Right to Arm Bears

[vaxocentric]

My humble opinion is that the only thing that stops a bad person with a gun is a good person with a gun. Because the police are not always able or willing to respond in a timely manner (they have no legal obligation), I want to have the ability to defend myself, my family, my friends, and my community against those that would harm us

Comments

[pokeypenguin]

As with my vehicle, I am okay with you carrying in my house. (But if you see any mice, you have to agree to leave them for the cats!)

[vaxocentric]

Thanks, Chris.

And don't worry- your mice are safe from me (though I might give them eye-hugs, as I've been conditioned by iheartoothecae)

[mw]

As you're far from my only friend with a CHL, I don't offer any blanket statements that I accept all people carrying in my house/car. Instead, I evaluate on a case by case basis.

You, I'm fine with. Others, I may or may not judge competent to carry in my presence.

[pokeypenguin]

I agree with this, and was not intending to offer such a blanket statement my own self. (Though I don't know that many people with CHL.)

[dragonsbones]

"Who, specifically, do you believe wants to (or could want to) harm you in such a way that a gun would be both effective and required for defending yourself?"

"We have about 460 violent crimes for every 2100 of theirs."

^ A bit of a self-answer there, but for convenience's sake: The people who do violent crimes. If the criminal has a loaded gun, which they almost certainly will regardless of whether they have the right to have one, a bobby stick or bowie knife is never going to be an adequate defense.

[dragonsbones]

My argument isn't necessarily vax's argument, of course.

" if by "safe" you mean "less likely to be murdered". "

Actually, by "safe," I mean less likely to have my person or residence violated by thieves or other people looking to gain at my expense. I also mean having the ability and wherewithall to discourage said violators without being limited to hiding under my bed and dialing 9-1-1 and hoping the cops arrive in time to catch them.

You've already said that the UK has massively more violent crime compared to the US, so I'm led to believe that I'm right, and the decreased availability of guns means that people inclined to crime are less discouraged. There's still data missing, since many states do have tight gun control laws, however.

Also, dude, Happy Birthday!!

[dragonsbones]

I tend to agree, though I'm personally such a poor shot that I probably *shouldn't* own a gun, at least until I'm better at it ;)

It's not so much that I think people ought to be shooting up intruders, but more that I think intruders would intrude less if they had a reason to think homeowners had equal arms. Burglary becomes less of an attractive living if the risk of injury or death increases.

Like with any weapon, when law-abiding citizens agree to give it up for peace, the less law-abiding citizens kind of don't give it up and we're outmatched by criminals. Boo to that.

[pokeypenguin]

Like with any weapon, when law-abiding citizens agree to give it up for peace, the less law-abiding citizens kind of don't give it up and we're outmatched by criminals. Boo to that.

As far as I can tell, the fundamental difference between people who think like this and people who think like I believe Ryan is above, that sufficient government control would prevent criminals from having guns too, so effectively as to reduce the overall homicide rate per capita, is whether or not one trusts the government to have control over the guns or not.

I don't mean whether one trusts their ability to maintain gun control so much as whether one trusts them to be the gatekeeper once they have accomplished it.

I don't have any particularly relevant point to the topic-at-hand, and I don't know whether it applies to anyone in this conversation or not. It's just a trend I've noticed.

[pokeypenguin]

Just to be clear, I wasn't trying to put any such words in your mouth, and was really focussing on the "so as to effectively reduce the overall homicide rate per capita" part.

That said: understood, and it's a pretty good point. I'm just for myself unconvinced that the US could reduce gun ownership even as effectively as you are saying, without instituting draconian penalties for gun ownership. The history of the country results in them being ubiquitous by now, and that's difficult to come back from even if it's desirable. Far more so at our population levels than even the same ownership rate would have been in European countries, I expect.

[kamoriaha]

I want to be like my great aunt who was 93, could barely walk, but was able to defend herself from people stealing her chickens and attempting to break into her house by holding a rifle almost bigger than she was. Actually, it might have been since she shrunk so much as she got older.

She never had to shoot anyone, but she also never lost any of her property despite having people illegally enter her property on a regular yearly basis (I'd like to say on average twice a year, but like, I don't really have the slightest clue and she's passed on now, so I can't ask).

[vaxocentric]

"God made man, but Samuel Colt made them equal!"

She sounds like she was a very interesting lady!

[kamoriaha]

I'm betting she was, sadly, even though I saw her on a pretty regular bi-yearly basis, I have no idea what she said. She spoke Cajun most all of the time and when she didn't I couldn't understand her well.