Who's responsible for your personal security?

[left15]

The police?

Your Landlord?

Your Bodyguard?

Your Mother?

You?

I'm of the mindset that I am responsible for my own security, and that with proper training a firearm is the best tool for the job.

What does everyone else think?

[On Par]

1. You Need To Invest....

..in a good Anti-Virus security program. They're immune to guns.

OP

[skippythwndrdog]

2. I am.

The Police are there to investigate crime, not prevent it against me.

[turnkey]

3. No one is legally responsible for my personal safety.

I gladly take on that job.

[jody]

4. To defend self and property, "firearm is the best tool for the job", the

choice of professionals like law enforcement and criminals.

[Jack_DeLeon]

5. myself.

[T Town Jake]

6. Me, myself & I. (n/t)

[cms]

21. Me

and me

[Name removed]

7. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[turnkey]

8. A smart mother indeed.

She must have brought her boy up right! ;)

[Atigun]

9. Smart Mother

Perhaps, but I assure you that she would never, ever agree with DU. LOL. Well, neither do I, actually, but its great entertainment. Shall have to mind my PC manners though, the last time that I slipped, Free Republic gave me the boot. Another glass of Cabernet and the moderator is likely to add a tombstone to my zot.

[left15]

10. personal security is the main issue for many people who are

for gun rights.

Personal security is main reason I own firarms. If someone can show me a better solution, I'll listen. After reading some posts, I am now considering pepper spray for some situations.

It is also the one issue I haven't seen anyone who supports gun control actually touch. (but I haven't been around that long.)

I don't see the police as the solution based on my personal experience. The only time I ever called out the police (bout 8 yrs ago) they called back 20 minutes later and asked for directions!

Since I can't afford professional security (like our elected officials get). That leaves me.



I only asked the question I really wanted an answer to: What does everyone think?

I kept my original post short, so my question was clear, and to avoid other bits of information (like this post) where people can go off on tangets.

[Maria Celeste]

11. It took me being assaulted...

to realize that I am first foremost and always responsible for my own protection.

This issue is so strong with me that it overrides all other progressive concerns I have. I will not support someone who does not support my right to self defense. It is my highest priority.

[slackmaster]

12. I am my own first line of defense

My philosophy is to avoid getting into danger if possible, then do whatever is necessary to protect myself if that fails.

[Paladin]

13. Threads Like This One......

....don't get really interesting unless they devolve into a discussion of "Who's Responsible If I Get Murdered?" In one memorable Gungeon thread a couple of years ago, one fervent RKBAer claimed that Kitty Genovese (look her up on Google) was ultimately responsible for her own murder, because she wasn't packing a gun to blow away the creep who knifed her to death while her neighbors sat around and let it happen. This response was promptly disowned by the other gun militants, which I thought was a bit disingenuous....

[slackmaster]

14. Sorry to disappoint you Paladin

I guess some of us gun "militants" aren't militant enough for your amusement.

[Paladin]

15. But If You Claim.....

...as is so often the case in the Gungeon, that we are all primarily responsible for our own safety---you know, the whole tiresome "Cops suck, we're all living in the jungle, so stock up on guns n' ammo and take some Bad Guys with you when you go" riff we see over and over around here---doesn't it follow that if somebody nails you and you aren't in a position to put up a fight at the time, it's pretty much your fault, for ducking your self-protection responsibility?

Now THAT'S amusing.......

[slackmaster]

16. You should know by now that does not describe my position

I've consistently said that only those who are willing and able to take on the moral responsibilities that accompany carrying a weapon, and who really want to carry a weapon, should do so.

[cms]

20. Who ever said anything about...

living in the jungle and killing bad guys. All that some of us are trying to say is that we can't afford to wait for the cops to show up. Where I live it would take police at least 30 mins. to show up...and thats on a good day. Toss in some snow covered roads or some other variable, it could be over an hour. I dont' want to sit in my house for an hour while an armed burglar tries to steal my property or harm my family. If I'm considered a militant for wanting to protect my family, then I guess thats what I am... Protection is my responsibility until the police show up.

[Peak_Oil]

64. Yes, quite amusing.

If I drive my Lexus home to my gated parking, roll up the windows, set the alarm, wave at the video camera in the lot, and take the elevator upstairs, and my car gets stolen anyway that night, that's one thing. I don't think it was my fault.

