I'm carrying a gun - Am I looking for trouble?

[Sousuke 1,214]

A firearm actually increases your risk. It has been shown that a firearm in the house is about a dozen times more likely to inflict harm on a member or guest of the household than it is to fend off an intruder. So yes, it is more lethal. But an insurance policy it is clearly not.

And there are mitigating factors that change this risk as well.

Kleck.

Consider this:

Just as there aren't 20 million Americans that have seen an alien spacecraft and just as there aren't one million Americans that have been in personal contact with aliens, there aren't two and half million - or even 800,000 - crime prevention occurrences by use of firearms. That's a pipe dream that has absolutely nothing to do with reality.

Kleck.

Thats fine. I'm not really touting his study, the lower 108k figure is still acceptable.

Edited August 3, 2013 by Brown Dwarf

[Sousuke 1,214]

I don't know how else to put this across. There is no reliable data that shows carrying a gun increases the safety of the ordinary Joe/Jane in normal life. The available data clearly demonstrates that a gun owner and his family are more at risk from their own guns in their own homes in their own hands than any external threat. Having a gun in the home without following a strict code of gun safety and storage is positively foolish.

It would seem that from a safety perspective the data supports avoiding having guns in the home because that is the source of most of the risk. I can't stop people being foolish, but I don't have to join them.

I'm not fully convinced that a firearm is either, but in the broad sense I am convinced that having a self defense plan can and does help, be it pepper spray, a taser, or possibly a firearm.

There is a stigma for firearms that some people cannot overcome and thats fine. Even I would prefer not have a firearm on my person in public, I feel a taser is a better choice because if a bad decision were made, others would be less likely harmed. However I respect the right for Slim and Gary & Alla and spookyturtle to carry in a safe manner and I recognize that they might choose a firearm over a taser because the taser has limited range and typically cannot be used on more than one person at a distance.

Edited August 3, 2013 by Brown Dwarf

[Peikko 1,575]

From the one who says that there is no reason to carry a gun because the risk of crime is irrelevant.

No Spooky, I said that the real risk a normal person who goes about a normal day faces is so low as to be irrelevant. Couple that with the data that demonstrates that more injuries are sustained by people's own guns than by guns from any external threat it is safe to conclude that for most people most of the time carrying a gun is not only useless, it's foolish.

[pddp 240]

If I remember correctly, the post I replied to stated that the chances of having a violent action committed against you was not a measurable risk, ie a miniscule chance of it happening. I replied that it probably wasn't miniscule to the 14,000+ rape victims. Since you dismissed that, do you think it was a minimal risk to the 400,000+ victims of violent crime? Or doesn't that violence count either?

The actual number of rape victims is WAY higher than 14,000+, by the way. As many as one in three women are raped and every single one of those incidents count. If you think I'm dismissing them you did not understand anything I said.

What I fail to see is how gun ownership would help those victims. Do you advocate a woman's right to kill her rapist? Should she be allowed to "stand her ground" and not face prosecution for such? If so, should a woman carry a gun when going out on a date? When at home with her husband? Always on her person? Is it then a woman's responsibility to defend herself by shooting and killing the guy before he can rape her? A woman who does get raped then failed in her responsibility to protect herself? And this is the world you would like to live in as a man, with the women in your life always ready to point a gun at you, should they feel at risk?

Rape stops when men stop doing the raping. It's that simple.

Edited August 3, 2013 by pddp

[Peikko 1,575]

I'm not fully convinced that a firearm is either, but in the broad sense I am convinced that having a self defense plan can and does help, be it pepper spray, a taser, or possibly a firearm.

There is a stigma for firearms that some people cannot overcome and thats fine. Even I would prefer not have a firearm on my person in public, I feel a taser is a better choice because if a bad decision were made, others would be less likely harmed. However I respect the right for Slim and Gary & Alla and spookyturtle to carry in a safe manner and I recognize that they might choose a firearm over a taser because the taser has limited range and typically cannot be used on more than one person at a distance.

What stigma would that be?

I understand those who hunt or enjoy shooting for the exhilaration of the sport, I wouldn't do it, but I understand it, I don't understand taking precautions against a threat that is statistically minute whatever numbers are used especially when doing so puts oneself and ones family more at risk from the firearms that are supposed to be mitigating against that external threat.

I guess the theory is, that each person that does carry a gun in daily life believes themselves to be the exception that proves the rule, the 'my gun will never be discharged against anything other than a real external threat and when that threat comes I will be ready, and am certain that I will eliminate the external threat efficiently and without consequence' logic. That doesn't work for me. I'll continue not carrying weapons to mitigate against events that are not very likely to happen, it's working out well for me so far.

