Weapons: what do you think?

The wife and I are considering have guns in the home for self-defense. In fact, we will be checking out a local gun show soon to see what is offered and will enroll in firearm training. We both will also consider getting permits to carry. We just want to be ready for the unexpected. We both are becoming advocates of armed and unarmed self-defense which is a human right we should all have for our personal and family safety.

 

Saty and Nose, thanks for the efforts to find datas etc.
Don't argue too bad, though
Intriguedone--- there, there.

 

...and waterguns can be dangerous too!!!! @Saty
Have u ever tried to get one in the ass???


:smt043

 

Very true.

Except poverty will never go away. When 2% of the population controls 50% of the wealth, that leaves the rest of us fending for that remaining 50%. That doesn't do much for getting rid of poverty.

But, poverty isn't the problem. People can raise decent human beings and be poor while doing it.

You can throw as many social programs at the problems, but those problems won't go away until the people want them to go away and until the people work towards making those problems go away.

You can't force a drug addict to get help unless that person wants help. If he/she doesn't want help, there's no amount of social programs out there that will clean that person up. That person has to want to do it for him/her -self.

We don't need social programs to fix the problem. What we need are people taking responsibility for their own actions. We need parents to start actually being parents and taking an ACTIVE role in their children's lives - making sure they do their homework, knowing their kid's friends, making sure they have curfews and obeying them, paying attention to their kids, etc.

 

Alright boys, now that your one-upmanship seems to have died a natural death, I will respond to the thread.

I think it's nearly impossible to get relevant statistics on this. Because, for every study that shows gun ownership reduces crime, there will be one equally true and justifiable which says the opposite. This is because drawing conclusions from the observation of statistics is tenuous and is always open to manipulation based on the desired outcomes of the observer. Unless additional statistics are included in the study, or the bigger picture is looked at, or the original hypothesis is framed in such a way to direct any possible response into a narrow range of results, then the data is, in my opinion, interesting at best but hardly useful for much else.

Logic tells me that, if people have guns, then they have an ability to kill others. The more people who have guns, the more possible it becomes. But having guns doesn't cause an increase in crime - that's the choice of the people using the guns. So, therefore, the problem is two-fold. 1. you have to reduce the liklihood that the crime will occur. 2. you have to minimise people's capacity to harm.

It doesn't take a genius to work out that this is an enormous task. Probably a near-impossible one.

Personally, I see no reason why people should be allowed to carry a gun or any other weapon, for that matter. It is rediculous and I cannot justify it in my own mind. No-body has the right to "bear arms"...It's not the wild wild west anymore. The context of that particular legislation is so different to current realities...it's crazy.

At this point, I am happy to say that if my home was invaded and the way for me to survive that home invasion was only with the use of a gun and the killing of that person, I am happy to leave behind an un-armed corpse. I am happy to take one for the team on principle. Perhaps I would not feel the same as they pulled the trigger, though?
As a side, and FWIW, my family has been touched in a personal way by individual gun ownership, so my opinion has some value....We are just fortunate that absolute good luck was on our side.

Anyway - I am fortunate enough to live in a country with very tight gun control and a population of people who support the government's policy on this. I wouldn't want it any other way.

The problem with gun ownership is that it's like a disease without a cure. Once it is released, you can't un-release it and you can't stop it. It has a life of its own, and you can only watch and wait for it to reach its own end. The only thing you can do is mop up the carnage and try and stop people from creating an environment when the diesease will cause the most harm.

When I went to America for my trip, people said two things to me. One - you know they drive on the other side of the road. (yes - obviously most of the world manages to cope with this, and I didn't think I was stupid enough to have problems with it). and, Two - all Americans have guns, you will be killed. The idiocy of these statements don't require me to highlight them, but it is an indicator of the general impression that many people have of America. I would suggest this impression has at least a little truth to it.

 

I disagree.

Not only is poverty a problem and impetus towards criminal behavior, but so are the factors, self-inflicted and systematic, that keep people poor.

With regard to personality responsibility, the existentialist in me cannot argue against people embracing freedom in the face of obstacles. However, the idea that circumstances are entirely circumstantial doesn't sit well with my intimate understanding of criminal behavior.

Why is American society relatively violent in comparison to other western and non-western (Japan) industrialized nations? Apparently, we don't mind it too much as long we think we're untouched by it.

 

Gun ownership is not the disease. It's the breakdown of our morals and values that's the problem.

