Intruder in the house
By adamg - Tue, 03/18/2008 - 8:35pm.
NOTE: The post has been removed from public view, so I've taken out the link.
Marcus was the road this morning, about 15 minutes after leaving his home, when his wife called to ask about weekend plans.
... We were talking when I heard the dogs start to bark in the background and she said, "Shit, someone is in here, I just heard the front door close." I told her to make a bee line for the safe down in the basement as she hung up to call 911. ...
| 
| 
Interesting...
Firstly, Adam, how on earth did you come across this little tidbit of information.
Secondly, It's very interesting to see a number of the handful of Massholes (endearingly) with LTCs in one place. Of the people I've witnessed on the internet who exercise their second amendment rights they seem to be a rather paranoid bunch. One user states,
Why I don't stop carrying when I walk in the front door and another says The default position of my doors and windows is shut and locked.If I open them I arm myself. If I answer the door I am armed. No exceptions.
These individuals indicate that they live in Leominster and Troy, Ohio respectively. How distrustful of society does one have to be to believe that it is a necessity to arm yourself when you answer the door?
indeed
whereas I feel for the couple who had their home invaded, reading the rest of that site was truly scary. I hope none of those guys live near me, who knows when they'll fire at a shadow, and a bullet will fly through my window.
These guys really walk around their own homes with loaded weapons on their persons? Why do they live in fear?
I have no problem with people who want to hunt, or shoot for sport. But when it goes to the level that some of these people, I fear for society. Look at some of the signatures and avatars. That should tell you enough. Scarily, I recognize one of the participants from another, peaceful forum I frequent! However, I'm not surprised he's hanging out on the gun boards.
but but but, this just
but but but, this just proves how truly dangerous the world really is! We all need to arm ourselves and suspect everyone is out to get us, rob us, or rape us!
Truth be told, there’s common sense and then there’s excessive fear. Nice houses are robbed, even in well to do communities, and usually smarts are all you need to foil a robber.
Keep the windows locked, keep the doors locked, garages shut, arm the alarms when you leave. 9 times out of 10 a secured house, when there’s only few or none of the family home, is more then enough to make a criminal go next door to the Johnsons unlocked house.
This everyone’s out to get me, fire first, ask questions later mentality that most gun enthusiasts show on the tubes is scarier then the thought of dealing with a criminal without a gun. I really wish they’d give gun owners personality / stability tests, as some I know who carry think the worlds out to get them, and that they’re the next Hesston.
"...usually smarts are all
"...usually smarts are all you need to foil a robber."
Yeah, because "smarts" have stopped so many determined armed assailants. A locked and secured house is a great first line of defense. I’m pretty sure that your alarm won’t be able to physically stop anyone and will notify the police in time for them to find your body.
If someone wants what you have bad enough they will go to any means to take it. If that means ending your life, some will go that far. If you would like to gamble with the belief that a determined intruder will only beat you and rob you that’s fine. I think I’ll take what ever means are available to defend myself and my family.
Yeah, because "smarts" have
Yeah, because "smarts" have stopped so many determined armed assailants.
How many people live in the Untied States again?
How many "armed assailants" were there last year?
Whats the likely hood of a attack vs that of anything else happening?
I bet you don;t even wear a seatbelt, they're for pussys!
"How many "armed assailants"
"How many "armed assailants" were there last year?"
Well some DOJ data can be found here : http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/glance/guncrime.htm
In 2006, about 68% of all murders, 42% of all robberies, and 22% of all aggravated assaults that were reported to the police were committed with a firearm.
There were an estimated 473.5 violent crimes per 100,000 inhabitants.
Take your chances if you like. It's a free country.
"I bet you don;t even wear a seatbelt, they're for pussys!"
I don't see how this applies nor do I appreciate the name calling, but I do wear a seat belt. Safety first!
According to the data that
According to the data that you link to, only 14% of all homicides is committed by a stranger. That's about 2300 homicides in 2005, or 1/125,000th of the country.
There were about 1700 random homicides committed with a gun in 2005, meaning that 1/166,666th of the country was affected.
I don't know where you live, but it's probably safe to say that it's not North Dorchester, Mattapan or Roxbury, which means that the random homicide rates in your neck of the woods are likely much less than that 1/166,666th rate, and since the home invasion murders probably do not make up all 1700 of those random murders, I'd suggest that you're risk is actually much lower than that.
But good luck with that gun, and try to keep it away from the youngsters.
Math, it's lost on them
Math, it's lost on them
no kidding
The weird anti-2a logic strikes again! "You walk around all prepared with a gun, I bet you don't wear a seatbelt"
....what? are you sure mibixoyour not posting from some type of home???
Then they go on to say that how low the odds are of being assaulted with a firearm yet I bet they all vote for stricter "gun control" whenever the opportunity presents itself, never comprehending that "gun control' means nothing to criminals, only that they feel slightly better if they don;t think about it too much.
I don’t really see how the
I don’t really see how the relationship between a victim and assailant is relative to the chance of being a victim. A “stranger” would be classified as someone that you have never met or seen before. This would mean that the remaining 86% of those homicides were committed by coworkers, associates, family, someone you might have met once at a social gathering, or a guy that lives down the street.
Random or not, I would prefer not to be a victim.
Don’t worry about the kids, of which I have none. Either way, all of my weapons are maintained in strict accordance with Massachusetts Safe Storage Laws.
a few usually do screw it up for the majority
You are absolutely right. A good lock and an alarm are usually enough but not always. Unfortunately for all the other gun owners out there the few that you seem to know screw it up for the rest of us, at least in your mind. Believe me owning guns in Massachusetts makes you a smarter and more law abiding citizen than most. There is no shoot first mentality because in this state the shooter would be in jail, his firearms confiscated and fighting not just the courts to stay out of jail for the shooting but the law suit from the intruder (or his/her family) for injuring him/her while breaking in or assaulting you in your home!!!
You'd be surprised how many
You'd be surprised how many of us are armed part or all of the day. And goodness forbid you were the person who's home was broken into...you'd pray one of us was a neighbor to help you. Unless you live next door to the police station it will take minutes for them to respond if you are able to call them at all...the crimne only takes seconds. Do you have a fire extinguisher in your home? If yes...why? Do you plan to have a fire? Of course not but it is smart to be prepared to protect your property. That is why many carry weapons...not because we plan to be victims of crime but because we prepare to protect ourselves and our property from being victims of a crime. Please don't belittle, make fun of or be afraid of what you don't understand. If you really recogognized someone then ask him/her about it...you'd be surprised how nice we are and you might learn something.
bwc, I too live in Medford,
bwc,
I too live in Medford, and may, in fact be your neighbor. Please allow me to introduce myself. My name is Jack (John actually), I'm 40 years-old, married and have 2 children (ages 7 and 9). I'm in software sales, and make an "above average" income. I'm college educated (BU), and. . .
I'm a responsible gun owner!!!!
I too have my LTC in Mass (and 17 other states), and carry a firearm 90% of my waking day. I shoot weekly, as much as 1000 rounds a week (which is significantly more than your "average" police officer)and get professional training at least 4x a year(which is more than I would guess 90% of police officers), and have done so for the last 12 years. I own quite a few firearms, some are "black, military style weapons", but most are pistols.
I wish to answer a couple questions that you asked, they are. . .
"These guys really walk around their own homes with loaded weapons on their persons? Why do they live in fear?"
I can't answer for everyone, but i will answer for my family and me.