[Sousuke 1,214]

What stigma would that be?

I understand those who hunt or enjoy shooting for the exhilaration of the sport, I wouldn't do it, but I understand it, I don't understand taking precautions against a threat that is statistically minute whatever numbers are used especially when doing so puts oneself and ones family more at risk from the firearms that are supposed to be mitigating against that external threat.

I guess the theory is, that each person that does carry a gun in daily life believes themselves to be the exception that proves the rule, the 'my gun will never be discharged against anything other than a real external threat and when that threat comes I will be ready, and am certain that I will eliminate the external threat efficiently and without consequence' logic. That doesn't work for me. I'll continue not carrying weapons to mitigate against events that are not very likely to happen, it's working out well for me so far.

There is a stigma surrounding firearms, a general fear of them. It comes from being exposed to gun violence either in person or through the media.

Your later paragraph is why I would rather have a taser.

Edited August 3, 2013 by Brown Dwarf

[Peikko 1,575]

There is a stigma surrounding firearms, a general fear of them. It comes from being exposed to gun violence either in person or through the media.

Your later paragraph is why I would rather have a taser.

If you have ever encountered gun violence in real life and afterwards have a fear of guns, that doesn't seem to me to be a general fear or irrational.

I don't believe that most people fear guns as such. That doesn't make much sense. I do think that it is right to be concerned about the prevalence of guns in the home that are only there because the owner wants a gun for self defense. To me that's a worrying trend - and it appears that currently the rate is nearly 50% of gun owners who cite this as their main or only reason for having a gun in the home.

Does this not strike you as in the least bit worrying? It does me. For the use of a gun as defense to be of any relevance whatsoever the gun owner must regularly train with one, not only in shooting skills but strategic use. If most gun owners just keep one lying around in the home 'just in case' it makes doing so more and more of a nonsense.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

And there are mitigating factors that change this risk as well.

Those would appear to be horribly neglected.

[spookyturtle 9,465]

No Spooky, I said that the real risk a normal person who goes about a normal day faces is so low as to be irrelevant. Couple that with the data that demonstrates that more injuries are sustained by people's own guns than by guns from any external threat it is safe to conclude that for most people most of the time carrying a gun is not only useless, it's foolish.

In your opinion.

[spookyturtle 9,465]

The actual number of rape victims is WAY higher than 14,000+, by the way. As many as one in three women are raped and every single one of those incidents count. If you think I'm dismissing them you did not understand anything I said.

What I fail to see is how gun ownership would help those victims. Do you advocate a woman's right to kill her rapist? Should she be allowed to "stand her ground" and not face prosecution for such? If so, should a woman carry a gun when going out on a date? When at home with her husband? Always on her person? Is it then a woman's responsibility to defend herself by shooting and killing the guy before he can rape her? A woman who does get raped then failed in her responsibility to protect herself? And this is the world you would like to live in as a man, with the women in your life always ready to point a gun at you, should they feel at risk?

Rape stops when men stop doing the raping. It's that simple.

I used the FBI statistics, which are you using? And why does a gun need to be fired to be a deterrent? Why does someone have to die or be shot to stop a crime? Rape is never going to stop.

[Peikko 1,575]

In your opinion.

No, not in my opinion in fact. The data has been provided, it's all in this thread. If you don't like the data find some that supports your own opinion, but contradicting facts with the statement 'in your opinion' just makes you look silly.

[Ban Hammer 13,333]

Do you advocate a woman's right to kill her rapist? Should she be allowed to "stand her ground" and not face prosecution for such? If so, should a woman carry a gun when going out on a date? When at home with her husband?

yes on all of the above.

[Ban Hammer 13,333]

And why does a gun need to be fired to be a deterrent? Why does someone have to die or be shot to stop a crime?

concur

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

And why does a gun need to be fired to be a deterrent? Why does someone have to die or be shot to stop a crime?

Because brandishing a firearm is a crime. A concealed weapon needs to remain concealed until it is to be used for its intended purpose, which is to launch a projectile with extreme prejudice.

[Peikko 1,575]

The health risk of having a gun in the home

The health risks of owning a gun are so established and scientifically non-controvertible that the American Academy of Pediatrics issued a policy statement in 2000 recommending that pediatricians urge parents to remove all guns from their homes.

http://www.minnpost.com/second-opinion/2012/12/health-risk-having-gun-home