[DunedinDragon]

Granted, I'm not like most folks here as I haven't owned guns my whole life. I'm a recent newcomer. But I do wonder if we as gun owners don't do ourselves and our sport a disservice by accentuating self-defense as the prime motivator for owning guns.

I'm an average, normal guy who got interested in guns as a hobby. I enjoy learning about them, understanding the technologies and techniques involved, and have even begun to start competing. Yeah, I'm becoming a "gun nut." But I'm no more a gun nut than I am a motorcycle nut. But it's my belief that many of the ills we suffer from anti's is due to the fact that so much of our discussion is based around topics like, "the police can't be everywhere", or how dangerous the world has become.

Don't get me wrong, I believe those things. But I also believe those are not things that everyday, normal people think about all that much. And when they come across someone that does think about it tend to be put off by it.

What brought this to mind was I have a friend (female) who I've taken shooting with me before. She knows I've gotten into guns and has rolled her eyes more than a few times at my discussing of gun-related things. The other night she mentioned that she had gotten her tax refund and wanted me to take her to the gun store so she could buy a gun. Of course I was happy to help her out. She eventually decided on a gun (a Taurus 92SS-17) and got the paperwork going and will pick it up on Thursday. Afterwards we went out to get some lunch and although she began to talk about being happy with getting something to defend herself since she lives alone, I could tell from her demeanor she wasn't really all that excited about the purchase.

I explained to her that my interest in guns was more of a hobby, and that self defense was really just a nice by-product of that hobby, and that seemed to make all the difference in the world. Suddenly she was very excited about borrowing some of my books on guns and getting involved in some of the different shooting opportunities in the area.

I guess my question here is, how many people are there out there that don't consider buying guns simply because so many gun owners represent the primary reason for owning one is self-defense?

In reality approaching it as a hobby like bowling or golf does more to promote being a responsible gun owner that really learns about it than it does someone that buys it for the single purpose of defending themselves and ends up only going to the range once a year.

Just a random thought I think us "gun nuts" might want to consider......

[carlrodd]

i feel just the opposite.....i feel like i have an obligation to know how to use firearms, and to exercise my right to bear them, not only for personal defense, but in preparation for actually having to defend OUR right as citizens to bear them. the fact that shooting them and learning about their mechanics and history is so incredibly enjoyable is the added bonus for me.

as far as stressing the 'wrong' things when talking about gun ownership, take a look around you......it's one thing to truly be paranoid, it's another to be observant and realistic about your environment; the constitutional right to bear arms is under constant fire. we need to be vigilant. and you only need to pay the slightest attention to see and hear the daily examples of ordinary people being victimized in situations where having and effectively using a firearm may very well have saved life, property, or protected well-being.

[jamez]

You are correct in the fact that self defense is a good by-product of being a gun owner. I guess I could be considered a 'gun nut' as well, but then again, I guess I could be labeled as a 'music nut' as well since I own music equipment and a large selection of cds as well. I won't argue that fact. :)

When I met my wife she was uncomfortable around guns and how they are handled. Her father had raised her and her brother around guns and told them, numerous times, not the mess with the guns if he was not there with them. Her brother decided he liked the way the bullets ejected out as the slide went back on a .380, he had a jam and turned the gun towards himself to undo the jam. You guessed it. It went in near the right temple and came out at the top left. He spent a long time in rehab and went back to finish his highschool diploma. Since then he had a Colt .35 and I had my Ruger P90. Mine had a decocker, his didn't. He went to let the hammer down on his while his mom and dad were present and he was facing in the direction of his father. The gun did go off but it was facing the floor. 1 or 2 inches higher and he would've gotten his dad. The hammer slipped out of his thumb, took a chunk and a hollow point was discharged into the floor.

I could go on about him, trust me, but because of his history, his family, including me, do not feel comfortable around him with guns. My wife feels more secure about guns with me, as well as my mom n law.

Although he is the way he is with guns, careless, that doesnt mean my wife and I cant enjoy a shooting experience ourselves, as well as the right to carry. I'm more of an avid shooter than she is. My bro n law seems to be wreckless in a lot more things than just guns, and according to my wife, he's always been that way.

I've always purchased guns with the intent to carry but i've also had guns just for sheer shooting pleasure. Sometimes they werent the most cost effective round, such as the .32acp, which I ended up selling. .25acp is more expensive than the .22 and a lot less effective if you're intending on using it for self defense. Then again, who in their right mind would use a .22lr for a self defense round unless it was easily concealable and a last resort. I bought my 30.06 with intention on deer hunting sometime soon, but that doesnt mean I dont enjoy putting holes in paper until I get there. :)

I also play with a PA system when I dont have anyone around to play with. Keeps my practice up for when the guys actually get to make it over for a jam session. :D

[SSN Vet]

I see your point...

If your aim is to get other people interested in shooting sports....then it may not be helpfull to emphasize self defense. Shooting is a lot of fun!

but...