I do actually walk around my home with a loaded weapon on my person. I do so, because Bad things can happen to Good people in good places. In 1993, my wife was grocery shopping, in Medford, near our home. While she was putting the groceries in the trunk of her car, 2 "kids" (she thinks they were between 17 and 20)came up behind her with a knife and wanted her pocketbook. she complied and has a scar from where she was "stabbed" (it was more like slashed, but required 12 stitches to close). We don't believe that the intent was to kill my wife, but to scare her more. These "kids" were never found (for this crime anyways).
Do I live in fear? Yes, I do. but not the fear that you think. I don't fear my death or injury or that of my wife. I fear that my children will be victims. I fear that someone will try to take their mom or dad away from them, or try to hurt them. It is MY responsibility to protect my children. Not Yours, not the police, not my neighbors, MINE!!
I pray every night that I never "have" to use my weapon on another human, but I can say with absolute certainty that if there is a choice to make between that, or my children's safety, I know God will forgive me.
So there you have it Brian, I'm not too much unlike you. I live in Medford, work in a similar field as you, I too cycle, and even our cars are similar (I too love the German cars, mine's an audi). One big difference is that I have accepted the responsibility for the safety and security of my family. I promise that from my home, there will be no stray bullets from me firing at a shadow that will fly through your window.
If interested, I will gladly take you to the range shooting. we will safely handle firearms, it may not be for you, but you never know. We may already know each other, a safe, responsible gun owner may live right next door. . . I hope you never need it, but please remember that I can get to your house faster than the police if your family ever needs help. While MY family is my #1 concern, I wouldn't let anything bad happen to yours either
You sound like a nice guy
I'm glad a guy like you has a gun. You sound very intelligent and responsible, and are probably a good shot with all that practice.
I'm glad your wife is OK. I hope you realize that you having a gun won't help protect your wife when she's by herself in the parking lot of the supermarket.
And I hope you lock your doors.
Gareth, thanks. what I find
Gareth,
thanks. what I find is that "most" gun owners are just like me. Their initial reason to own/carry a gun may be different, but I believe that we think the same. I do lock my doors, however if I had just left the home, and my wife was ready to leave, the garage door may be open and someone could enter my home. We are careful, but criminals don't warn that they are about to break the law.
As for my wife, she too carries a firearm. At 5' and just about 105# (don't tell her I mentioned her weight)she is no physical match for a 6'2" 250# attacker (I use that size because I believe that is what you mentioned you size to be. She trains martial arts, to help level the odds, but in shear size and strength she can still be overpowered. She also practices shooting (not as much as myself, but still more than many officers)and there is no doubt that she would do whatever is needed to protect her young.
The point that I was trying to make, is not all of us are "crazy gun nuts", in fact most aren't. You and I aren't that different, I'm not sure if you have children, or have ever had a loved one be a victim of violent crime. I choose to take responsibility for my family's safety and not leave our lives in the hands of criminals and hope the police are there when something bad happens.
I will leave this thread with one last comment. When my wife was robbed and assaulted, it took police 11 minutes to arrive on the scene, EMS arrived in 4. In the seconds that her life was in danger, "help" was 11 minutes away.
I believe you
I'm sure most people who own guns - my dad, my uncle, my brother among them - are real nice folks. It's unfortunate that the majority of anti-gun control folks who do the yammering on the internets don't seem to be. They seem to be more interested in baroque descriptions of how I will inevitably be dismembered.
I'm glad your wife can keep herself safe. God bless.
Yeah, I've got a family and I try keep us safe as much as I can, respecting the different threats out there (traffic, dogs, and open water are much greater threats to children than violent crime).
I don't feel I need a gun to keep us safe. I've been a target of violent crime, but never a victim.
LTC?
What's LTC stand for? Loose Trigger Complex?
The think that slays me about this guy is that he talks all about how secure the position of his house is - not a corner lot, mind you! - and then he says he never locks his door.
Can you say D'OH?
Looks to me like my house is a bit more secure than his because ... I lock my door!
Yeah, I remember the days when people didn't lock doors. I also remember the crazy lady who came into our house. The police said "Oh, that's just Lulu. She's harmless." Nonetheless, that was the end of the unlocked front door.
Yeah, right, the problem is he doesn't 'wear his Walther when he's just hanging around the house.' If this guy is too foolish to lock his door, waving a gun around all day isn't going to accomplish much. He'll probably end up shooting his maid.
License to Carry?
License to Carry?
Locks
Talk about Pollyanna. Nothing is as eye-opening as coming home to find your well-locked front door kicked in with a size 13 muddy boot print in the center of it. Lock, shmock. If somebody wants to get in they will. And if they get in while you're home it's a safe bet they've got a plan to deal with you. You should have a plan to deal with them. Anything less is the fantasy world you live in.
My wife used to live in that world. Not anymore, after the door. Dog & the gun were her idea. And she doesn't even like guns, still doesn't. Makes her uncomfortable. And yet instills a feeling of security in her.
And we lived in a "nice" neighborhood.
Solving nothing
So your house was broken into when you weren't home...
And you having a gun would have stopped that how?
Sorry you're so scared. Glad the gun makes you feel more secure. Sorry to inform you it won't make your house any safer when you're not home.
Until the next time
That time we were lucky that no one was home. My wife typically is home then. Who's to say they won't be back again? There was a lot of 'good' stuff, stuff typically taken in a robbery, that wasn't taken that time.
And if they come back, would I bet my life that they have good intentions and wouldn't enter the house if she was there alone? Or would I bet my wife & kids life?
I'll say right now that a gun is not an answer for everything. It's a tool. Used in the right hands it can provide safety and security. I realize it might not fit every situation. I realize I might not be able to get to it every time I needed it. It's just a tool, not a guarantee. I'd prefer to have that option. If you don't, then don't own one.
What a font of knowledge!
Um, who said it would make the house any safer when they're not home? Are we making things up to try to make a point? If so, you're losing credibility.
Yeah, because getting killed is so much more "progessive"
How distrustful of society does one have to be to believe that it is a necessity to arm yourself when you answer the door?
It's called the recognition and acceptance of reality.
Don't believe me, ask this Vermont homeowner.
Yeah, he was just being paranoid.
Half and Suzanne Zantop, two Dartmouth professors weren't so "paranoid". They let these nice young men into their home about a week later and were brutally stabbed to death.
Yet, you would call the first would-be victim a dangerous nutjob. I'll take some juvenile name calling over a pine box any damn day.
Feel free to disagree. I'm not looking to change your mind any. If self-defense is so abhorrent a concept to you, by all means, render yourself as weak and helpless as you wish to be.
I think the issue here is
I think the issue here is the extreme some of the people on the board go to. one guy said something like, whenever i answer the door i am armed, no exceptions. that's pretty intense. granted if someone came knocking on my door in the middle of the night i'd be suspicious too.
i think it's one thing though to have a gun that you can pull on anyone who looks at you the wrong way, and another thing to want to be safe and use self defense.
if i ever do actually breakdown in vermont and need help, i sure wont go to robert's house, i dont need a gun pulled on me for no reason...
the issue is safety
How is it extreme to be prepared for a terrible scenario, no matter what the odds? I've been driving for 13 years now, and have never had a flat tire, but that doesn't mean I don't have one with me along with a jack and a tire iron. Always. I'm not going to toss out my safety just because the odds are that I won't be having a flat any time soon.
Saying someone who takes the stance of always carrying for self-protection is an extremist is in my opinion the absolute stupidest thing I have ever heard. Being prepared is not being paranoid, being prepared is saying that you won't ever be a victim as long as you have a say in the matter.