If I drive my lexus down to Crenshaw, leave the windows down and a nice stereo blaring, lights on, keys in the ignition and motor running, and head into a bar for a couple drinks, and my car's not there three hours later, I still don't think it was my fault.


But I should have known better.

[Retired AF Dem]

72. Saw this today

Cheaper to buy a good gun than an Alarm system if you live in some of these places.

Police in California City to Ignore Burglar Alarms
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=1896&ncid=1896&e=4&u=/nm/20050121/us_nm/crime_alarms_dc

[Township75]

17. I didn't think you would answer the question...

I notice that when questions like this are thrown out, the anti gunners are often absent...and they usually only show up to change the subject.

BTW - I am the only one responsible for my own protection

[Cooper]

19. i wouldn't go that far, but

i'd say that people who aren't aware of their responsiblity for their own safety get less sympathy from me when bad things happen.

there is a difference between responsibility and guilt. you are responsible for your own safety. if you are murdered, the GUILT is on your murder. if you are irresponsible, as far as safety is concerned, you're more likely to be murdered.

carrying a weapon is a personal choice. i don't fault anyone who doesn't carry a weapon. but i do fault people who have feel no responsiblity for their safety. people who think they shouldn't be careful walking the streets, people that don't lock their doors, or people who don't fight back when confronted with violence. when they are murdered/raped/whatever, i feel for them about the same sympathy that i feel for someone who died in a wreck while not wearing a seatbelt.

the carrying of a weapon is just one aspect of the personal responsibility for safety.

[MrSandman]

18. Of course it is the PD and...

the Bush administration. There is a whole Department devoted to that. I just need some plastic and duct tape for my windows and I am secure.

[anonymous44]

22. The government and the police

are going to take care of me. Bush and cops will protect me.

[MrSandman]

23. Because they know what is best...n/t

[alwynsw]

24. I rely on the great Zoombah.

I take over when he's on his coffee break.

[alwynsw]

25. Another, more graphic idea of responsibility

[Wickerman]

26. Does she have safety glasses on?

it looks like it. I cn't tell if she has hearing protection. I'll bet she does. THAT is responsible gun ownership! Glad to see she has used her 30 seconds well.

That's it, I ain't got nothing else.

[jody]

27. The picture depicts a real encounter and I don't believe a victim would

search for safety glasses and ear plugs before defending them self.

[Wickerman]

28. The picture depicts a real encounter

Wow, glad they got the camera set up so quickly - complete with pro-lighting!

[jody]

29. Depicts, i.e. To represent in a picture or sculpture. n/t

[Wickerman]

30. Understood, but it looks nothing like areal life situation

and the person doing the "depicting" has somethin' sitting on her nose, hence my statements.

And, of course, my OP was directed to the poster of this pic. Steve has the type of sense of humor that would've taken my comments for what they were.

[PaganPreacher]

52. I think it's a clip-on nose....

the "Michael Jackson #3" in "alabaster", if I don't miss my guess.



The Pagan Preacher
I don't turn the other cheek.

[alwynsw]

31. PPPHHHBBBTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT!!!!!! You asked for it!

[Wickerman]

33. Now THAT was an appropriate response

Hey, I thought we had a rule against those?
:realmad:

[CarinKaryn]

32. Society

All the Dirty Harry wannabe gunslingers who are saying, "yeah the cops are too slow for my tastes. I can do my own killin!" are paranoid about a temporary disruption or breakdown in the system that might delay police response times. It is the responsibility of society to fix this disruption so that personal protection is NOT available ONLY to those wealthy enough to live behind walls in gated communities with armed guards.

Let me ask you: If the water main breaks do you start jackhammering up the street so you can fix it yourselves? So why do you think you are justified in and qualified to possess dangerous weapons "just in case" the police don't come running everytime you sight a swarthy stranger in your neighborhood?

[alwynsw]

34. My justifications are nearly endless

The prime justifications are 2A and my personal right to life. Firearms are also my prime hobby - target, plinking, collecting, investing, hunting, etc.

