I do not recall his having suggested "stashing handguns".
Well, I suppose it could be interpreted that way, but you are correct. I'm not suggesting stashing guns as a first-line self-defense strategy, but I do think it's better than stashing knives. Sort of like poking your eye with your finger is better than poking it with a sharp stick.
Me: Of course, but guns aren't less than $2.00 apiece.
No argument there.
Ok, let me try again.
There is a common justification for making inferior self-defense choices. It goes something like this:
"I know that there are much better choices for self-defense than X, but you know what they say, 'An X is good for fighting your way to a Y.'" Maybe it's intended to be humorous, maybe it's intended to be serious, maybe a bit of both. Regardless, it's not a rule to live by.
I call it the videogame philosophy of self-defense.
It seems to happen only rarely in the real world. In the real world, people don't seem to use the first weapon they grab to fight their way to a superior weapon, they are usually stuck using the first weapon they can put their hands on. If they pick a weapon that's not sufficient for the job, they don't get a chance to make it to a superior weapon. If the weapon they pick works, then they don't need to make it to a superior weapon. Either way, they tend to either succeed or fail with the first weapon they get their hands on.
In other words, setting up a self-defense strategy that involves an inferior weapon as their first line of defense when they could easily have better weapon choices is a bad idea. Relying on a knife as a first line of self-defense when one could rely on a firearm instead is inadvisable.
If one is CONSTRAINED to choose an inferior weapon as a first line self-defense strategy, that's an entirely different matter. You do what you have to do. I'm talking about VOLUNTARILY picking an inferior weapon when other options are just as easily available.
In case it's not clear, there are very good reasons why people don't carry long guns around with them--or, said another way, good reasons why people carry handguns instead of long guns. That's not the kind of choice we're talking about here.
That's the first part. Moving on to the second issue...
There are a number of problems with the strategy of stashing weapons all over the house.
1. Even if small children don't reside in a house, they might visit. Remembering to pick them all up and remembering where they all are, or trying to stash them in childproof locations are all issues.
2. Even if small children never visit, other people may, and again, you either have to collect them all or assume that their presence won't be discovered or that if they are they won't be a problem.
3. Also, they can become weapons of opportunity to use against you. There have certainly been criminals who enter a house unarmed with the express intent of finding a weapon and using it against the occupants. This prevented them from being charged with a weapons offense if they were discovered in the process of breaking in or on the way to a crime. And kept them from having to find/buy a weapon of their own.
4. You have to remember where the nearest one is and get to it when things go sideways. Presumably if you had the time to leisurely retrieve a weapon, you'd go to the safe and get a firearm. So these weapons stashed all over the house are there for when time is very short. But when time is very short, remembering where the nearest one is and getting to it might require more time than is available.
5. You have to have a number of them. This either means a significant expense, or it means that it may be tempting to compromise on quality/performance.
6. People sometimes need self-defense weapons when they're outside of their house--in the front yard, or back yard. Doesn't matter how many weapons there are in the house or how convenient they are to each room if you're outside when you need one.
7. If you are already in an interaction and it starts to look like a weapon might be needed, if you are carrying one you don't have to excuse yourself to go grab the nearest one. Getting it is as unobtrusive as doing NOTHING because you always have it.
What I see is that people get themselves into a weird progression of rationalization that leads to decisions that could never be justified if they were taken individually.
It's a rare person who would argue that a knife is a superior self-defense weapon compared to a gun. We've all heard the old saw about knives and gunfights. And Kleck's done a study that conclusively shows that guns are much better at keeping the defender uninjured than knives.
It's a rare person who would argue that Dollar Store level merchandise is superior to quality equipment.
So how does one justify choosing a $2 knife over a handgun for self-defense? It sounds crazy when you break it down to the bottom line, doesn't it?
It all stems from the initial assumption that carrying a self-defense weapon isn't a reasonable choice.
Don't get jammed up by an initial assumption that isn't really valid in the first place.
If the concern is that a weapon will be needed urgently, the solution is to carry a weapon, not to stash weapons all over the place. Then it's always immediately available, always under your control, always in exactly the same place--and you only need one so you don't have to skimp on quality/performance.
When picking a self-defense weapon, pick a good one. I'm not saying it has to be the IDEAL weapon, before someone cracks back about whether or not I have M2 emplacements around my house. I'm not saying that legitimate issues about weapon selection should be ignored--if concealability is critical, there's no need to explain why a handgun is chosen over a long gun--if legalities prevent the possession of a firearm that's a valid reason to choose a less effective weapon, etc.
I'm just saying make a good choice from the available reasonable options.