If you truly believed that being prepared for a worst-case scenario no matter how unlikely was foolish than you should throw out your fire extinguishers and your spare tires, cancel your AAA subscription, unlock your doors and shut off your house alarm, and ditch the cell-phone.
i use my cell phone for
i use my cell phone for other things than always being prepared, can i keep it?
seriously though, i think there is a point when it gets too extreme. i make no comments against being prepared, but i do think it can be over done.
i also dont think a gun on every person or in every house is the answer. take the recent campus shootings for instance. some cities/states/colleges now want to allow carrying a concealed weapon on campus. this wouldnt have made a difference at virginia tech or northern illinois (is that the right school?) those people would have gone on the rampage anyways. now say someone in the room had a gun on them and was able to take out the shooter limiting the amount of injured and killed. great, but whats to say that person is going to take the time to place a careful aimed shot? what if they kill someone in the process?
what about the student from unc that was killed? would it have happened differently if she had a gun?
i think everyone has a right to safety and should always be prepared. i dont think everyone needs a gun. i also think that the constitution was written at a very different time period. they wanted citizens to be able to protect themselves from being imprisoned my another british like force. i bet they would deliberate about it a lot more now and be much more careful with what they put in writing.
Yeah, you can keep it ;)
"i use my cell phone for other things than always being prepared, can i keep it?"
Sure, why not! I use my gun for things other than self-defense, can I keep it?
"i make no comments against being prepared, but i do think it can be over done."
I think we live in a country where your feelings on my preparedness level do not and should not concern me. If I want to be prepared to stop someone intent on doing me harm no matter where or when, how does that effect you in the slightest? Call me crazy if you like, but don't take away my rights and my freedoms because we have differing philosophies. Believe me, I'd love to die having never been the victim of a violent crime, but I'm not willing to gamble that I will be that lucky.
"this wouldnt have made a difference at virginia tech or northern illinois (is that the right school?) those people would have gone on the rampage anyways."
Would you feel different if your daughter was the 4th person to die in the shooting if you were able to change the past and determine that a licensed and carrying student in the classroom would have been able to stop the guy after he killed just three people?
"now say someone in the room had a gun on them and was able to take out the shooter limiting the amount of injured and killed. great, but whats to say that person is going to take the time to place a careful aimed shot? what if they kill someone in the process?"
I, personally, would take the gamble. 15 dead people is not worth the price of inactivity and hoping for the shooter to decide to stop shooting. If a licensed student shot and stopped the gunman after he killed a few people, and that licensed person accidentally shot someone innocent, that is still far fewer dead people than if the gunman was allowed a full access shooting spree to kill however many he desired. To give up so many lives in order to avoid a stray shot accident is a horrific thing to say, in my opinion. If I were a student there, and I had to give up my life to protect the lives of 15 of my fellow students, I would do it in a heartbeat. If I got shot in the 'crossfire', I would still praise the student who took down then gunman, if I was still alive to do so.
"i dont think everyone needs a gun."
I don't think so, either. Certainly the people who think that guns shoot people all by themselves, or cause accidents, or who do not trust anyone else with the proper handling of a firearm should not own a gun.
you make a lot of valid
you make a lot of valid points and that's why i appreciate these discussions. i know i dont have all the answers, so i like to hear other sides.
you said: "Would you feel different if your daughter was the 4th person to die in the shooting if you were able to change the past and determine that a licensed and carrying student in the classroom would have been able to stop the guy after he killed just three people?"
my point here was that these two people would have made the attacks anyways, and guns wouldnt have stopped that. i think one of the big arguments for more guns is that a criminal wont attack someone if they think the victim has a gun. clearly these people would have still done their attacks. as for if my daughter was killed, honestly, i dont know, i'd like to think i'd feel the same way, but since i havent been put in that position i cant totally speak to it. i will say that i used to be against the death penalty until a friend of mine was brutally murdered, and now i cant make a decision on it.
in the end i'm still against guns, but i'm not going to say i'm not open to change. you said, "Certainly the people who think that guns shoot people all by themselves, or cause accidents, or who do not trust anyone else with the proper handling of a firearm should not own a gun."
i dont know if this was a dig at me, but i obviously dont think this way and i am trying to share real opinions without making personal attacks or outrageous statements.
You are right, I don't think
You are right, I don't think everyone should be armed...unless they want to. We don't all have that right in Massachusetts. The college campus shootings may not have been effected...a nut is a nut and if he didn't use a handgun to be a nut then he would have come up with something else to make his point! Maybe if students were allowed to carry he would have chosen something else that may not have killed so many or maybe more, we will never know. And you are correct our forefathers wrote the constitution thinking about what had happend to them and their ancestors in hopes to keep it from happening again. To keep the future of America safe from enemies within and outside. If they had to write it today I thionk you are correct that they would have to think even harder but come to a similar conclusion. You cannot stay safe if you cannot protect yourself. Ask the armenians, the jews or the kurds...those are three attempts at genocide in the lst century that I know of...there are more. Ask the Australians why their violent crime rate has risen by 20%...answer because the givernment made it illegal for private citizens to own firearms. In Great Britain personal possession of firearms has been severely restricted for many years, so what are they banning now...knives, because violent crime with knives has increased immensely. You cannot take aay everyone's weapons and expect no one to be victims of crime! People in "gun free zones" are more likely to be victimes becasue the criminal knows no one there will have a gun!!!
Not everyone should own a gun...?
There was a city - Kennesaw, GA - that in 1982, in response to a gun control law recently established in Morton Grove, Ill, established an opposing law requiring every head of household to own and maintain a firearm. Just last month they celebrated 25 years of not a single fatal firearm shooting, accidental or otherwise. Don't get me wrong, there are people that I wouldn't want to see with a gun - but I think this is a pretty compelling example of how arming your citizens makes them a LOT safer.
Remember that until someone
Remember that until someone posted it here...this thread was on a board populated by members with like interests and very knowledgable of each other. People say silly things and sarcastic comments in conversations with friends. I don't know everyone on the forum but I know many and feel as though I am friends with most. When someone unacustomed to the tone and tenor of the members reads some comments I can see where some interesting opinions can be formed. Just like no one takes everything you read in the newspapers as gospel because even the media has an agenda, you can't read one comment thread and understand the interactions.
Thank You!
Well, I'm glad at least one reader here has some common sense. There is nothing wrong with being prepared for anything, especially today.
Are there overly paranoid, shoot-at-anything-that-moves gun owners out there? Sure. And for the most part, many of us lawful, responsible gun owners don't like them either.
Most of us make the decision to carry based on the fact that we want to be able to defend our own lives, and the lives of those around us, no matter what happens.
Si vis pacem, para bellum.
Be Prepared
That's why I keep a life vest on at all times. In this day and age you never can tell when a flash flood's gonna sneak up on ya! FEAR THE FLOOD!!!
Hey Flood Boy...
Do you have a fire extinguisher in your home! If so, why are you planning on having a fire? If not why don't you? You don't plan a fire of course but it is smart to be prepared just in case there is one. Then you can protect you property and loved ones from it. Your life vest will protect you in case there is a flood and you are too short to be able to keep your hed above the water. Well a handgun is the same...something to have just in case you need to protect your property and family from a criminal. What is wrong with being prepared? I can't think of one thing. Haven't you ever filled up with gas, bought milk and bread just before a bad storm? Is it because there will be no more milk and bread after the storm?!? No it is to be prepared if you can't (or don't want to) get out in the bad weather. It is called being prepared. Unfortunately just as so many anti-gun people like yourself make jokes at the expense of gun owners it is because you just don't understand and don't seem to have the desire ti understand anyone that doesn't think like you. Your loss.
Great
You didn't really directly answer the question, but judging from you're desire to always be prepared, I'm just going to go ahead and assume that you do in fact wear your life vest all the time.
