The problem is that too many gun owners are more afraid of ****CRIMINALS**** and/or

[hedgehog]

the ******GOVERNMENT***** than they are of massacres. Seriously, these people firmly believe that they are targeted by thieves, rapists and murderers and that they alone will be responsible for protecting themselves, their families and their belongings. Exactly what the government is going to do I don't know, but these people are absolutely convinced that they will need their guns to resist. (I was going to put some snark about Red Dawn here, but I think we need to address these fears seriously.)

Anyways - until we can get these people past these very primal fears, we won't make much progress with gun control. Nothing happened after 1963, then nothing happened after 1968, then nothing happened when even George Wallace was shot. I haven't been shocked by gun violence in many, many years.

[liberal N proud]

1. Is that the problem?

I will entertain any thoughts as to why except the more guns line.

[hedgehog]

4. I recommend reading "The Eleven Nations of North America" by Colin Woodward

http://www.businessinsider.com/the-11-nations-of-the-united-states-2015-7

to explain my theory. That book discusses how regional American cultures have different world views and how it effects politics today. Until we who don't need guns understand the view points of those who think they do, we'll be talking past each other after every shooting.

IIRC, Michael Moore's "Bowling for Columbine" expressed a similar viewpoint - that it is White America's fear of the "other" tha generate the devotion to guns. I don't think it's any coincidence that "the right to bear arms" ha become such a hot button issue just when White Americans are about to become just another minority.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

2. Despite the fact that violence in general has been dropping for decades

they're consumed with their fantasies that they're going to save themselves and their families from hordes of home invaders, muggers, and rapists.

[mike_c]

3. I've long thought that to be the case....

My age begins with a six and I've never owned a gun. Have never needed one. I can't imagine going through life afraid of everyone around me, feeling like I need to protect myself from some amorphous but constant fear of attack.

[tech3149]

7. I'm with you

Of the same age, lived and worked in areas that most white middle America considered a risk to life and property. There were times I feared for my safety but never to the point of paranoia. I never even had the urge to have a gun of any sort.
I have no doubt that as a nation we have a sort of psychopathy driven by sensationalist popular media and news coverage.
I see little chance of reducing gun violence until we can honestly address our propensity and reliance on violent means to solve our problems.

[TipTok]

9. Do you own a fire extinguisher?

Do you suffer from an amorphous but constant fear of fire?

[hedgehog]

13. I've never heard of anyone accidently killed by a fire extinguisher -

nor have I heard of a mass killing by fire extinguisher.

[TipTok]

14. .... and?

What does that have to do with the motivation to have a tool on hand that likely won't be used but if necessary could prove useful?

[hedgehog]

15. Why do you think a gun may prove necessary?

[TipTok]

32. It is possible...

... that I or someone within my range of influence, may be the victim of a crime and I personally believe that a gun could prove useful to protect or render aid.

[hedgehog]

37. Now, here's where the discussion can begin -

define your range of influence, and determine what the actual odds are that you and yours may be a victim of a crime. Limit the numbers to those crimes that actually warrant a gun. For example, would you shoot someone stealing a tv from a neighbor who isn't home? What if someone breaks into your parked car to steal the radio. Now, what are the real odds that you may encounter a criminal? What are the odds that your guns may end up harming someone in your family? What alternatives do you have to make your environs safer for everyone?

[TipTok]

41. Range can vary wildly...

From arms reach to my wife calling me on the phone to come where she is to render aid.

Would I shoot someone stealing my neighbors TV? Not unless they presented a threat to my safety. I would possibly draw on them, if the specific situation required it, to ensure that they would stay where they are until law enforcement arrived. Same answer for both scenarios.

Based on the places where I live and work, the odds of needing my weapon are statistically low but so are a lot of things I prepare for. Make a plan, do the prep work and don't worry about it.

My weapons are secured in such a way that they are easily accessible to me and to no one else so there is no threat to anyone. I train regularly and am proficient in the use of my weapon.

Overall, a net positive...

[tabasco]

20. Then use the right tool.

I can "protect my home" from the scary boogeyman with a machete, baseball bat, shotgun or bolt-action rifle.

I don't need a semi-auto assault weapon or a handgun.

Would you install a million dollar sprinkler system in a double-wide?

[TipTok]

27. If your average firearm cost a million bucks you might have a point...

[tabasco]

29. If tens of thousands of Americans were not killed every year by handguns and semi-autos,

you might have a point.

How many people were killed last year by fire extinguishers? LOL.

[daleanime]

28. I have a nice cast iron frying pan....

that I'm fairly sure will break at least a few bones.

[tabasco]

30. Ouch!

[uppityperson]

17. Which google shows no mass murders but individual and of course accidental.

Accidental death, there are many more over the years
http://citizen.co.za/399385/mpumalanga-man-killed-after-fire-extinguisher-explosion/

Murdered
http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2009/07/03/man-who-killed-gay-lover-with-a-fire-extinguisher-jailed-for-life/

Call me a pedantic nitpicker if you want.

