thinking, and are sure that the firearm they now keep at hand will magically protect them against evil.

Any hunter can quell such misgivings. Using a pistol on large bears, for instance, elicited the advice to use bacon fat to lubricate the bullets. This way, if you threw the unfired pistol toward the bear, it might find the smell interesting enough that you have the opportunity to run away while the bear investigated the pistol.

One should consider an assailant under the influence of pain killer medication or demon rum the same as one would Charismatic Megafauna. Once the brain has reached vestigial organ status by chemical means, reasoning or violence may not have the desired effect. The literature is rife with cases where hunters, often professionals, have been terminated by a Brown Bear or Cape Buffalo or Lion or what have you, after the creature has been terminally wounded.

A firearm safely maintained is thus a better conversation piece than it is a means of primary defense in almost all cases.


BSBD,

Winsor

[Andy9o8 0]

kallend

***It's a fact my wife and I feel safer and in deed are safer in our home with our firearms at the ready.

I wonder how many of the people shot dead by their partners and/or with their own guns felt exactly the same way.

A timely question, as it happens:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/02/25/man-shoots-himself_n_4853983.html

Quote

A man from Independence Township, Michigan accidentally shot and killed himself on Monday while teaching his girlfriend about gun safety, the Oakland Press reports.

[Lefty 0]

Andy9o8

******It's a fact my wife and I feel safer and in deed are safer in our home with our firearms at the ready.

I wonder how many of the people shot dead by their partners and/or with their own guns felt exactly the same way.

A timely question, as it happens:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/02/25/man-shoots-himself_n_4853983.html

Quote

A man from Independence Township, Michigan accidentally shot and killed himself on Monday while teaching his girlfriend about gun safety, the Oakland Press reports.

So does the tendency of morons to demonstrate gun safety by putting a pistol to their respective head and pulling the trigger make me less safe with a gun in the house? Assume, if you please, that I am not a moron and would not demonstrate gun safety in that manner.

Provoking a reaction isn't the same thing as saying something meaningful.
-Calvin

[Boomerdog 0]

Self defense considers many options, a fire arm being one of them. But please don't mix words. Let me say it again.

Self defense IS the first human right. Now where did I put "gun" in that sentence?

[SkyDekker 1,121]

Boomerdog

Self defense considers many options, a fire arm being one of them. But please don't mix words. Let me say it again.

Self defense IS the first human right. Now where did I put "gun" in that sentence?

When you used that as a reply in a thread titled: Does having a gun in the home make you safer?

[Boomerdog 0]

-1

[RonD1120 58]

Boomerdog

Self defense considers many options, a fire arm being one of them.

I recently read somewhere that the term "self defense" automatically puts you in the mindset of being the victim. In other words, you will defend yourself after the aggressor makes the first move. The position of the writer was to assume the position of aggressor first when confronting a threatening individual.

To me that is a shoot first and ask questions later concept. I am fairly sure I could not choose that course unless the perp was in my house. That being the topic here and in that case, I'm shooting first.

"Trespassers will be shot. Survivors will be shot again."

That is an old saying which I find amusing.

Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them.

[Southern_Man 0]

But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.

"What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

[toolbox 0]

[toolbox 0]

I've hunted elk and deer, and my dad used to hunt black bear(which I see no good reason for since bear taste like hell in my opinion) and when a shot is placed properly with a good penetrating round,all animals drop in their tracks. This holds true for all animals,including intoxicated humans.
Brown bears have been killed instantly with .22 cal long rifle rounds straight on through the eye at close range. Is it a good idea to hunt anything,especially bear with a .22 or a handgun? Hell no it's not a good plan for success.
But even cape buffalo,elephants, and other hard boned large animals are easily killed with the right shot placement and proper penetration.
Comparing any handgun less than a 500 magnum or 454 casull with a high powered rifle is like comparing a moped to a crotch rocket,and comparing humans to any large animal is like comparing tissue paper to cardboard.
Hand guns are close range personal defense weapons,that are easier to pack around than long guns,and should only be used when at close range, and they are designed for use against soft targets (humans) but are better than punching,kicking,or trying to run from dangerous large animals, and I've personally seen bear run from the loud report of a pistol without being hit,which is a win win scenario in my book.
As far as defending against mass shooters,I agree it's best to stay out of the cross hairs and out of range if possible ,but once targeted trying to hide behind doors and walls of normal building materials will not afford much protection if they are blasting away at your location. If the shooter has you cornered, and you have a handgun, at least you have an equal chance of shooting back and making solid hits on your attacker,which in my opinion is better than just sitting there wishing for mercy from a nutjob.
In the case of home invasion from a stronger,faster more effective individual,or individuals,then the gun can once again be your salvation.

[kallend 1,621]

toolbox

In the case of home invasion from a stronger,faster more effective individual,or individuals,then the gun can once again be your salvation.

And then again, your own partner may just shoot you with it.

FBI data show consistently, year after year, that more people are shot dead by family or acquaintances than by strangers breaking in to their home.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[RonD1120 58]

Southern_Man

But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.

After 20 years working in the social services for and with heathen liberals I have done that more times than I remember. Now I am retired.

Now, if evil comes on my property it will be dispatched with extreme prejudice.

You appear to know your Scripture. What church do you attend? I'm a Redneck Pentecostal. Ain't Merica grand?

Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them.

[regulator 0]

kallend

***
In the case of home invasion from a stronger,faster more effective individual,or individuals,then the gun can once again be your salvation.

And then again, your own partner may just shoot you with it.

FBI data show consistently, year after year, that more people are shot dead by family or acquaintances than by strangers breaking in to their home.