Insofar as my qualifications - by which I assume you mean ability and expertise - to own and/or handle firearms are concerned, I'll match training and ability with almost anyone on any day. Jeff Cooper, Ayoob, and a few others are far above my league, but then, those folks in that group actually DID write the books on firearms use and safety.

Dang. No water mains around here. I do fix my own pump, though. I have been known to move downed power lines and downed phone lines near my home after storms and auto accidents.

Thanks for the chuckle.

[Romulus]

36. hee hee - well owners UNITE!!!! (n/t)

[Billy Ruffian]

35. No temporary breakdown or disruption necessary

Check with your local PD. Find out what their average response time is. Find out what their average response time is when it's a home invasion/robbery or rape being called in.

Even with a police car near your house, you're talking an absolute, minimum physical universe limitation of a minute or more before the police can arrive at your location. Put yourself in a location without a lot of police coverage, and you're talking tens of minutes, even if your call gets dispatched INSTANTLY.

It is absolutely impossible to have enough police to provide the protection you can provide yourself.

Additionally, I have not seen any pro-firearms person here that has suggested a need for weapons "just in case" the police don't come running everytime you sight a swarthy stranger in your neighborhood?

Your watermain analogy is flawed in the extreme. It's a rare case that a broken watermain would place someones life in danger. If it does, removing the person from that danger is sufficient.

In a robbery or home invasion, the danger has come to you. The danger may even pursue you as you attempt to avoid it.

[slackmaster]

37. No matter how well society "fixes" that problem it will still be there

Your hyperbolic rhetoric notwithstanding, I live in an area that is well known to be prone to earthquakes, fires, and floods. We have at least one major disaster in California just about every year. When that happens, sometimes real people become temporarily isolated from the support of society. That's not some paranoid fantasy, it really happens.

I take responsibility for my own safety by keeping a supply of drinking water, food, medicine, and everything else I might need for up to three days without any help from anyone else.

Let me ask you: If the water main breaks do you start jackhammering up the street so you can fix it yourselves? So why do you think you are justified in and qualified to possess dangerous weapons "just in case" the police don't come running everytime you sight a swarthy stranger in your neighborhood?

That's about the most asinine analogy I've ever seen on this forum, packaged in a manner intended to be as insulting as possible. For someone who comes up with a good idea now and then, it's a shame you insist on blowing your credibility by taking every opportunity to slap gun owners in the face with backhanded accusations of racism and mental illness.

[left15]

38. How about a gas leak

Just last week, a truck driver knocked a 2" gas main running 60 psi of gas off the side of our building below the shutoff valve. (the gas pressure at your home runs under 5 psi.)

Once I was told of the situation, I dialed 911 and cleared all of the personnel out of the building, and stuffed the pipe with a rag. I did not completely plug the leak, but I did slow it down considerably.

Likewise if I see someone get injured at softball, I call 911 get the first aid kit and do what I can.

Likewise if someone was breaking in my house, I'd call 911 and wait for the police, if the police didn't arrive before my house was broken into, I would do what I could to stop the home invasion.


The first part of your post implies gun owners want to shoot someome, or are looking for a fight. I can not speak for all gun owners, but as for myself, a gun is just a piece of emergency equipment, like a first aid kit or fire ax, only to be use if necessary, and something I would use only if no one more qualified is available to help.

[NorthernSpy]

44. busted gas main -- scary!

Just last week, a truck driver knocked a 2" gas main running 60 psi of gas off the side of our building below the shutoff valve. (the gas pressure at your home runs under 5 psi.)

Once I was told of the situation, I dialed 911 and cleared all of the personnel out of the building, and stuffed the pipe with a rag. I did not completely plug the leak, but I did slow it down considerably.

Wow! How did you get the rag to stay in? Did you have to actually stand there and hold the rag in place until help arrived?

Weren't you worried at all that static electricity from the cloth might cause the gas to ignite?

Scary!

[cms]

40. Is the water main threatening your life...

because if it was I'm sure you'd be out there fixing it. You anti's think that just because we want to defend the lives of ourselves and our families that we "want" to kill people. I don't think there are too many normal people that wanted to kill someone who threatened their life, but instead they were forced to defend themselves. If an armed robber breaks into your house and you are forced to fire upon him to protect you life or the life of a family member, you act until there is no longer a threat. This very rarely involves killing. Most of the time the assailant will surrender at the sight of the gun, and if you are forced to fire, there are usually not fatalities. You make it sound as if we shoot an intruder and then walk up to him and put a few more into his head for the fun of it. Stop twisting the facts...