I'm looking for more information about being prepared. You seem to be a prepared person. May I ask you for some advice? . What types of food and entertainment should I keep in my bomb shelter? Should I get asteroid insurance for my apartment? How often to I have to floss, REALLY? If I tip 10%, should I expect to be assaulted? Please respond... inquiring minds need to know how to prepare!!!
guns are sooooo scary
As a member of the board you are all so content with ridiculing because people choose to take responsibility for their own safety rather than rely on the state to take care of you, i can honestly say that there are some members of the forum who in my opinion are a bit too paranoid. On the other hand, i carry a firearm everywhere i go. I refuse to be a helpless victim should a mall or other public shooting occur here. Even the paranoid ones are not unsafe gun nuts. Have you bothered to research the many hoops a lawful gun owner has to go through in MA to get an LTC (license to carry)? I doubt it. Just more liberal knee jerk reactions without bothering to research anything.
At home, a gun is always within reach. Why? Am i paranoid? I don't think so. If someone breaks into my home intent on harming my family i am not going to ask the bad guy to hold on while i call 911 and say ok mr. intruder please don't begin harming my family for at least another 10 minutes until the police show up. Sorry but i'm prepared to take responsibility for my own safety and that of my family rather than relying on the incompetent state to do it for me. If that makes me a gun nut in your eyes then feel free to resume your liberal pant-pissing in fear over the idea that the founders of this country guaranteed our RIGHTS to defend ourselves. If you hate the constitution so much move to any one of the liberal socialist sh*thole paradises on the other side of the pond.
its a right
---This everyone’s out to get me, fire first, ask questions later mentality that most gun enthusiasts show on the tubes is scarier then the thought of dealing with a criminal without a gun. I really wish they’d give gun owners personality / stability tests, as some I know who carry think the worlds out to get them, and that they’re the next Hesston.----
Sure. As soon as we give personality / stability tests for the right to vote. Or the right to participate in a public debate. These are also rights. It amazes me that people will trample on a right just because it makes them a little uncomfortable.
More Guns = More Accidents
Just like more smokers = more fires. When smoking declined, fires attributed to smoking declined. When gun posession goes up, accidents and suicides go up.
I was raised in a house with guns hanging on the wall. (I technically own a .22, but I don't have it in my home for a variety of reasons.) These were hunting weapons - Mom's .22, Dad's 12-guage. Dad would even pay me a penny a shell to fill cartridges with shot. Handguns? These were disassembled and placed in places kids couldn't reach. They were reassembled as a way to humanely dispatch an imperfectly hunted bambi.
My brother and I were also taught: never point even a TOY weapon at a person or a pet - it might not be a "toy". If you see an unsecured weapon at a friend's house, DONT TOUCH - get a grown up to pick it up.
That said, not everybody is as responsible with weapons as my parents were. Not every kid knows what mine do - don't touch weapons and get grownups to put them away.
All the security from dangerous "others" will never reassemble your kid's face. You can childproof a gun, but you cannot gun proof a child. I sincerely hope that people realize that it is more likely that their own kids will accidently kill each other or intentionally kill themselves with these weapons than they will repel an attacker or home invader. So long as people understand the simple reality that more guns means more accidents, and accidents are more likely in most areas than a protection incident, carry on! But please, don't call it "taking responsibility for one's own safety" because the risks accrue to the weapon, not to the counterfactual intruder.
More Guns does not equal more crime or accidents
Just wanted to post some facts.
Firearm accidents are at an all time low from when statistics were started in the 1930's.
The highest crime rates exist in places where the most strict laws regarding firearms also exist. And the crime rates in those places rose higher than before the laws were enacted.
Take the UK for example. In 1900, the only law regarding firearms was basically one that prohibited police from carrying. Today almost all guns are banned and the violent crime rate for the country as a whole is higher than that of the USA.
Washington DC bans handguns and is the highest crime rate city. Kennesaw, Georgia REQUIRES all homes to have guns and has virtually no violent crime.
Switzerland requires homes to maintain a fully automatic rifle and ammo as part of their militia and has a very low violent crime rate.
Vermont's only law regarding guns is that it is illegal to use one in the commission of a crime. Vermont routinely rates as one of the safest states in the union.
There is evidence all over that shows that when good citizens have guns, violent crime drops. Interviews with criminals routinely show that the only thing they truly fear is being confronted by an armed victim.
Those are the facts. But don't take my word, do your own research.
I said ACCIDENTS not CRIME.
Crime has complex causes, not all of which have to do with guns. The biggest cause of increased crime is having a lot of young people as a proportion of the population. Poverty levels and unemployment in that same cohort are also strongly associated.
GUN ACCIDENTS and GUN SUICIDES require ... GUNS! Firearm accidents are down for the same reason I don't have my gun in my house ... people don't hunt as a matter of livelihood anymore. Less guns = less accidents.
All the same, having loaded weapons in your household is a huge risk factor for faceless children and obliterated teenagers and accidently shooting your spouse who arrives home unexpectedly. That's why your homeowner's insurance has stuff about guns in it: not out of liberal moralizing, but out of business sense driven by actuarial reality.
Not that people don't try suicide without guns, but they are far more likely to actually succeed! Kids don't go find a lighter to play with because there is no gun to be had, they mess around with guns because the guns are there.
Interesting that I said NOTHING about crime - only accidents, but you went about your canned reaction script nonetheless.
And?
Yes, and gun suicides and gun accidents are terrible things. So are hanging suicides, and football related accidents. If someone has a destructive tendency they will comit suicide, the gun is just the means to do that. Indeed, if you look at the US suicide rate it's about the same as all other western nations. Actually LOWER than Canada and Sweden. Do you really think that removing firearms will somehow stop these tragic suicide deaths?
Suicide is tragic, but it's more to do with the failure of the mental health system than any "device" used to carry it out.
As for accidents. Life is full of dangers. Do we ban golf or football when an accident occurs? Education and training are the best ways to fix that (small) issue.
Blow off your head
You will have a better chance of never having to apologise for being found dead in your family room than if you do the rope trick or pill swill.
Gun suicide is more effective if you want to kill yourself dead. Teens use what they have access to, and guns do a dandy job of makeing sure it happens as planned.
Insurance companies keep stats on these things. They will rate you for having guns in the house just like they will charge extra or refuse you for having certain breeds of dogs. They don't like to have to pay for your so-called "small" problems and that is a valid business decision based on actuarial statistics, not a crusade.
Hmmmm
Rubbish. Hanging can be just as effective. If the US had a suicide rate significantly higher than in other countries you might have a point. The fact remains it doesn't.
So to "fix" this problem we restrict/ban guns rather than fixing the societal and mental health issues that drive someone to this extreme? What next...ban sales of rope over 3 feet in length?
NH dude, We'd need to raise
NH dude,
We'd need to raise taxes and spend on social programs for that...
You in?
Errrmmmm.....No ;-)
Errrmmmm.....No ;-)
Accidents are DOWN
Do you have a 5 gallon pail in your home?
Did you know that a child is 5 times as likely to die from drowning in that 5 gallon pail than from a firearm? (go check the CDC statistics if you doubt it)
Firearms in America are at an all time high. Millions are sold in this country every year. And yet, the accident statistics continue to DROP. Look at any list of accidental death statistics and firearms are so far down that it isn't even a realistic threat. Drowning, falls, medical errors, etc are all MUCH higher risks.
Suicide is a totally different issue. However, if you look at the Suicide statistics from other countries like Australia from before the ban and after, you will find that the number of suicides remains fairly stable. While expectedly the number of gun related suicides drop dramatically, the increase in overdose and bridge jumpings and other methods all increase. NO EVIDENCE exists that shows fewer guns will prevent people seeking self destruction from finding a way.
