General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: the gun nut kills 38 year old thread got me wondering [View all]Xyzse
(8,217 posts)See, I don't have any guns but that is on me.
I have a bunch of swords, knives and other things however. All of them way beyond the reach of children.
There are no children in the house as well.
Either way, the niece and nephew are being taught how to treat weapons properly. Martial arts is a great system for teaching self defense, responsibility and learning to avoid conflict if the school focuses on that. There is currently no equivalent of such a thing with guns. Gun courses don't go that far unless you go in to military.
They are not allowed to touch such things without adult supervision. Besides, I am skilled enough to disarm them even years from now. In regards to guns, I wouldn't be that confident.
My issue is that many who have guns and those around them do not have the necessary respect for the arms that they carry. There is no actual training for some and many times it is at a bare minimum. It is why at certain times, I think mandatory insurance is necessary since I am not convinced people think about how dangerous these things are, particularly "accidental discharge". Just so, that if they were to shoot their toe off or something else, they have something to pay medical fees and collateral damage.
I am also convinced that these jerk-wads that go around brandishing their guns in public do a disservice to those who own treat their arms responsibly. Problem is, there are too many jerk-wads and stupid people out there. Sure, there are those who help out incidentally, but in general, chances are, if one has a gun carried, it offers a false sense of security that when whipped out, more likely than not they would just add to collateral damage.
If a person has a gun, and they brandish it in front of me, I am pretty much screwed. I mean, running is not the best option since more often than not, all it would mean is getting shot in the back.
Now with the Stand your ground laws and self defense laws, if I die while protecting myself from a guy with a gun, chances are they would say I am this disreputable guy who cold cocked someone and they had to shoot me for self defense.
Back then, what I would do, would be to make an assessment of if I am going to die any way or not, given what I would lose. If it is only my wallet, fine, that's no problem, if it is getting someone I am with hurt or I am going to get killed any way, then I'd do something physical. My aim would be to incapacitate them by any means necessary. So nowadays, the current laws makes the victims and defenders even more powerless against bullies who have guns(legally or illegally).
Any way, I digress. If it is in regards to guns at home. I could care less, as long as it is stored properly. If kids happen to get to them, I would consider the owner liable for not storing it correctly. If they shoot and it goes through the wall and kills a neighbor, particularly if they are owning assault weapons and so forth, then they should also be liable, even if they are supposedly protecting themselves from an intruder. So in essence, this only strengthens my belief that guns should be subject to mandatory insurance and training.