[cms]

41. "Possess dangerous weapons"...?

I bet you own a couple dozen dangerous weapons. Knives, pencils, scissors, you car...need I continue. You like to sensationalize stories, as if us armed folk run out into the street and open fire on every shady looking character on every corner a few times a day.

[MrSandman]

42. Let's simply stereotype gunowners...

as fictional characters, attempt to marginalize them with implications of bigotry, and their statements don't merit serious consideration.

[sierrajim]

43. Don't even try that in here

Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.
Benjamin Franklin

[iverglas]

45. ditto

No one really seems to know what old Ben actually said, or where and when he said it, but there is a consensus of sorts on this version:

They that can give up essential liberty
to obtain a little temporary safety
deserve neither liberty nor safety.

"Essential" liberty isn't quite the same as your "a little" liberty.

And "a little temporary safety" isn't quite the same as your "a little" security (agreeing that safety and security refer to basically the same thing here).

People, quite willingly, give up non-essential liberty for significant and/or durable safety all the time. You included.

Given that many people have very different ideas of what liberty is essential, and what level of safety is significant, old Ben really hasn't provided us with much guidance on the margins, which is where we tend mostly to be when we discuss these things.

Nice try.

[cms]

47. I don't know about...

you folks up in Canada, but we Americans cherrish our freedoms...even if that includes taking the life of another to save our own. This isn't even about liberties though... Every human being has the right to defend themselves by any means necessary. This includes you, but you also have the right to choose not to if you see fit.

[NorthernSpy]

48. uh oh...

I don't know about you folks up in Canada, but we Americans cherrish our freedoms...

:think:
:nuke:

While you're at it, put in something about the Brits struggling under the yoke of monarchy.

No -- call it the yolk of monarchy, like everyone else does. That's way funnier.


(And the unintentional funny just keeps coming! Edit: fixed typo :dunce:)

[iverglas]

49. "cherrish" is a word I use to describe ...

... little fellas who bounce up and down on internet boards wailing and gnashing their teeth about their freedoms and never bothering to look outside the cave they've barricaded themselves into and notice that they have fewer freedoms than just about anybody else living in the parts of the big wide world that could superficially be mistaken for their cave if they stumbled out into it but who would soon find there's so much more they could have if they'd only step

... outside.

Human Freedom Index

Sweden 38
Denmark 38
Netherlands 37
Austria 36
Finland 36
France 35
Germany 35
Canada 34
Switzerland 34
Australia 33
United States 33
Japan 32
United Kingdom 32

As one net denizen has said:
http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/87More.htm

This is a devastating statistic for those who believe that America's greater commitment to individualism translates into greater individual freedom. In reality, the social democracies of Northern Europe are the freest societies in the world.

Well, and Canada. But it's a USAmerican writing, and I guess s/he just didn't notice the doorstep as s/he looked outside the cave.

Now, those figures are kinda old -- the UN no longer produces that index. But does somebody here want to stand up and say that folks in the US are free-er than they were 10 or 20 years ago?

The criteria, in case you're reading:

http://xenia.media.mit.edu/~kris/FreedomIndex.html

The right to ...

travel in own country
travel abroad
peacefully associate and assemble
teach ideas and receive information
monitor human-rights violations
ethnic language

The freedom from ...

forced or child labor
compulsory work permits
extrajudicial killings of "disappearances"
torture or coercion
capital punishment
unlawful detention
compulsory party or organization membership
compulsory religion ro state ideology in schools
arts control
political censorship of press
censorship of mail or telephone tapping
police searches of home without warrant
artibrary seizure of personal property

The freedom for ...

peaceful political opposition
multiparty elections by secret and universal ballot
political and legal equqality for women
social and econimic equality for women
social and economic equality for ethnic minorities
independent newspapers
independent book publishing
independent radio and television networks
independent courts
independent trade unions

The legal right to ...

a nationality
being conisdered innocent until proven guilty
free legal aid when necessary and cousel of own choice
open trial
a prompt trial

The personal right to ...

interracial, interreligious, or civil marriage
equality of sexes during marriage and for divorce proceedings
homosexuality between consenting adults
practice any religion
determine the number of one's children

Damn, eh? All that unimportant shit about personal rights and legal rights and labour rights ... and nothing about the "right" to wander around with a pistol in one's pants, the only freedom that matters ...