[TipTok]

26. That word is ruined for me...

[Tommy_Carcetti]

35. Do fire extinguishers shoot out fire to stop fire, per chance?

No?

Then your analogy meets fail.

[TipTok]

42. Ok.. I'll bite...

What?

Why? Should my gun fire human beings intent on causing harm at criminals? I don't think that would fit in your average holster.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

43. Fire extinguishers and guns aren't remotely similar.

Even if a gun could potentially be used in a matter of self-defense against another act of aggression, it could just as easily be used for the purposes of that same aggression.

Whereas a fire extinguisher only defends/against the danger, which by the way is more often than not a matter of accident or Act of God (much unlike a criminal act). It cannot be used to create the same danger in which it was designed to fight against.

[TipTok]

44. A tool is a tool...

Everything that happens with it comes from the person handling it.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

45. Except different tools have different intended purposes.

And a gun, while indeed a tool, is a most extra-ordinary one (in the literal, original sense of the word).

Gun enthusiasts don't wish to acknowledge that fact.

[TipTok]

47. The intended purpose of a firearm is to expel a projectile at a high rate of speed with accuracy...

Anything beyond that is on the operator.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

48. Into one of three types of targets.

Human, animal, or paper.

With the first two, the expelling of the projectile into the target is meant to inflict injury and/or death upon the target.

With the latter, the expelling of the projectile into the target is meant to simulate the accuracy in which one could expel the projectile into the human or animal target upon a later unspecified and perhaps uncertain date.

I'm saying this without any sort of moral judgment upon any specific situation in which one may use a gun, but that's what guns are designed to do and the only thing guns are designed to do: They are designed to injure, kill, or simulate injury or killing. There's no other purpose (other than starter pistols, which use blank projectiles).

[Calista241]

46. Actually, one of the main ways to "contain" a major fire

In California is by setting backfires. Essentially the burn all the flammable stuff before the main fire gets there.

All those firefighters you see pictures of are actually going around and setting fires, and then putting those fires out.

[kcr]

51. If my fire extinguisher was more likely to cause me harm

than protect me, and other people were going around and killing massive amounts of people with them, I'd gladly turn mine in.

[olddots]

5. Have you watched TV lately ????

is our society super violent or is it cheaper to make entertainment full of violent fear mongerging actors & good stories cost more than meat puppets and bimbos .

[hack89]

6. I have never owned guns out of fear

Last edited Mon Oct 5, 2015, 12:03 PM - Edit history (1)

I have always lived in safe areas. My use of guns for the past 40 years has been purely recreational.

[hedgehog]

8. I have neighbors who have hunted in my 60 acre back yard

for 25 some years now. They are careful not to shoot unless they know what they're shooting at, and some years they don't get a deer. We have to stop letting the NRA and others pretend that gun control is about eliminating hunting.

[Snobblevitch]

11. I'm not certain,

but I don't think the NRA believes that gun control is about eliminating hunting. It's the pro-control side that brings up hunting.

[hedgehog]

38. I wanted to make clear that I am not opposed to hunting with fire arms.

which means that I think some firearms can be kept safely in the home.

[ileus]

10. I don't mind protecting myself.

I do mind that the same folks that want to ban guns, want to make sure schools remain easy targets.

[hedgehog]

12. See - you're bringing up what I am talking about -

you're assuming that you will have to protect yourself and further claim that schools are easy targets, implying that guns are needed to protect schools. For many of us, the question is, protect yourself from what? For many of us, people are in more danger from the guns they keep than they are from whatever they think they need the guns for. At the same time, many gun owners consider those without guns hopeless naive fools who don't recognize the dangers around them.

[ibegurpard]

16. we have a media that peddles fear 24/7

That's what Bowling for Columbine was about. And the NRA uses that fear to raise money for right wing causes. It is no longer a gun organization.

[uppityperson]

18. ++++++++++

[hedgehog]

19. I am reminded of the discussions regarding vaccines -

a small number of people are injured by vaccines every year. Overall though, we are all much safer if we all get vaccinated. It's a matter of playing the odds.

So - yes, there is a small chance that you may be the victim of a criminal. Overall though, you will be safer without the guns in your house and all of us would be safer without so many guns in circulation.

[Snobblevitch]

21. It makes sense

to fear murderers, rapists, and thieves more than the threat of a massacre. Mass shootings are an exceedingly rare way to be killed.

[hedgehog]

24. But the chances of any one person being the victim of crime are very small. Maybe we have to take

another look at mass shootings and stop thinking of them as a distinct category from other crimes. Guns are readily available because so many people fear crime. How much does the ready availability of guns enable crime?