No. YOUR parter would shoot you with it. Your argument is so stupid its funny. I'm very sure my wife can shoot circles around YOU. Much less your significant other.

[kallend 1,621]

regulator

******
In the case of home invasion from a stronger,faster more effective individual,or individuals,then the gun can once again be your salvation.

And then again, your own partner may just shoot you with it.

FBI data show consistently, year after year, that more people are shot dead by family or acquaintances than by strangers breaking in to their home.

No. YOUR parter would shoot you with it. Your argument is so stupid its funny. I'm very sure my wife can shoot circles around YOU. Much less your significant other.

So you think the FBI data are stupid.

Maybe you should look in a mirror.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[Boomerdog 0]

What's the bumper sticker say? "If You Don't Like Abortion Don't Have One!"

Accordingly...If you don't want a gun in YOUR home then DON'T put a gun in YOUR home!

Some of us just have a different opinion and take on this. We don't need each other's permission.

Was it not Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes that said, "A Constitution is for people with differing opinions." ...or words to that effect.

Come to my DZ sometime, I'll gladly buy you a jump but puhlleaze (on this issue at least) the "busybody act" just ain't gettin' it.

Last post this subject (no matter what verbal bombs get tossed at me in reply).

I'm outta here!

[SkyDekker 1,121]

Quote

Accordingly...If you don't want a gun in YOUR home then DON'T put a gun in YOUR home!

Some of us just have a different opinion and take on this. We don't need each other's permission.

It's not about permission. You have the right, feel free to use it. Don't need anybody's permission!

Like jumping a much smaller canopy. Feel free to do it, just increases your risk of a rather violent death. People warn you and provide the data, proceed at your own risk. Some people are just very talented hotshot skygod pilots who make all the right decisions. Some aren't.


Same situation here. Data shows that adding a gun to your household increases the risk of a household member dying a violent death. You know the risks, you take your chances.

[kallend 1,621]

Boomerdog

What's the bumper sticker say? "If You Don't Like Abortion Don't Have One!"

Accordingly...If you don't want a gun in YOUR home then DON'T put a gun in YOUR home!

Some of us just have a different opinion and take on this. We don't need each other's permission.

Was it not Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes that said, "A Constitution is for people with differing opinions." ...or words to that effect.

Come to my DZ sometime, I'll gladly buy you a jump but puhlleaze (on this issue at least) the "busybody act" just ain't gettin' it.

Last post this subject (no matter what verbal bombs get tossed at me in reply).

I'm outta here!

I don't think anyone has tried to tell you what to do, with the exception of opening your mind the the real, measurable risks. It is clear that you haven't done this. Reminds me of many skydivers' attitudes towards downsizing.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[RonD1120 58]

kallend

*********
In the case of home invasion from a stronger,faster more effective individual,or individuals,then the gun can once again be your salvation.

And then again, your own partner may just shoot you with it.

FBI data show consistently, year after year, that more people are shot dead by family or acquaintances than by strangers breaking in to their home.

No. YOUR parter would shoot you with it. Your argument is so stupid its funny. I'm very sure my wife can shoot circles around YOU. Much less your significant other.

So you think the FBI data are stupid.

Maybe you should look in a mirror.

What would the SC be without the trolls, myself included.

Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them.

[Boogers 0]

kallend

FBI data show consistently, year after year, that more people are shot dead by family or acquaintances than by strangers breaking in to their home.

Apples and oranges comparison. The weasel word is "acquaintenances". An acquantenance is just somebody you happen to know. Could be someone from work, someone from the drop zone, someone from school, someone from social circles, at the bar stool next to you, heck, just anyone you happen to know somehow. The vast majority of those people shot by acquantenances were not shot in their homes, or with their own gun. So that's really not the equivalent counterpart to a gun being used in a home for self defense. Most all that acquantenance crime stuff is outside the home with the perpetrator's own weapon. So having a gun in your home is irrelevant to acquaintenance crime.

Good try at playing with words and trying to confuse everyone though.

Do YOU keep a gun in your home?

[GeorgiaDon 340]

SkyDekker

Quote

Accordingly...If you don't want a gun in YOUR home then DON'T put a gun in YOUR home!

Some of us just have a different opinion and take on this. We don't need each other's permission.

It's not about permission. You have the right, feel free to use it. Don't need anybody's permission!

Like jumping a much smaller canopy. Feel free to do it, just increases your risk of a rather violent death. People warn you and provide the data, proceed at your own risk. Some people are just very talented hotshot skygod pilots who make all the right decisions. Some aren't.


Same situation here. Data shows that adding a gun to your household increases the risk of a household member dying a violent death. You know the risks, you take your chances.

This is exactly correct, but some seem to take any suggestion that guns in the house can pose a risk as an attack on their 2nd amendment rights.

None of us want to believe it, but we (or family members) are always at risk of a moment of despair, a flash of anger, or a mental illness. We have lost members of our dz.com community to this. I can think of more than one person who used to post here who I wish to God had not had a gun at hand at the wrong moment. I can't think of a single person who was murdered in their home, though. I can recall one person who was murdered, and I wish he had been able to defend himself, but I don't think that happened at home. I also recall a skydiver who used to post a lot, who murdered her parents (but I can't recall her name). It's hard to be quantitative about things when you're just picking up an incident here or there from what people post, but over the past few years the experience of our dz.com family seems to reflect the findings of the researchers: a number of suicides, a skydiver who used a gun to commit murder, but no-one (that I can recall) who had to use deadly force to protect themselves in their home.

Don

_____________________________________
Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996)
“Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)