A loaded firearm in the home is NOT a risk factor. The only study that ever proposed this was the Kellerman study which concluded that "a gun in the home was 42 times more likely to injure a household member than kill an intruder". The statistic sounds horrid until you read the methodology used. Any injury of a household member went into column A REGARDLESS of the source. ONLY verified dead bodies went into Column B. So, every home that had a gun with no incident was never considered (the vast majority) and any incident where a defensive use didn't end with a dead bad guy was ignored (also a vast majority)
Time and again various so-called "studies" are published to show how bad guns are. And time and again when the data is looked at, the study is found to be flawed or a complete fraud. There was a book that supposed to have 'proven' that guns were not a major part of American Life in the early years of this country. The book was shown to be a fraud when much of his supposed evidence came from records that had been burned before he was born.
Another study claims to show firearms a cause of crime uses a methodology that could be used to show that possession of insulin causes diabetes. And yet, we still hear that one quoted on the nightly news.
How many kids a day are killed by guns? Well, depending on the number used, it includes so-called "Kids" as old as 24 years of age. Many of the numbers include 18 and 19 year old gang bangers. I'm sure those are the 'kids' you were thinking of.
Please, do everyone a favor and actually do some research. You will find that many of the so called 'facts' are nothing but lies.
As for my homeowner's insurance, there is nothing there about guns. In fact, I think if guns were an issue, every police officer would cry foul as many are REQUIRED to keep their duty pistols at home. Many of them are loaded. And as a Deputy Sheriff, I do have some knowledge in this regard.
Right to Bear Responsibility for Hazards
A loaded gun is a hazard.
You have a right to impose this hazard in your home.
You also have a right to bear consequences for your choices, such as:
Have your kids removed from your unsafe household if there is a gun accident in your home involving an unsecured weapon
Be sued for any gun accident that occurs in your home
Have your home owners insurance decline to cover gun accident liability and/or decline to insure you entirely
Have health insurers refuse to insure gun accident injuries or even refuse to insure your entire family
Suffer other consequences due to your choice to have your weapon loaded and ready in the usually remote event that your paranoid fantasy will transpire.
Freedom means responsibility - and liability, folks! Cowboy up!
Wha???
Sure. All of the above could also apply to: Owning a swimming pool, owning a jacuzzi, a large dog, having a medical condition that requires dangerous medication in the house, owning a large collection of power tools, owning a quad bike, playing football, playing ice hockey, playing squash, playing rugby, drinking, smoking, taking drugs...The list goes on and on.
So, no as a gun owner if my insurance company did want to charge extra liability so I could own guns (that are locked in a safe at all times) I wouldn't mind. Providing they also did the same for all the above (and more).
Paranoid fantasy? Like the paranoid fantasy that there might be a house fire I will put out with my fire extinguisher.
Your wrong
I am still waiting for some data from you folks regarding the lethality of firearms related accidents versus motorcycle. Again, you have opinions, ill informed ones if I may add...
Also, a motorcycle does nothing to protect my family.
Here are some REAL numbers in case you care....
More than 80% of motorcycle accidents result in injury or death: http://www.poconolaw.com/motorcycle_accidents.htm
Each year during the study period (July 1992 through December 1995), an estimated 132,687 persons sustained gunshot wounds that resulted in death or treatment in an ED. The overall age-adjusted Fatality Rates among persons who sustained firearm-related injuries was 31.7%
http://cel.isiknowledge.com/
In addition:
1. Accidental gun deaths in 1998 were less than 1% of total accidental deaths.
By comparison, automobiles accounted for 42% of accidental deaths.
http://www.outdoors.net/site/features/feature.aspx+rn+38416+Forum+Firearms+ArticleCode+121+V+N
The annual number of fatal firearm accidents fell to an all-time low in 1995 of 1,400 in comparison to fatal accidents involving motor vehicles (43,900), falls (12,600), poisoning of all types (10,600), drowning (4,500), fires (4,100) and choking on an ingested object (2,800).1
sean taylor
washington redskins player killed at his front door during an attempted home invasion in miami.he was carrying a machete but his attackers were packing heat.taylor had his guns taken away after an armed assualt arrest.if he had acted responsibly with is gun, he may have ben able to protect himself.
"How distrustful of society
"How distrustful of society does one have to be to believe that it is a necessity to arm yourself when you answer the door?"
When strangers are breaking and walking into homes then committing crimes with enough frequency that its on the news EVERY NIGHT, my trust in society is already gone. Can you honestly watch the news and say that you trust society as a whole? All it takes is one animal to harm my family. Guns are no different than seatbelts or fire extinguishers...their owners hope they never are required, but have the view that they'd rather be safe than sorry. It seems you would rather be dead than admit the world might be a dangerous place.
Man!
I'd hate to see how you would have armed yourself if you had lived during the Dark Ages!!!
Proportionally
Proportionally
Crime has been on a downturn
Crime has been on a downturn since the 70's
Crime coverage on the TV has been on the up swing.
Paris Hilton critch shots are also, so does that mean your 1000X likeler to see a PH crotch shot this week? I think not.
This is what it comes down to. I don't trust a gun owner that can logically work his way around simple statistics.
Crime is down, even gun crime, yet somehow we're on the verge of a dytopian nightmare. It's all in your head buddy, and that's why i don't trust your judgment with firearms.
Question. Have YOU ever
Question. Have YOU ever lived in a city where every other neighbor was the victim of a home invasion or some type of assault by just walking to thier car for work? I think if YOU did, you'd be a little paranoid too. Another question. Do you know any one who has been a victim of a senseless crime?
I am proud to say that I don't even walk through the city without a can of mace in my purse or pocket. Part of being a victim is being unprepared and unaware of your surroundings. Ask any police officer, he will tell you the same. It is a matter of not allowing myself to become a powerless victim in today's irrational society. I unfortunately also live in a horrible neighborhood, and choose to arm myself and protect my family from the harsh reality that surrounds us. YOU may choose to leave your door unlocked, but do not be surprised when you've found you've been robbed. Keep your head in the sand.
Just so we're on the same page
Are you talking about living in Boston or Medellin?
I think it's Bagdad.
I think it's Bagdad.
every other neighbor?
every other neighbor? either this is the worst neighborhood ever or you are over exaggerating. if this is the case though what are police for? they should really be stepping up in your neighborhood (obviously not something you can control on your own). however, if you really do want to protect yourself and your kids you could probably move. i realize that it is often cheaper to live in these areas, but if people really wanted a cheap and safe place they could find it.
So you're not distrustful of
So you're not distrustful of society??? Then post your social security number or a credit card number here on the web. Then let's see who makes out better the distrustful person that is prepared and has the tools (locks, fire extinguisher, gun) to protect his family and possessions. Or you the trusting one...I'm sure you believe no one would take you SS# and try to buy a car or shop with the credit card number you posted. Come on...take off the rose colored glasses! While both scenarios are extremes, it is better to be prepared and err on the side of caution. Didn't your parents ever tell you not to talk to strangers? That wasn't an overreaction it was becasue someone's kid had been abducted, raped and killed at one time and they didn't want it to happen to you! Sorry but Camelot this ain't...you can't trust everyone completely. And because others disagree with you they all aren't wrong.
It's hard to tell how this
It's hard to tell who this was directed at but I'm going to assume that it may have been me.
I never said I completely trust society. I asked how distrustful does one have to be? I was curious at the motivations to encourage a person to put on a piece when they answer their door.
And for anyone who wants to know I am not anti-2nd. While I don't own a gun now I plan to in the future though I'd probably not bother with CCW (carrying a concealed weapon). And I can completely understand a persons desire to carry, I just don't understand someone who might go out of their way to put their piece on when they go to answer their door assuming they didn't already have it on.