[Snobblevitch]

31. There are areas in which having a gun makes sense.

There are rural areas in which the response time for LEO to show up can be an hour. There are urban areas that can be fangerous. I think self awareness is likely more important than being armed.

The majority of gun deaths, other than suicides, is from criminal activity. What happened in Oregon is rare, and I don't know how to stop it. Even our Democratic Governor of Minnesota is skeptical about what laws can stop mass shootings. A deranged person will likely always be able to get a gun.

http://www.twincities.com/politics/ci_28912796/gov-dayton-skeptical-new-gun-laws-will-stop

The recent shooter's guns were purchased legally. The only thing that could stopped him is if his mother tried to get him some help, but I don't know if she saw any reason to do so.

[hedgehog]

39. What are the actual crime statistics in rural areas?

How many people are victimized by people they know rather than by strangers? As I said above, what are the odds that you would use a gun to protect yourself from a criminal versus the odds that that same gun would be used to harm you or yours?

I live in a rural area, and I worry more about the response time of the local volunteer fire department than I do about the response time for the police. Crime here seems mostly to consist of high school dropouts caught robbing empty houses. At that, most crime takes place in town rather than out here. The most common crime involving a personal attack tends to involve some dispute over drugs.

If I wanted to limit robberies in my county, the first thing I would do is shut down all the places buying gold. That would do a lot more to eliminate crime around here than all the guns in the world. Stolen gold jewelry comes in and it goes right into the melting crucible and is never recovered.

[Snobblevitch]

50. Even with a low threat of being targeted by criminals

I do not believe someone should be denied the right to defend themselves.

[Vinca]

22. The paranoid gun idiots are the ones making the country unsafe.

[Old Union Guy]

23. I am more afraid of criminals and the government than I am of massacres.

Not a gun owner BTW, but that's not the point.

Massacres are very low probability.

[hedgehog]

25. Why are you afraid of the government?

[Old Union Guy]

34. I don't fear government to the point of hyperventilation like a right wing gun nut, but ...

... you know the police are not always your friend.

Right?

Likewise with fear of criminals.

Not a gun owner nor particularly worried, but when it comes to probabilities being a crime victim or a victim of police misconduct is higher than getting caught in a mass shooting.

Try and come up with a more cogent reason for whatever it is you want to do about the problem.

[hedgehog]

40. Are you saying people should carry guns so they can shoot at a bad cop?

Somehow, shooting at police officers doesn't seem a viable strategy.

The criminal is someone you know ( a neighbor, acquaintance or abusive spouse) or a stranger. If you know someone who could do you harm, what can you do to prevent the violence? At the same time, what are the odds that a stranger will attack you with a gun, whether you are the only victim or whether you are involved in a mass shooting?

[Lizzie Poppet]

52. That very question has troubled me.

I legally carry concealed. So if I were to witness, in person, some of the terrible cases of violent police misconduct we read about all too often, would I act to defend the victim? Would I be willing to royally screw my life (or possibly end it) to defend a stranger from bad cops? Particularly if it looked like the victim was going to die or be maimed (that is, when waiting and hoping the system dealt with the problem wasn't going to save the victim)?

Despite mulling that one over a good bit, I have no answer. I'm not sure that's the kind of question anyone can answer without actually being in the situation.

[Old Union Guy]

53. Don't put words in my mouth.

The point is it does not prove RWers are stupid or irrational to fear crime (or cops) more than massacres.

That is all.

[Lee-Lee]

33. I've actually defended myself with a gun without firing a shot

Against a man who had a good 100 pounds and a foot height advantage on me who had a knife. It was an instant equalizer against a man who thought the short woman in the parking garage was an easy target- the dynamic changed from him feeling he had every advantage to him turning to run.

I've never had one of my guns used in a massacre nor been threatened by one.

I'll just leave my decisions on what I do based on my leaned experience instead of someone else's supposition about what's best for me.

[Puzzledtraveller]

36. I would say many gun owners own them out of some level of fear.

I think the issue tends to be over simplified though. We often have a image of the type of person we think owns guns when violence like this happens and though it may be correct it doesn't paint the complete picture. We will make more progress if we acknowledge that is isn't just one segment of the population that owns guns. I was surprised to learn my aunt has a gun in her home and she's always been vocal about violence, domestic violence, and has been a reliable democrat and liberal as much as I can tell. I use that as an example. But, I have an uncle and grandfather who have an arsenal and are avid hunters and collectors and very anti government. I would say, out of those two examples, which one is most likely to contribute to gun violence?

[clarice]

49. The government has nothing to do with it. It's that pesky second amendment thingy. nt

[Eleanors38]

54. I keep one firearm for bedside protection, no big deal.

Several others are locked in a safe for sporting-hunting use.

I believe the big majority of some 80,000,000 firearms owners have similar arrangements, save for the hunting aspect: Less than 20% of gun-owners hunt.

Don't see much problem, here.