[Retired AF Dem]

50. If it is so great over there

why do so many want to live over here?

[iverglas]

51. an excellent question!

If it weren't so loaded with that false ... or, shall we say, meaningless ... premise.

"If it is so great over there why do so many want to live over here?"

What's "so many"? And who sez they want to live down there?

http://people-press.org/commentary/display.php3?AnalysisID=80
(That's PEW.)

North Americans--both Canadians and citizens of the United States-- are the most satisfied people in the world, notably more satisfied than other wealthy publics—particularly Western Europeans. Two-thirds of Canadians give their own lives high ratings and slightly fewer U.S. residents (64%), say they are quite happy with their personal lives.

Canadians stand out as happier with the state of their nation than do either Americans or Europeans, ranking at the very top of the 44 nations surveyed by the Pew Global Attitudes Project in 2002. More than half of Canadians (56%) say they are satisfied compared with 41% of Americans satisfied with the U.S. and a third or less of Europeans who are happy with their nations.

... The North American neighbors part ways over individualism. Nearly three-in-five Americans (58%) believe that freedom to pursue their life’s goals is more important than guaranteeing that no one is in need. Only 43% of Canadians and even fewer Europeans agree.

http://www.pewtrusts.org/pdf/vf_pew_global_attitudes.pdf

The more than 38,000 people interviewed in the Global Attitudes survey are overwhelmingly dissatisfied with the way things are going in their countries today. Solid majorities in nearly every country in every region surveyed say they are unhappy with the state of their nation.

Although just four-in-ten Americans (41%) have a positive view of national conditions, people in the United States rank as one of the more contented populations in the world. Canada is the only country in the West where a majority of those surveyed (56%) is satisfied with the way things are going.

So I dunno about those cranky Europeans, but we up here seem to be feeling just fine.

I must say I've noticed quite an awful lot of people in the quite immediate vicinity who live in the US and don't want to. So, to echo your question, how come so many of them want to live up here -- or over there, or down under?

Permit me to quote the appalling Telegraph, which one might assume attracts a rather right-wing public to its polls:
http://news.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/01/03/ncoun03.xml&sSheet=/news/2005/01/03/ixhome.html

Nearly half of Britons regard their country as being one of the most democratic countries in the world and one of the most deserving of international respect - a reputation likely to be enhanced by Britain's response to the tsunami disaster.

Nearly half also say that Britain is one of the three countries where they would most like to live.

However, most of these figures can easily be looked at the other way. If roughly half of Britons think Britain is a splendid country in which to live, that means the other half would prefer to live somewhere else.

... A glance down the column headed "The top five" shows the dominance of countries such as Australia, New Zealand and Canada and also the relevant insignificance of countries on the European continent. Canada, Australia and New Zealand are rated unusually safe and Australians unusually friendly. The USA has a more mixed reputation: dynamic and democratic, yes, but also dangerously unsafe.

One in three of YouGov's respondents regards America as one of the world's three "least safe" countries – more than think the same of Israel, Egypt or South Africa.

Now, some folks here might not care whether they have any of that safety stuff, but I don't see people who rate a country as one of the world's three least safe countries being real anxious to move there.

(I have no idea why the figures in the relevant columns below add up to more than 100.)

Moreover, while 19 per cent reckon the US is one of the countries "most deserving of international respect", a considerably larger proportion, 25 per cent, reckon that under this heading it is one of the world's "least deserving" countries.

I've been trying, all this time (and mostly because this stuff is so interesting, so don't be worried if you're not as fascinated by this as I am or think you'll hurt my feelings if you say you aren't), to find a report on the survey done sometime in the last 2 years, I thought by PEW, that asked respondents what country they would prefer to live in. An overwhelming majority of respondents, in an overwhelming majority of countries, preferred to live in their own country. People are just like that. No matter how "special" Condoleezza Rice and her fellow USAmericans might think they are.