While I can understand the concern regarding home invasions how often do these actually happen with the intent or even side effect of killing the occupants of the home? I imagine that these are difficult stats to find due to the way that the UCR works so it leaves the news and other independent research to provide this information. I can't recall very many (if any) instances of it happening in Boston within the last couple of years. Now, if I'm living in a misinformed fantasy world please let me know. There have been instances that have made national news (ie: that kid who killed his girlfriends parents while they were sleeping but that's a special case).
Or, perhaps I'm just missing something?
The thing is
Behind the rhetoric is a serious disagreement over basic philosophy: Is anything worth defending with lethal force? The rest is quibbling.
Not too long ago I had a conversation with a very thoughtful woman of my age who was horrified to find I carry a handgun. "What would you do if someone attacked you?" I asked. "I don't know," she said, "but I'd rather die than kill someone else." That's an honorable position, and a noble one. It's not mine.
I've owned a firearm - living my whole life here in the Bluest of Blue States - since I was 16, three decades ago. Never shot anyone. Never drawn one in anger, in this country, though I've recently spent too many months in a dry ugly place where that behavior was the norm. But here we're talking about domestic firearms.
Gun owners too often say (and write) yahooistic tripe; I suspect most are people who've never seen someone shot. But gun opponents say stupid things, too, and it's all more heat than light. Here's my simple take: If we could uninvent guns, I'd be happy as a clam. If we could limit ownership to just me, who I know to be responsible and meticulously careful, I'd be content. Since neither of those things will happen, I'll carry one and, as with fire insurance on my house, hope I never need it.
I agree
Great post, 'I just work here'. Guns cannot be un-invented. This is a simple concept that gun-grabbers cannot comprehend. They think that by taking away all of our guns, that there will be no more guns left to hurt people. Prisoners make guns in prison. If Prisoners can construct a zip-gun IN PRISON, then there is no way in heck that guns can ever be removed from the equation. Either law-abiding citizens and criminals have guns, or just the criminals. Which world do you want to live in?
We can and should do our best to make it so that criminals cannot easily obtain firearms, but taking them away from law-abiding citizens is not the way to do it.
Good post and I
Good post and I agree.
Unfortunately, I think what gets most of us "liberals" worked up are the rants that can be seen above.
You read stuff like that and just think "This guy actually thinks that and is allowed to carry a firearm, and does".
"With great power, comes great responsibility" -- and all too often gun supports leave out the last one when arguing their positions.
The NRA doesn't help with it's position on a free market reign of handguns and pushing that agenda. This liberal thinks you should be able to keep your guns, as long as you are responsible. I also think we should enact policies to keep guns out of the hands of people they shouldn’t be in, even if that means it's a royal pain in the ass for me and anyone else to obtain them legally.
Yes but...
...the government should not tell me what I can and cannot buy because Big Brother wants to protect me from myself. Don't make a list of guns I can own because I'm not smart enough not to buy the poorly made ones or I'm not smart enough to understand the complicated ones. Let the free market (there is one in every segment of our economy) weed out the manufacturers and sellers of poorly made and unsafe products. Some government regulation is necessary but I'm all grown up and since you let me raise my family and take my tax dollars to pay your salaries...allow me to decide how I want to spend my hard earned money and be smart enough not to buy an un-safe gun. Why did Massachusetts consider the Glock handgun unsafe for the public until Glock made changes YET oredred them for the State Police, Boston Police Department and soooo many others. If they are unsafe then the law enforcement community that handles those "unsafe" firearms more frequently every day shouldn't have them either....for their saftey and the saftey of the public!!
The News proves your point every night
If gun owners were so unstable, you'd see incidents reported on the news every night. Fact is, there are thousands and thousands of gun owners who carry daily. You don't see incidents on the news because these guys and gals are responsible. They don't whip it out every time they feel threatened. They do, however, plan for their security. If you don't agree with their mindset then don't do what they do. In the meantime, leave them to live their way. They're not causing a problem. You see the proof every day.
Darwin Was Right
These hi-tech security systems and guns and what-have-you are a great way to seperate the paranoid from their money.
That's what you say until
That's what you say until you need one. Doesn't matter if it is an alarm, a solid lock, a fire extinguisher or a gun...they all are tools used to protect people and property. Some people are doers and others are watchers. I choose to protect myself by using the tools available and not depend on someone else alone to take care of me.
Guns kill
Guns kill people like spoons made Rosie O'Donnell fat.
People who think gun owners are crazy paranoid yahoos are the FIRST people to cower behind a gun toting policeman or friend when the big bad wolf comes knocking. I think most of the "horrified" people here are living in a dreamworld, trying so hard to convince themselves that the world is peaceful and just that they step right over the bodies and daily reports that prove otherwise.
More Guns =! More Accidents
>More Guns = More Accidents
>By SwirlyGrrl | Wed, 03/19/2008 - 10:50am
>
>Just like more smokers = more fires. When smoking >declined, fires attributed to smoking declined. When gun >posession goes up, accidents and suicides go up.
Nice try SwirlyGrrl,
More motorcycles = More accidents
More kitchen knives = More accidents
More excercising = More accidents...
need I go on...
gun accidents tend to be more lethal than other types of acciden
Gun shot accidents do tend to be more lethal than many other types of accident, and therefore more guns and more gun accidents will tend to cause more death than many other types of accident.
RE: gun accidents tend to be more lethal than other types of acc
Thanks for sharing data on this subject....
oh wait you have no data other than ur kneejerk reactions...
Did you know auto accidents kill more cops than shootings?
Auto accidents killing more cops: http://www.policeone.com/writers/columnists/CraigFloyd/articles/97440/
Still waiting for the rest of it
Is there a part where you criticize the logic here? Or are you just going to saw off the limb you're sitting on?
Yes, not smoking and not riding a motorcycle will make you safer. Ask your insurance company.
gun accidents
It's a thesis, not an explicit criticism of your argument. You're welcome to engage or not. Gun accidents tend to be more lethal than other types of accidents, it's just a thing about weapons.
I think you posted this in the wrong place
Hey up there! Look down here!
yur-right
I mistook your comment to Peter as a comment to me.
Your data??
I am still waiting for some data from you folks regarding the lethality of firearms related accidents versus motorcycle. Again, you have opinions, ill informed ones if I may add...
Also, a motorcycle does nothing to protect my family.
Here are some REAL numbers in case you care....
More than 80% of motorcycle accidents result in injury or death: http://www.poconolaw.com/motorcycle_accidents.htm
Each year during the study period (July 1992 through December 1995), an estimated 132,687 persons sustained gunshot wounds that resulted in death or treatment in an ED. The overall age-adjusted Fatality Rates among persons who sustained firearm-related injuries was 31.7%
http://cel.isiknowledge.com/
In addition:
1. Accidental gun deaths in 1998 were less than 1% of total accidental deaths.
By comparison, automobiles accounted for 42% of accidental deaths.
http://www.outdoors.net/site/features/feature.aspx+rn+38416+Forum+Firearms+ArticleCode+121+V+N
The annual number of fatal firearm accidents fell to an all-time low in 1995 of 1,400 in comparison to fatal accidents involving motor vehicles (43,900), falls (12,600), poisoning of all types (10,600), drowning (4,500), fires (4,100) and choking on an ingested object (2,800).1
There are no recorded cases
There are no recorded cases of people receiving accidental gunshot wounds, lethal or otherwise, from riding a mortorcycle.
>There are no recorded cases
>There are no recorded cases of people receiving accidental gunshot wounds, lethal or otherwise, from riding a mortorcycle.