If your aim is to keep the Libs from taking away the RKBA....I think the argument has to be couched in terms of NEEDS and RIGHTS and not WANTS and RECREATION.

It's to easy to make the argument that "keeping society safe" is adequate justification to restrict your fun. You could use drag racing as a possible (yet imperfect) analogy.....not many will argue that it's a problem to restrict the FUN of private individuals who want to drag race on public roads....as they don't NEED to do this. They can spend a fortune and go to a track (range) if they want to seek thrills doing such dangerous activities.

But as long as you have violent crime and criminals.....RKBA can be argued as a justifiable NEED for private citizens.

In my mind the "militia" is more needed to restrict evil inside our society (i.e. the old fashion posse that runs down the gang of thieves) than it is to protect the borders from invading armies.


Different arguments are needed for different purposes.

[pax]

Ahhh, I'm the other way around: I consider the fun I can have with guns to be a nice side effect of having them for self-defense. I would never have gotten into the shooting world just for fun.

Self-defense is the reason I got into guns even though my husband doesn't care about them at all. It's the reason I work hard at learning to shoot well. It's what gets me to the range when I'm so busy I don't have time for pure fun -- because I'm serious about defense, practice is a duty. It's very wonderful that it happens to be a fun duty, but even if it weren't fun I'd be doing it anyway.

About half the women I know are the same way. The other half are like your friend, primarily interested in the fun.

It's all good.

pax

[trickyasafox]

i was raised with firearms, but whenever i try to explain the benifits of firearms to new comers i emphasize the sport aspect. shooting is one of the few sports where age, physical ability, or other factors dont come into play. there is a nitch in shooting for everyone, and thats what i try to point out

[Pilot]

I originally got into guns many years ago as a hobby and for target shooting. I didn't carry for many years, although I had a CCW for transporting guns back and forth to the range (so I wouldn't have to worry about getting hassled) and I would carry when backpacking. The last few years I have taken some hangun courses and now carry all the time. My shooting has gone from target practice to defense style shooting. I now view handguns as a defense tool first and hobby second.

[Waitone]

The attack on firearms comes from the angle of the menace to society = bad cop. The good cop = sporting purpose. Making that distinction permits the anti-gunners to wander down the road to control/confiscation and keep the masses happy because they haven't touched the hobby/sports uses.

Second, a sport is not necessary to survival but self defense.

In positioning your opposition to gun control the pro-RKBA community naturally focuses on the inherent right to self-preservation. Once self-preservation is accepted as a legitimate right, the sporting applications become moot.

[whm1974]

I know people who brought guns for self defence, AND became gun nuts later on.

AS far as I'm consired self defence is a good reason to own a gun. Many are not into shooting or gun collecting but do need a gun for self defence. I'm fin with this.

-Bill

[CAnnoneer]

Having to justify something in an issue implies a defensive stance. That by itself is intolerable to me especially concerning fundamental rights. We should not need to justify having rights. That's why they are called "rights", instead of "wrongs", "incidentals", "occasionals", "conditionals", etc.

Gun rights are about individual freedom. Anybody restricting gun rights is no friend of freedom. It is as simple as that.

[Zundfolge]

If your aim is to keep the Libs from taking away the RKBA....I think the argument has to be couched in terms of NEEDS and RIGHTS and not WANTS and RECREATION.
I believe that there is a nail hit squarely on the head.

[Control]

I also primarily got into guns as a hobby. I too enjoy their engineering and I enjoy target practice and hunting.

I think if I only had one gun I could make the self defense argument. The problem is it's difficult to justify a dozen guns in a huge safe as self defense to friends and family. If you have more than a couple of guns, please don't try to convince people you have them only for self defense. I too would get nervous if someone showed me a dozen guns and then said they were all for “self defense.”

My wife uses the "hobby" word quite a bit when explaining to her liberal friends that I own guns. It seems to settle them a little. Whatever works with these people is fine by me.

We absolutely need to end the propagation of the "urban commando" myth. Most gun owners I know are responsible every day citizens. There are however wacko gun geeks and fake gangsters who give us all a bad name. We should distance ourselves from them.

(On a side note, gun geeks and “gangsters” are consistently horrible marksman by my account. If you can’t hit the paper at 7 yards, you need to not shoot guns for safety reasons…)

One bad example is the latest Kimber “Desert Warrior” ad on the back of the Guns and Ammo. First, it’s called the “Desert Warrior” because desert stuff is cool these days. Next, about half of its features are called “tactical” for no apparent reason and apparently only “elite” military and law enforcement people use this gun. It’s also desert colored as apparent that helps you hide from terrorists. This ad is a complete embarrassment.

Control.

[ball3006]

who is going to do it for you? The SCOTUS has ruled the cops do not have an obligation to protect you. Who is left?......chris3

[Phantom Warrior]

I agree w/ SSN Vet and Waitone. It is _easier_ to couch your argument in terms of "O, it's my hobby, it's just something I do for fun, there are lots of legitimate sporting applications." I've been guilty of that a few times myself.