In 1994 Chicago, 2 boys aged 10 and 11 dangled a 5 year old boy out the window on the 14th floor and dropped him because the boy wouldn't steal candy for them.

No weapons of any kind in that crime.

It's not the weapons, it's the lack of morals and values of the people holding the weapons with the intent to do harm that's the problem. And unfortunately, most of the people doing harm with guns are people who have obtained the guns illegally. Most people who own guns are not violent people and would never kill someone "just because".

Guns have been around for centuries. 100 years ago they didn't have these problems...why?

 

And our population is also how many times more than Canada's?

 

Fly is referring to rate not number; proportional comparisons are what matter.

 

Good Lord. Then fucking ban guns. That's the answer. :roll:

 

Are you saying, Saty, that the "cultural characteristics" (mindset?), in addition to systematic issues, that result in people being poor, staying poor and creating multi-generational poverty are also the same characteristics which, to some degree, result in criminal behaviour?
At my uneducated and observational level, I would agree.

I would say that, on a broader level, it's people's reactions to their environment and their ability to cope with that. Poverty just introduces a level of desparation into the mix which makes people become irrational. Additionally, the ability to see hope and meaning in life as well as having something to lose in any situation probably has more impact on it all. It would just so happen that people without these things are mostly poor. But, it's probably too much of a broad issue to cover with blanket observations. And I know not enough about it. :|

This is what I was politely trying to say. It's the reason why you want a gun, or think you should have a gun that bothers me.
It's the implied nobility associated with it that irks me. As if you're a better person for having "taken arms" against whatever it is you're afraid of. There is nothing to celebrate in even allowing yourself the opportunity to take someone else's life.

Yes. I agree. This was a bad metaphor on my behalf in this instance. I simply meant that once you relax gun ownership laws, it is nearly impossible to tighten them again. Once you have unregistered guns in the public and an attitude of "it's ok, it's my right"..you have lost the battle.

A gun is an expensive paper weight until someon picks it up. Always it is the problem of the person pulling the trigger - and that is a larger issue. But, if people were never allowed to have guns in the first place, then crime couldn't help but be less severe.

 

Haha...yeah, i was wondering about that Bookworm, if the alarm system would go off on accident, and you would have to constantly explain to the authorities that it was a false alarm. How much does a really good security system cost? Thousands?

 

Oh, and i have a question. Is this whole discussion about protecting your house really that much different than protecting your country in war? Hundreds of years ago, wars were fought with swords, but in today's world, battles are fought with firearms. I know the soldiers don't like the idea of killing, and taking another man's life, but they are just doing what they have to do to protect their countrymen right? Is protecting your family from intruders really any different than protecting your countrymen while at war? Maybe they're not really similar at all. I'm just wondering that's all.

 

The reasons why someone would break into your home or declare war on you is different.

Furthermore, soldiers are sent to war for reasons they may not understand or support. A friend who was sent to Iraq and told me that many of the troops there felt like sitting ducks caught in the middle of an unjustifiable conflict.

Most family men and women don't need a reason for defending their loved ones.

 

FEHG/Sir/B-Dub, THANK YOU for your thoughtful and mature input on this thread. We may not fully agree, but at least we can have thoughtful and candid dialogue....'preciate that....sorry about the sideshow.

I think we've veered away from the original premise of the thread.

SuperThickShawty inquired about everyone's persective of owning a firearm to protect your home.

My perspective is that in America, everyone has that right, so I have no problem with it. The majority choose not to, I have no problem with that.

I'm a little mystified why anyone would criticize anyone else for either decision.

 

It was many years ago...another lifetime ago it seems. I don't exactly remember. But, I do know the initial set up was in the $100s range, but I can't remember what the monthly fee was. Sorry.

 

Because the right to bear arms is as hot a topic as abortion, religion, etc. People are very opinionated about those topics.

I agree. If an individual wants to bear arms, let him. If he doesn't, then he won't.

But, I'd like to have the option, one way or the other.

 

I can see Russia from my house.

 

I am a little late to this discussion but I while a believe a lot of what BMJ and FEHG has stated if you just ponder their thoughts, make sense. Unfortunately the genie is out of the bottle, meaning guns proliferate the United States in the several of millions legal and illegal and we'll never ever see the day where fire arms are banned and the laws of owning them become draconian. I don't own and I support those who do...

 

God damn right!!!!!!!



Fear my Rasen-shiriken when you step in my home.