There are no recorded cases of people being in a motorcycle accidents, lethal or otherwise, from handling a firearm, your point being?
Is that the best you can do?
Is that the best YOU can do?
>There are no recorded cases
By PeterPressure (not verified) | Wed, 03/19/2008 - 2:43pm
>There are no recorded cases of people receiving accidental gunshot wounds, lethal or otherwise, from riding a mortorcycle.
There are no recorded cases of people being in a motorcycle accidents, lethal or otherwise, from handling a firearm, your point being?
>There are no recorded cases of people receiving accidental gunshot wounds, lethal or otherwise, from riding a mortorcycle.
There are no recorded cases of people being in a motorcycle accidents, lethal or otherwise, from handling a firearm, your point being?
Is that the best YOU can do?
Oooh! Google Challenge!
I bet you can find a case of crashed motorcycle due to improper firearm handling.
Question is, will the words "bike week" be in the search terms?
When a motoercycle misfires,
When a motoercycle misfires, usually nobody dies.
Glancing blows
It would if you put it in your mouth first.
Cops are at least two
Cops are at least two minutes away, and that only if there's a dunkin’ donuts around. That's why I never go anywhere without my motorcycle.
Nice comments guys...
Looking at some of the comments here, as oppossed to on the forum the quote came from, why all this anger over firearms?
Where are the comments like "I am glad your wife is ok" "I am sorry that your wife had to experience such a traumatic event" No, what I see if a bunch of folks saying, OMG! What if the intruder was harmed!?!, will little disregard for the mans family. This is typical, make the intruder the victim and the victim the aggressor...
The anger's in your mind
There's a surge of very angry gun lovers posting very angry things here now, as they tend to do whenever anybody says "gun" anywhere on teh internets.
But really this case is otherwise remarkable or humorous to the regulars only because the reason some random kid walked into this guy's house is he left the front door unlocked. The peculiarity is in the disproportion of the silly fellow's Ramboesque response to the actual problem, which was he didn't lock his door. Where did this guy think he lived? Mayberry?
I'm glad this guy finally got the message - a few decades late, perhaps - that if you don't lock your door, people might just walk in. (And, in my experience, they're usually weirdos.)
The 'I'm going to lounge around in my PJs with my Walther' nonsense is just icing on the humor cake, becaue it's so ridiculous. I hope he's not disappointed that nobody walks into his house anymore once he starts locking his door.
True...almost...
Why should he have to lock his door - especially when the house is occupied? I know he should do it, but I for one am getting pretty pig sick of having to lock my door, buy alarm systems, install panic buttons (or other measures) because some scum-bag, low life members of our society decide they want to invade my home (or mug me, or anything else) rather than actually be productive members of society.
Certainly I agree one should be smart by taking sensible measures to avoid a deadly confrontation (and yes locking a door is one of them). It should also be noted that something drummed into gun owners early on (despite the bravado often spoken) is that even if armed using the gun should be the very last resort (in MA there is a whole world of legal pain if you do).
For the record, I don't carry on a regular basis (although in NH I can). I do have several firearms locked in a safe. But you bet your ass I can get them pronto. Oh, and I don't think I'll ever need to use them for that purpose, in the same way I don't think I'll ever need to use a fire-extinguisher.
He doesn't have to lock his door
He doesn't have to close his windows. He doesn't have to put his wallet inside his house instead of on his front porch.
But he's stupid if he doesn't.
And no gun is going to lock his front door for him.
Let's Hear it for the Dogs
If you read the original story, it wasn't even Mr. Homeowner who "saved the day with a gun".
It was the dogs barking that alerted Ms. Homeowner that chased off the intruder. The intruder clearly didn't bank on an occupied house or dogs and fled the scene.
No gun here, folks. Just dogs and people. As much as the crowd of high caliber would like you to think that it was a "Man Saves Wife and Property with Gub" story, it just ain't so. His gun had nothing to do with it. Their dogs and her good sense did.
What if he wants to put his
What if he wants to put his firearm on the front porch and his wallet inside his open door. What then?
Hmmm...
Okay. I got it.
Then he's stupid.
What do I win?
sorry. not poking fun at
sorry. not poking fun at you, poking fun at the arguments of others.
All in good fun
So what if he locks himself out by accident, and his cannon is in the house and there's like 500 naked savages from a bad movie coming at him and he can't get the door open?
Some would say it's a fact that door locks are an evil plot by the libruls.
"He doesn't have to close
"He doesn't have to close his windows. He doesn't have to put his wallet inside his house instead of on his front porch.
But he's stupid if he doesn't."
He doesn't have to own a firearm to protect his family, either.
But he's stupid if he doesn't.
NH dude, you don't have
NH dude, you don't have to
And statistically, in all likelihood, you'd get through life with no problems, never being a victim.
The thing is, most people looking to rob you, aren’t looking for a face full of lead. They're looking for a quick hit, where they can get in, grab some valuables and credit cards, and get out and pawn them fast.
Easiest way to prevent that isn't to go out, buy a gun, train on said gun, get all licenses, ect. That’s one way of doing it, but simply locking your doors and windows when you’re not home is the easiest, and has been proven the number one way to deter theft.
Let’s be reasonable here, dude.
Well, yeah...Of course when
Well, yeah...Of course when I'm not in you can bet your ass I'm going to lock my doors, use timers on my lights etc. It's when I'm at home that I'm more concerned (i.e. hot break-ins).
And as I said. I don't think I'll ever need to use a gun in self defense. I tend to avoid "bad parts" of towns and cities, I tend to live in nice neighborhoods. BUT as a last resort, you can bet your ass I would like the opportunity to use other means of defense.
My main reason for owning a gun? I like shooting (targets, not animals - I hate mornings so I could never be a hunter).
I think it has to do with
I think it has to do with the fact that the original forum post was well written, and everything turned out fine. His biggest mistake in his opinion was not being cautious, and locking his front door, which many will tell you is the single biggest mistake homeowners make, making their property susceptible to break ins.
then you read on, and you get some really loony paranoid comments below. I think it's just more interesting to dissect them.
No one every swapped the rolls there, we’re just finding that dissecting the gun owners who seem to live in the fear of being accosted or burglarized is a more interesting discussion.
Take your head out of the sand people!
I guess very few of you watch the news.
If I knew when and where I would need my gun, I wouldn't go to that place at that time. But because I don't, I choose to carry.
Don't forget, that when every second counts, the police are only minutes away.
Stay safe!
that's your right to carry a gun
but who needs your cynical attitude that gun totting is the only way to be safe and secure in the places you go...
Ahhhh -- what a wonderful
Ahhhh --
what a wonderful world it would be if the anti-gun folks could just live and let live. Instead, the reality is that they have an almost DNA-based urge to impose their views on lawful gun owners thru legislation, which in the end only affects the law abiding, not the criminals.
Almost DNA-based?
Wow. That's ignorant. What other behavioral associations are "almost DNA-based" in your opinion? Associations between melanin and being sub-human?
FOR THE RECORD, I actually own a gun. I don't keep it around because I don't hunt anymore, and, being heavily trained in risk assessment paradigms, consider guns to be more dangerous to me and my family than they are worth to keep around.
I don't think you read well for comprehension
that's your right to carry a gun but who needs your cynical attitude that gun totting is the only way to be safe and secure in the places you go...
to which you reply: Ahhhh -- what a wonderful world it would be if the anti-gun folks could just live and let live. Instead, the reality is that they have an almost DNA-based urge to impose their views on lawful gun owners thru legislation, which in the end only affects the law abiding, not the criminals.
blaa blaa. check the safety.
Gun's are a legal
Gun's are a legal commodity.
So where are these illegal guns from?
