Does carrying a gun make you safer, or make you a target?

[irishScott]

Sounds good. How many of those are defending the home?

Does it matter? Your scenarios involve being blitzed, which is the situation most homeowners find themselves in during a home invasion or robbery. In fact I'd argue that home defense situations are even better proof that the presence of guns helps more than it hurts. In the case of home defense the gun is often not on the defender's person and is less accessible.

 

[irishScott]

I agree. By definition a deadly weapon decreases the safety of people merely by its presence.

Assuming sarcasm, it's a wonder that restaurants are constant bloodbaths; what with the dozens of long, sharp knives floating around. It's amazing how deadly weapons aren't all that deadly when they aren't being used as weapons. Guns are not unstable explosives.

 

[SlitheryDee]

I think it makes you safer. Attackers are more likely to abort the attack if they know one or more of the people they are engaging are armed.

 

[smackababy]

If you are in a liquor store and 2 guys run in with guns drawn to rob the place, do you draw your weapon? You don't get to sit around and think about it either, like you can right now. It has to be draw or not draw before they decide to shoot you, if that's what they feel like doing. You can't know during the event.

I know two guys entering a liquor store with weapons drawn is a threat. I immediately draw and if their weapons are pointing anywhere in my direction, I'd fire as well. I am not going to put my life willingly in the hands of another, especially one whose can take it on a whim.

 

[moonbogg]

I know two guys entering a liquor store with weapons drawn is a threat. I immediately draw and if their weapons are pointing anywhere in my direction, I'd fire as well. I am not going to put my life willingly in the hands of another, especially one whose can take it on a whim.

OK, so you draw on sight. If that's the case, you would likely end up dead IMO. Also, are you going to yell, "I have a CCW! I have a CCW!" as you draw your weapon?

 

[smackababy]

OK, so you draw on sight. If that's the case, you would likely end up dead IMO.

Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.

If two guys come into a store willing to shoot someone, they are going to anyway. I am not going to sit around and hope it isn't me.

 

[Humpy]

Assuming sarcasm, it's a wonder that restaurants are constant bloodbaths; what with the dozens of long, sharp knives floating around. It's amazing how deadly weapons aren't all that deadly when they aren't being used as weapons. Guns are not unstable explosives.

No, not sarcasm. I'm commenting on the overly simplistic poll that has little value.

The outcome of these threads is pretty much the same every time.

Clearly, if one finds themselves in a situation where a gun will allow the ability to defend against an attack then yes, it will provide some defense. It does not make the situation safer. Surprise, gun battles are not safe. And yes, if someone was shooting at me I would like to be able to shoot back. So what.

That argument does not support the claim that having more guns will somehow reduce the occurrence of the use of guns. It just doesn't make sense.

 

[moonbogg]

Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.

If two guys come into a store willing to shoot someone, they are going to anyway. I am not going to sit around and hope it isn't me.

But you don't know what they are willing to do, that's the point. By drawing your weapon, you might end up dead when otherwise they might just grab the money and leave.
So, having a gun if they want to kill you is good. But you negate that safety because if all they wanted was money, then you put yourself at risk unnecessarily. You make one situation safer, but make the other situation more dangerous.
Most of the time people just want money. Most of the time, they don't want to kill. The suicide runs we see in the news are more rare, so it makes more sense to hand over the money and not draw the weapon.

 

[justoh]

Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.

If two guys come into a store willing to shoot someone, they are going to anyway. I am not going to sit around and hope it isn't me.

Just point to the poll results. In his world, clearly facts are opinion based, and you're the winner.

 

[smackababy]

But you don't know what they are willing to do, that's the point. By drawing your weapon, you might end up dead when otherwise they might just grab the money and leave.
So, having a gun if they want to kill you is good. But you negate that safety because if all they wanted was money, then you put yourself at risk unnecessarily. You make one situation safer, but make the other situation more dangerous.
Most of the time people just want money. Most of the time, they don't want to kill. The suicide runs we see in the news are more rare, so it makes more sense to hand over the money and not draw the weapon.

I do know what they are willing to do. They are willing to use a firearm while committing a felony and willing to threaten my life, as well as others. I know what I am willing to do as well, and that isn't stand for that kind of bullshit.

I might end up dead, you're right. But, I might not. And when it comes to "going to end up dead or not", I am stacking the deck in my favor as much as possible. I won't sit around and allow myself to be a victim, at the mercy of those unwilling to follow the laws.

 

[moonbogg]

Just point to the poll results. In his world, clearly facts are opinion based, and you're the winner.

I live in the same world you do. You know, the one where too many people die from gun deaths.

I think the country should try an all or nothing approach. For a decade, we should hand out CCW's like candy to anyone eligible. Loosen any gun laws that are currently restrictive and let nature take its course. Everything the NRA advocates regarding gun rights should be respected and allowed. Let things go for a decade that way and then reevaluate.
If things are worse and people don't like it, then no one can say its because we didn't have enough guns or gun freedoms. We should do everything advocated by the pro gun side of the debate, honestly and thoroughly.
If that doesn't work, then all guns should be banned and confiscated with rare exception.
How's that? All or nothing.

 

[tHa ShIzNiT]

Owning a gun decreases the safety of you and your family 99.99% of the time. In that 0.01% when you're actually the victim of a home invasion, I'll concede that it might make you more safe if you're well trained and able to calmly act.