[cms]

53. Nope...its just another to add to that list...

of freedoms we supposedly "don't" have. It's how our country gained its independence. We fought. We earned the right to have the Second Amendment in the constitution. Wasn't it Sigmund Freud who said a fear of weapons is a sign of retarded maturity and unstable feeling of sexuality?...or something along those lines? :P

By the way, nice essay, but your opening paragraph is one big run-on sentence.

[NorthernSpy]

54. oh, the hoplophobia thing has been tried

Wasn't well received, I'm afraid. :nuke:

And a run-on sentence incorporates two or more independent clauses without the necessary conjunctions and/or punctuation between them. A very long sentence with many clauses is not necessarily a run-on.

FWIW...

And BTW, welcome to the gun dungeon!

:)

[cms]

55. Thanks for the welcome...

I love this place. So much passion! Whoda thunk that politics could be so much fun.

[NorthernSpy]

58. I like it here, too...

Me, I've been here for just short of a year.

And ... (drumroll)... With this very post, I FINALLY join the 1000+ club. Yay!

Took far longer for me to accomplish that than it does for most people, though. It was just so hard for me to think of that many things to say...

:party: :dunce: :party:

[cms]

59. Congrats!

Keep on fighting off those anti's one at a time.

[NorthernSpy]

75. thanks!

And, will do. :)

[iverglas]

57. gosh

Wasn't it Sigmund Freud who said a fear of weapons is a sign of retarded maturity and unstable feeling of sexuality?

yeah. I think he also said something about me having penis envy. He was a funny old guy, eh?

Nice to see someone progressing beyond the 18th century when it comes to quoting dead rich white guys, though, I must say. Keep it up, and you might get to someone even more recent, and maybe even someone less rich and white and male. Maybe even someone who isn't dead yet.

By the way, nice essay, but your opening paragraph is one big run-on sentence.

Thanks for noticing! Always nice to have one's efforts appreciated.

[enigami]

61. that is the most stupid analogy I ever heard n/t

[jody]

62. Stick around, gun-banners have a million of them. n/t

[iverglas]

63. and contentless rkba-head one-liners are just the best n/t

[Billy Ruffian]

65. as bad as the contentless gungrabber one-liners n/t

[iverglas]

66. ah, if only there were such a thing ...

[Billy Ruffian]

68. Here's a couple

Florida, State Senator Margolis SB0500.

Oregon, Burdick, will be proposing a ban on 'assault weapons' Ban. Turn them in.

They're all over.

[solinvictus]

39. Ultimately me...

police are there after the fact. It's up to my warning system (2 chihuahuas) and my pistol and/or rifle to protect my home and property.

[Buster43]

46. Me and no one else.

n/t

[Torque67]

56. Well, I am.

And I'd be remiss if I hadn't taken many types of measures to help ensure my safety, and the safety of my family.

These include, but are not limited to:

Selection of home location: I bought a home in the safest neighborhood I could afford.

Security mindedness of the area around the house: I avoid having any stuff covering a good view of ground floor windows from my neighbor's homes. I also communicate with my neighbors as to my vacation schedule, or if I expect to have someone over to pick up anything out of my garage while I am gone.

Lowering Risk: I dont play pool for money in bad parts of town with an empty wallet, I avoid places of ill repute, and avoid having dealings with folks involved in illegal activities to the best of my ability. I am pleasant and polite. I try not to attract mortal enemies. I do not post photographs of myself, my wife, or my children on the Internet. I avoid confrontation unless it would truly morally bother me to not intervene.

Around the home: I lock the doors, use deadbolts where applicable. Arm security system when gone, or asleep. Check the function of window sash locks once in a while, and also take a walk outdoors frequently, and pay attention to any signs that things are amiss.
I keep a cell phone upstairs in the event that for some reason I am cut off from using my home telephone service due to alarm, natural event, or malicious cutting of telephone wires. My children know our home alarm signal, and know to stay put if told to. Both my wife and I are versed in the use of a pump shotgun, and there is one in a secured but accessible to us location. There is also a flashlight in each bedroom.

It's not just about wanting to shoot people, you see. I would be deeply affected by having to take the life of another person, no matter who they were, or what their intentions were. I would bear that on my conscience to save myself or my family though.