The answer is that some legally owned guns are being passed into the black market from legal owners and sellers.
You're never going to stop that by making laws more lax, and arming more people.
You need laws in place that responsible people can get them, and laws that cut down on this black market. Sorry if it’s a pain in the ass, but buying a pet fish and buying a gun should be very different. I cede you your right to own and pack if you cede to me we need to make sure it’s tough as nails for people that shouldn’t get a gun to get one.
But then again you’re also paranoid about the government too, so that will never be a good compromise.
Wrong!
Guns are not being passed onto the black market by legal gun owners! If they were then the police could find that "legal gun owner" selling those "legal guns" to the criminals and stop it from happening. Guns are being stolen from gunshops, distributors and gun owners then finding theri way onto the streets. If a legal gun owner sold a gun illegally then he becomes the criminal. Stricter gun laws will not stop a criminal from having, selling or committing a crime with a gun. Stricter gun laws will only affect citizens that abide by the law. Lets see heroin is illegal, yet it is the most widely used drug on the street today and readily available for the price of a couple of packs of cigarettes. Making it illegal or more difficult to buy/own a gun will not effect anyone that doesn't care about the law. People say gun supporters over react but we simply try to defend ourselves from others that want to take away our right, our hobby, our protection simply because you don't think we need it. Too Bad!
Ahhhh -- what a wonderful
Ahhhh --
what a wonderful world it would be if the anti-gun folks could just live and let live. Instead, the reality is that they have an almost DNA-based urge to impose their views on lawful gun owners thru legislation, which in the end only affects the law abiding, not the criminals.
They're Everywhere!
"I'm a paranoid schizophrenic with surround sound speakers" - Jim Infantino
Anon, you win for most
Anon, you win for most ridiculous post!
Raptures right around the corner too, Fred Phelps has been telling me, so make sure to get your savioring on too!
Why aren't the folks who dislike guns backing up their arguments
I find it very interesting that the anti-gun arguments seem to only consist of broad statements not backed up with any facts, whereas the pro-gun arguments are backed up with studies showing their facts.
I wonder why that is?
Because you're hallucinating?
Boo!
I just terrified a gun owner! Now he's going to fulminate aginst libruls while he mops up his pee.
Such Venom!
Notice how when they're "arguments" invariably break down, as they do time and time again, they drop all decorum and result to mud slinging and insults. One thing's for sure -- I'm glad the anti's don't have guns -- I'd truly be frightened with guns in such emotional people's hands. And this is the crux of it -- these folks fears are based on the projection onto other, rational people, on the uncontrolled fashion they KNOW they'd display if they found a firearm in their hands.....
Ants!
They're all over you! They're speaking to you!
And there he goes again. No
And there he goes again. No facts, only a loose claim that he's "terrified" me.
And where did I say I was a gun owner, anyway? Or are you assuming that because I'm pointing out that the emperor has no clothes, so to speak?
And if I am a gun owner, why would I be terrified of someone who obviously ISN'T?
At least the original thread was coherent.
Backwards
People without guns are less frightened than people with guns. People get guns because they're frightened. Easily frightened, paranoid, and wimpy people like Bernard Goetz need guns to feel secure.
Me, I don't need a gun. I'm the kind of guy who inspires fear without one.
I'm scared of you. I'm
I'm scared of you. I'm terrified because your ego is so huge that it might crush me if I get too close to it! :)
If you get too close
It might fall on you! Owch! That's 250 pounds of pure ego!
Well there's always someone
Well there's always someone out there with a 251 lb ego you know. :)
Shit
Now I'm scared. I'd better go eat some ribs or buy a gun.
Hmm... let me think...
"inspires fear"
Is this what you are after? Maybe they were right, and you WERE projecting your feelings all along.
What about the diminutive old lady who doesn't inspire fear? You saying she shouldn't have a chance on her own?
Dude
Get your own fucking name.
Obviously all grandmas everywhere need armor-plated humvees with turret-mounted machine guns. That'll take care of those punk kids who keep trying to sell them candy.
wow gareth
You really have issues!
No, really. You should take a deep breath and have a glass of water. No wonder the other guy up there ^ said you seem to be projecting your feelings. I agree. You sound violent.
The fantasy continues
Easily frightened, paranoid, and wimpy people like Bernard Goetz need guns to feel secure.
This would be the Bernard Goetz that was mugged once on a subway by a gang of thugs? The same Bernard Goetz that decided not to be a victim anymore and bought a gun to protect himself? The same Bernard Goetz that ended up having to draw and use that same gun to defend himself against another group of thugs?
You'd probably prefer that he submitted to the gang again. Because surely he could tell that this time they wouldn't kill them. But me, I don't read minds. When a group of thugs approaches me for an intimidating shakedown, I'll prepare for the worst. If you want to depend on their sense of humanity then have at it and good luck to you. But if you end up lying on the floor with your throat slit, let your last thought be "They warned me."
Dude
Thanks for the next episode of your fantasy. It was really cool. You should write a movie.
They... warned... me... ack
Cut! That's a wrap!
That's it?
Is that the best you can do? How about addressing the facts of the Goetz case? Nah, it's so much easier to toss a mindless wisecrack. Go ahead in your smug self-satisfied world. Let somebody else answer the hard questions.
Hard questions?
You're not answering any hard questions here. You're just stroking yourself. Hey, whatever floats your boat, kid. Just remember to wipe before you type.
How interesting is it?
You have all the facts. Answer the question yourself.
Because as Adam can attest
Because as Adam can attest to, it's been argued and argued before
Plus facts are what you make them on teh tubes, anyone can link to misleading, but favorable "facts".
We’ve linked to stuff in the past to only be told it’s hogwash, when in fact it’s the majorities consensus. Majority be damned.
We have people above arguing that gun ownership is up, but it’s not it’s down. We have them arguing crime is up, because they se more black people on teevee, but it’s also down.
What’s the point then?
>We have them arguing crime
>We have them arguing crime is up, because they se more black people on teevee, but it’s also down.
Way to toss in race dood, real smart...
Did anyone mention race before you did?
Actually gun ownership IS
Actually gun ownership IS up. Concealed Gun Permits in this state on the other hand are down. Some towns in Massachusetts make applicants jump through hoops to own firearms even though they never intend to carry them concealed. Also many people who had Lifetime FID cards never got rid of their firearms because they were unaware that keeping them was illegal when the law was changed. I myself legally brought firearms into the state when I moved here from NH a few years ago. Nothing in MA. gun laws state that they have to be registered. The info you have access to doesn't take into account any of these other guns. With the election coming up in November everybody and their brothers are stocking up on new guns and ammo. BTW, I tried using my name but was unable to.
Its ironic that the same
Its ironic that the same people who claim that gun owners are afriad and wimpy are the ones saying guns aren't the answer because they are dangerous and somebody might be hurt by them. What causes more unwanted injury, legal gun owners or criminals? If the answer is criminals, wouldnt that mean the gun owners are preparing for a statistically-occurring threat and the only ones who are irrationally fearful are those who choose to fear an inanimate gun rather than a living breathing criminal who its been proven is statistically more likely to harm you?
I hate to bring up an old
I hate to bring up an old cliche, but many people on NES has dozens of guns, and Tend Kennedy has killed more people with his car than any of these folks have with their guns.
I hate to bring up an old
I hate to bring up an old cliche, but many people on NES have dozens of guns, and Ted Kennedy has killed more people with his car than any of these folks have with their guns.
Isn't it ironic
First, no, it's not ironic. That's a misuse of the word. Look it up. It would be incongruous or coincidental or amusing.
Second, it's more incongruous and amusing that someone who posts as anonymous has such trouble telling apart people who post with usernames.