But, ultimately, it's a weaker argument because, as mentioned, a hobby can be taken away for the greater good. A right can not.

[Vern Humphrey]

I wonder how many people don't buy spare tires, because so many other people only buy them in case they have a flat?;)

[Waitone]

In the future we'll have to be careful of the spare tire analogy. Seems Detroit is about to sell cars without spare tires. Seems it saves space and cost. Good idea? We'll see what the customer says.

[Vern Humphrey]

In the future we'll have to be careful of the spare tire analogy. Seems Detroit is about to sell cars without spare tires. Seems it saves space and cost. Good idea? We'll see what the customer says.

This customer lives way to hell-and-gone in the Ozarks, only buys 4X4s, and carries a spare, a battery-powered air compressor and a can of tire sealant.

[Standing Wolf]

Why you get here matters much less than whether you do.

[444]

This is a common argument, however in my opinion it is a waste of time. Many people believe that if only we acted a certain way, only bought certain types of guns, and only used certain words (no words like weapon for example), that the antis would change their minds and immediately realize that we are a great bunch of guys only having fun.
I hope that sounds as silly to you as it does to me.
There is nothing that we are going to do that is acceptable to a liberal anti-gunner. No matter what we say, no matter what we do, they won't be happy unless we give up ALL of our guns. Us agreeing to give up "assult rifles" or "sniper rifles" or "high capacity........" isn't going to make them happy. Did you see the anti-gunners give up and rejoice when that last "assult weapons ban" was in effect ?

Second, I think it is a shame that the American public has been brainwashed to the point that they feel ashamed to admit that they consider defending their life or the lives of their family something to be ashamed of. Even worse is the dupe that is willing to NOT defend their own life because it isn't politically correct. That is disgusting on so many levels. People with this attitude should be ashamed of themselves as members of the human race.

[Control]

444, your counter argument sounds silly because you generalized several different orthogonal aspects into one unrelated group.

Should we restrict the kind of guns we buy to win over the anti-gun crowd? Absolutely not. I hate regulated ten round internal locking magazine disconnecting guns as much as the next guy.

Should we "act a certain way" as ambassadors of our sport? Yes! For example, we should not attempt to justify a massive gun collection under the umbrella of "self defense." We should not attack anti-gun people but understand their concerns and persuade them to rethink their position.

We won't be able to "win over" many anti-gun nuts. But most people simply don't understand firearms! They are simply doing what the media tells them. It’s these people who need our help and if we can approach them in a reasonable manner we may just win some allies.

[444]

Why do you feel the need to justify your gun collection to anyone ?


"Reasonable manner"
I can see how my post would sound silly to someone who wants to be reasonable to an anti.
I hope it works for you.

In my opinion, here is how the game is played by being reasonable.
The antis want to ban ALL guns.
We agree to be reasonable and give up our rights a few at a time. We do this in an effort to not be extremists. We want to meet them halfway and be "reasonable". With each concession, the antis scream for more.
Note that the antis haven't given up a thing. Meeting them halfway means that we give up rights we presently have and they give up nothing.



Don't get me wrong. I understand where you are coming from. But I just don't agree with it. A very large portion of the gun owning segment of our society own guns at least in part for self defense. Why hide that fact ? When asked about it, admit it. This is nothing to be ashamed of. If they don't like it, that is a shame but no reason to lie about it.
At the risk of inviting trolls to hijack the thread, I would suggest you go to the website for Frontsight (shooting school) and ask them for a free copy of their DVD. IMO, they make some great points along the line that you are talking about.
One of these points is that our present stadegy for preserving our gun rights is doomed to failure. We have been following the same path for 50+years and if it was going to work, it would have already worked.

[bill in IN]

You say you are also a "Motorcycle Nut". Do you feel the same way when you read a thread on motorcycles being used for everyday transportation?

I usta' be a motorcycle nut, and still am a ham and gun nut. Alternatives are always interesting to me in all my hobbies (and even occupations). Maybe i'm different.

[foghornl]

I started out as a hunter, to supplement the dinner table.

Worked a few years as an Auxillary Reserve Deputy.

Self & Family defense got to be a bigger issue.

Now I am a hobbyist/collector.

[shotgunner]

It doesn't matter what the anti-gun nuts think. Whether it's a hobby or not. The 2nd Amendment was instituted for self-defense. Not for sport, hunting or hobby. Our forefathers wanted to make sure that we didn't have to rely on anybody for protection. Also, they wanted to ensure that our government could not force its will upon us.

If I'm speaking to an anti, I emphasize that it's my right to protect myself and my loved ones. Let them wait 3-30 minutes for police to show up. In the meantime, I'll be holding the suspect at gunpoint. Knowing full-well that my family and me remain unharmed.

[Mongo the Mutterer]

I believe Jeff Cooper put it best when he said (I paraphrase). --

Target shooting and hunting is fun, but it is practice.

Hits the nail on the head for me..