Stop putting so much emphasis on the gun, and start putting more on not having to use it. But keep the gun.

[Maria Celeste]

60. Point well taken

I have done much of what you discuss. This is the Gungeon, and it is the firearm that gets the attention, pro or con.

What you omitted was martial arts training and firearm practice. The former is great exercise and a lot more fun that the basic gym workout. It also readies you to take a hit.

You may want to reconsider your shotgun. Its rare to practice with one and the noise indoors will disorient you. Consider a .380 for your wife if recoil is an issue. I am not that large and have a 9mm Glock.

Finally check into your security system. Most of them these days are real skimpy and overpriced. There are often better and cheaper solutions out there. You are most likely on an auto renew contract for monitoring that is well overpriced. Read it, including the fine print. It will piss you off. Its how the alarm industry works, especially the big boys (can you say Tyco?). Monitoring can be had for $15 or less per month. Take the difference and by some range ammo :-)

[Torque67]

67. Thanks for the reply.

Yes, I should have mentioned training.
I shoot 3 gun competition as often as I can, and practice pretty regularly with the shotgun. I spend more time with pistols and rifles than I do the shotgun, but it is an excellent all arounder for home defense usable by either my wife or I. She has shot it quite a number of times, and despite her slight build, does ok with #4 turkey shells. She has taken womens defense classes some time ago, and I still keep myself in good enough shape to cover past unarmed combat training.

I'd feel ok with my glock as a home defense piece (Glock 20), as I can crank out a bill drill pretty quick with it, but my wife does not spend enough time practicing, nor does she wish to in order to be able to use a pistol effectively, especially under duress.

Best just to run with what you know you can use. In an emergency, people dont rise to the occasion, but are reduced to their level of training. If you can hold a shotgun correctly, you should be hitting pretty tight to the mark just by feel, without looking down the rib.

[Maria Celeste]

69. Ever tried shooting without hearing protection?

I took a practical shooting/home defense seminar a while back. The instructor *suggested* we try shooting without hearing protection once just to see how it impacted our accuracy and responses. Mine, like all of those who tried it, were much poorer. Per that instructor, shotguns are much louder than pistols and between the noise and the blast can stun people in enclosed spaces. There is also the issue of maneuvering a long gun in a home. If you shoot three gun, that is probably not an issue for you.

I did try sporting clays for the first time in the fall. Great fun, wish I had the time and money to do more of it.

[cms]

70. See the post about taking suppressors off the NFA list...

If you ever have a chance to shoot a handgun with a suppressor, do so. Much more comfortable.

[Torque67]

71. Sporting Clays

I hear you on the clays. I've shot a few rounds of clays and 5 stand, and it is a really good time. Those fine side by sides are a little rich for my blood though. I have been with a few other folks, and have been handed some very nice shotguns to shoot a few rounds with. A lot of those guys run through 500 shells a week to stay on top of it, plus range fees, plus those snappy coats, I'm gonna leave that to the doctors and lawyers :) Sure is fun though.

With shooting indoors, shooting anything indoors without hearing protection is generally unfun. Something you might try, if you haven't yet is to drill with your pistol in low light conditions if possible, you'll find the muzzle flash distracting, and also screwing with your night vision. Having run a heavy machine gun for a few years, my hearing is about shot up anyway :)

Sounds like you are putting your time in with the practice and instruction. I wish more of us would. Never know, might be fun even :)

[Lefty48197]

73. I need a 50 cal. mounted in the living room pointed at the front door

with a silencer and flash suppressor so nobody will know what I'm up to. Oh yeah, I need 10,000 rounds of ammunition too.

[Paladin]

74. Don't Give 'Em Any Ideas, Lefty.....

n/t

[anonymous44]

77. 2nd amendment is not about 'need' or 'hunting'

i don't need a lot of things.
i don't need 2 cars

but i choose to have them

plus gun ownership is a right

and i gotta have a gun because it's in the constitution:)

[Van23]

76. Amen!!

Bottom line: cops can't protect you, they can only respond to you after the crime has been committed.

Keep packin'!


www.liberalswithguns.com

[skippythwndrdog]

78. That would be me.