Guns in the home

Status
Not open for further replies.
OP, you are not the first anti-gun person we've had on THR. Most don't last long, some have, but even they flame out in the face of facts.

I have helped you out with the victimization threads from other countries, showing that other countries have a higher burglary rate than the US, even Canada.
 
Odd place to be if you don't really like guns.

The biggest problem with your argument is the assumption that you don't really need guns for self defense. Exactly how do come by this assumption? Most self defense situations don't require the attacker/bad guy to send you a note with at least 7 days of warning before the attack/event. Any assumption that it isn't gonna happen to you is at best childish and at worse naive.

Maybe you are using statistics to back up your theory? The problem with statistics is they basically ignore the single case. Saying something like..... You are only 20 percent likely to get killed..... doesn't mean you only get 20 percent killed. You are 100 percent killed.

Personally most of the reason I own a gun is self defense.....but from animals. I live far off in the woods, wild animals happen. For some reason the antigun side of the world can't wrap their heads around this fact.

I think a safe is a good idea in the home, but not every gun should be in it. Needing a gun is almost always a right-now sort of thing.

My perspective on guns is different than a lot of people, to me they are tools. I'm happy with the size of my ego/penis/whatever and don't own guns for that fact. I own guns like I own hammers, to do the thing they are intended to do.

I'm also more self sufficient than most people, which is another reason I own guns, work on my own cars and build my own stuff. For some reason this mindset is scary to some
 
President Barack Obama issued an executive order allowing the CDC to review existing studies on causes of and ways to reduce gun violence. As to defensives uses of guns, the CDC report said, “Studies that directly assessed the effect of actual defensive uses of guns (i.e., incidents in which a gun was ‘used’ by the crime victim in the sense of attacking or threatening an offender) have found consistently lower injury rates among gun-using crime victims compared with victims who used other self-protective strategies. … Almost all national survey estimates indicate that defensive gun uses by victims are at least as common as offensive uses by criminals, with estimates of annual uses ranging from about 500,000 to more than 3 million per year, in the context of about 300,000 violent crimes involving firearms in 2008."

IOW, the CDC determined during the last administration that using a firearm defensively produced better outcomes for the would-be victims.

While one may wish we never were threatened seriously enough to force us to defend ourselves or someone else, the Centers for Disease Control under the Obama presidency determined using a firearm in self defense produced better victim outcomes.
 
Folks,

I've had to prune out several posts focused on the person and not the opinion.

Remember that the argument is our focus for this debate.

Many people feel the same way Stephin Mize does so address the position stated from the approach of answering all of them, not just Stephin.
 
Folks,

I've had to prune out several posts focused on the person and not the opinion.

Remember that the argument is our focus for this debate.

Many people feel the same way Stephin Mize does so address the position stated from the approach of answering all of them, not just Stephin.

My name is spelled with an e, not i. And you left out the letter a in my last name.
 
Folks,

I've had to prune out several posts focused on the person and not the opinion.

Remember that the argument is our focus for this debate.

Many people feel the same way Stephin Mize does so address the position stated from the approach of answering all of them, not just Stephin.

Much appreciated, hso.
 
If you feel strongly you should not have guns in your home for self-defense, then you have every right to free your home of any guns (or other applicable implements of defense) and you will have all the support for that right you need.
 
Im not ready. I will explain in due time. I will get back to you in five years.

So you don't have a reason at this time? Passing fancy then?

Really, I don't really care if you don't wanna have guns in home. It's a free country and everyone should be able to do what makes them happy/comfortable/safe in their homes.

Personally I want to own guns and it's my legal, constitutional right. So I choose to
 
And there's the FACT of the US Supreme Court ruling that the Second Amendment applies to self defense in the home allowing lawful storage and carrying of guns.

And the FACT that crimes (burglary, robbery, rape, murder, etc.) continue to occur in every city all across the country.

And we have this ...
President Barack Obama issued an executive order allowing the CDC to review existing studies on causes of and ways to reduce gun violence ... the CDC determined during the last administration that using a firearm defensively produced better outcomes for the would-be victims.

And you have been asked by the moderator this
State you position and defend it as the others are doing.


So please, defend your position with facts.
 
Last edited:
So I do have one follow on question: is your position that one should defend one's home with something other than a firearm, or is the concept of defense of the home given up in its entirety? You certainly have a right to not defend your home, should you so choose.
 
Careful, that does sound like trolling. State your position and defend it as the others are doing.

I understand your concern but I’m not ready to defend it yet. Especially not at this premature stage. I’m not like anyone else. It takes time to explain my position, which will take 5 years to explain it. I’m not trolling but it will take studying and backing up my position will facts. I will need five years to explain. I have work to do.

sorry for the inconvenience.

all I can give you at the moment are the victimization posts.
 
And we have another consideration that many women, elderly and physically disabled/challenged home owners may not be able to physically defend against unarmed or armed attacker or multiple attackers.

For them, as member Old Lady New Shooters posted, firearm may be the only and best self defense option.
 
it will take studying and backing up my position will facts
So are you saying you started this thread without doing proper study or gathering facts about using guns for home self defense like the Second Amendment and the US Supreme Court DC v Heller ruling?

It takes time to explain my position, which will take 5 years to explain it.
Look forward to continuing this discussion in 5 years as we may likely have more facts and possibly more federal courts/US Supreme Court rulings on gun rights and the Second Amendment.
 
You began with "My personal view is...". And that's fine, we all have personal views. However, your view on how you feel your home should be defended or not should not intrude on the views of others who may differ. Or do you feel you have the right to impose your view on others?
 
Guns in the home for self defence makes the gun owner a dangerous person.

Well, that is kind of the point. If I did not wish to be dangerous to unwelcome and uninvited criminally minded persons in my home, I would have a self defense plan that revolves around the creative use of fire extinguishers.

The whole point of carrying a gun, or otherwise planning to use one in self defense is that it makes you dangerous to your attackers.

It would be nice if the American police would deny guns for self defence purposes.

Nice or not, it's simply not something the police have a choice in. The police enforce the law, not make it.

There is simply no need for people to have them.

There is no need for you to have a car, or a computer, or a bed.. The US isn't generally in the habit of dictating what a person may own based on their need to own it, especially when the ownership of that item is a protected right.

There should be strict gun control laws in place to keep guns out of the hands of criminals.

There are. Hundreds of them. How often violations of those laws are aggressively enforced... Well, now that's the real question isn't it.
 
It would be nice if the American police would deny guns for self defence purposes. There is simply no need for people to have them.
Individual self defense is one of the two justifications for a constitutional right to arms. (The other is community self defense, but that doesn't seem to resonate so much any more.) Remove self defense, and you remove the entire rationale for the 2nd Amendment. The 2nd Amendment is not about recreational uses of guns, hunting, or gun collecting.

I'm a gun collector. I don't necessarily use my guns for self defense. Hunters are in an analogous situation. They might not necessarily use their hunting guns for self defense. But all of us must make common cause with the defensive-gun community, or all of us might end up losing our guns.

I have to ask the OP: Is he, or is he not, in favor of the 2nd Amendment? What does the 2nd Amendment mean to him?
 
I'll make my counter to the OP as clear as possible.

It doesn't matter -
How well educated you are
How much money you have in the bank
How solid your career is
How far you've come
How much you're loved and valued by those closest to you, or indeed by strangers
How happy you are in life
How well diversified your 401k is
How good you look
How intelligent you are
How nice a car you drive
How big your house is
How many well-to-do's you know
Or anything else,

...when your existence on this plain is about to be snuffed out, and the vessel of your consciousness laid to waste, all that matters is your ability to prevail.

Guns help people do that.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top