 

[smackababy]

I live in the same world you do. You know, the one where too many people die from gun deaths.

I think the country should try an all or nothing approach. For a decade, we should hand out CCW's like candy to anyone eligible. Loosen any gun laws that are currently restrictive and let nature take its course. Everything the NRA advocates regarding gun rights should be respected and allowed. Let things go for a decade that way and then reevaluate.
If things are worse and people don't like it, then no one can say its because we didn't have enough guns or gun freedoms. We should do everything advocated by the pro gun side of the debate, honestly and thoroughly.
If that doesn't work, then all guns should be banned and confiscated with rare exception.
How's that? All or nothing.

Perhaps, when you actually understand where the vast majority of gun crime happens, you'd stop being incredibly stupid with your suggestions. The laws surrounding the ownership and availability of a gun doesn't mean anything to someone who wants to shoot someone.

The laws regarding stealing can't be tightened anymore, yet people still steal.

 

[corwin]

Owning a gun decreases the safety of you and your family 99.99% of the time. In that 0.01% when you're actually the victim of a home invasion, I'll concede that it might make you more safe if you're well trained and able to calmly act.

And 99.99% of the time you pull statistics out of your ass...the other .01% you just flat out lie

 

[tHa ShIzNiT]

Owning a gun decreases the safety of you and your family 99.99% of the time. In that 0.01% when you're actually the victim of a home invasion, I'll concede that it might make you more safe if you're well trained and able to calmly act.

I should add that the decrease in safety is extremely negligible. But it is still a decrease in safety.

 

[smackababy]

And 99.99% of the time you pull statistics out of your ass...the other .01% you just flat out lie

He is right though. In most situations there is a degradation of safety having a gun present, even if it is so incredibly small it is meaningless.

 

[moonbogg]

Perhaps, when you actually understand where the vast majority of gun crime happens, you'd stop being incredibly stupid with your suggestions. The laws surrounding the ownership and availability of a gun doesn't mean anything to someone who wants to shoot someone.

The laws regarding stealing can't be tightened anymore, yet people still steal.

What do you mean? Pro gun people say that having more guns is the answer. We need to be able to defend ourselves and create credible deterrence. I'm saying do all of that for a decade and see if it helps. I'm saying give the pro gun side everything they want for a decade. Follow all of their suggestions to help with gun crime and see where we end up in a decade. How is that so stupid?

 

[tHa ShIzNiT]

And 99.99% of the time you pull statistics out of your ass...the other .01% you just flat out lie

Meh. What % of the time do you think home invasions are occurring? 0.02%? The studies are all out there. Owning a gun simply increases your chance to die by accidental gun death, and your family's.

 

[corwin]

Meh. What % of the time do you think home invasions are occurring? 0.02%? The studies are all out there. Owning a gun simply increases your chance to die by accidental gun death, and your family's.

First off reading comprehension...OP says "carrying" a gun, nothing about having one in the home/home invasions, even if they technically would go hand in hand.

Second, statistical insignificance of "acidental gun death" is pretty much meaningless

 

[JulesMaximus]

I'd say it would depend entirely on the situation and there is no way you could make a blanket statement like it makes you more safe or it makes you less safe.

 

[justoh]

I live in the same world you do. You know, the one where too many people die from gun deaths.

I think the country should try an all or nothing approach. For a decade, we should hand out CCW's like candy to anyone eligible. Loosen any gun laws that are currently restrictive and let nature take its course. Everything the NRA advocates regarding gun rights should be respected and allowed. Let things go for a decade that way and then reevaluate.
If things are worse and people don't like it, then no one can say its because we didn't have enough guns or gun freedoms. We should do everything advocated by the pro gun side of the debate, honestly and thoroughly.
If that doesn't work, then all guns should be banned and confiscated with rare exception.
How's that? All or nothing.

Err...

 

[moonbogg]

Err...

Oh, OK.. So doing everything the pro gun side wants for a decade to see if it actually helps gets an "Err" from you. Got it.

 

[tHa ShIzNiT]

First off reading comprehension...OP says "carrying" a gun, nothing about having one in the home/home invasions, even if they technically would go hand in hand.

Second, statistical insignificance of "acidental gun death" is pretty much meaningless

You've refuted your own argument there. Carrying a gun means owning a gun. Owning a gun means you and your family are more likely to die due to an accident with said gun.

I'll agree with your second statement. Its very, very unlikely to happen. But its more likely to happen than if you didn't own a gun.

You just have to be extremely responsible/cognizant if you do own a gun, every single day.

 

[MongGrel]

I'd say it would depend entirely on the situation and there is no way you could make a blanket statement like it makes you more safe or it makes you less safe.

What he said, I'm gonna go look for sexy chick pics awhile

:biggrin:

 

[corwin]

You've refuted your own argument there. Carrying a gun means owning a gun. Owning a gun means you and your family are more likely to die due to an accident with said gun.

I'll agree with your second statement. Its very, very unlikely to happen. But its more likely to happen than if you didn't own a gun.

You just have to be extremely responsible/cognizant if you do own a gun, every single day.

Actually no...you attempted to isolate it to the home, mist self defense uses with guns are outside the home, hence carrying...and comparing self defense uses (conservatively 100k+ per year) to accidental shootings is not even close, self defense uses are dramatically more likely, hence 99.99% of the time you would be safer...you are more likely to be able to protect yourself with a gun if you have one.

I do agree you have to be responsible every moment of every day though