Dumbest Thing I've read today, via the internet......

rsvman
thought this portion of a well written , balanced article on the subject supports your stance .

"If there’s a commonality between the pro-gun and anti-gun divide, it’s that people feel the world is unsafe (despite the fact that the world, including the US, has become increasingly more safe in terms of homicide). On the one hand, suburban, white parents who are strongly anti-gun are up in arms (pun intended) about gun control because they feel their children are endangered in places where they shouldn’t be (in contrast, inner-city gun violence among black youth doesn’t tend to spark national talk of gun control). And so, banning guns completely seems like a rational solution. On the other hand, pro-gun advocates have similar concerns, but they feel that arming themselves is the only way to keep them safe. In their view, more permissive gun laws allowing open-carry and concealed-carry firearms or arming teachers with guns in schools is therefore the sensible path.

From a psychological perspective, it’s less important whether guns actually make us safer and more important whether guns make us feel safer. But nonetheless, let’s start with some “facts.” The preponderance of available evidence indicates that having a gun in the home is associated with a greater risk of accidental death, homicide, suicide, and a greater risk especially of female and childhood death by firearm.3 As a result, the significant public health risk of firearm ownership has become a known dictum in the medical literature. What’s much less well known is whether firearm ownership really prevents violent victimization. Methodologically, it’s extremely difficult to detect a deterrent effect of gun ownership, when preventative outcomes are hypothetical (i.e. in cases of purported gun self-defense, it isn’t really possible to know what would have happened if one didn’t have a gun in the same situation)."

full article here
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/psych-unseen/201510/the-psychology-guns

rsvman

I was simply being rhetorical in my response. But thank you for the reply anyway.

My guns are safe... in a safe. My wife and I are the only ones who know the combination lock. Not sure how that creates a situation where it puts my family at more risk. I would argue it actually puts my family at less risk. My wife and my son (26 years old) have gone to the local gun club (which I'm a member) with me on several occasions to learn how to safely and securely use firearms. I have a legal CC permit, which was obtained through the local Sheriff's department. All firearms I've purchased have required extensive background checks, through the proper channels. Being former military - I have a deeper respect for firearms and their lethality, granted. But still - my secured firearms, whether concealed carry on my person, or at home in my safe, I see as an insurance policy that I hope that I, or my family, never have to cash in on.

Not all of us are George Zimmerman's looking for trouble.

The only people at-risk are those who foolishly see me, my family, or my home/property as a soft-target.

Suicides by gun per 100,000 people:
US 6.3
Can 1.52
Suicides in general
US 12.6
Can 10.4

Dispute that.
The suicide rate is the slightly higher in the US (must be more mentally deficient people) but there are 4 times as many deaths by guns. Do you think that maybe if the gun wasn't available the rate would be lower? Just asking....
Would the rate be on par with other industrialized nations IF the gun wasn't readily available?

PA-PLAYA
but, it seems you are not the norm. How many times have we read in the news that a kid found a gun in a bedside table (loaded) and shot their sibling? THAT does not happen here...

some info:
This type of thing happens more than it should. At least 265 children under the age of 18 picked up a firearm and accidentally shot themselves or someone else with it in 2015, according to numbers compiled by the gun control advocacy group Everytown for Gun Safety.

are these numbers wrong? puttinfool?

PA-PLAYA

do you think that people want to kill you as much as they do that azz Trump ? i sure hope that's not the case. Our Political leader has significant protection as well, Ive never felt a need to own a gun ever and I visit our biggest cities all the time at night,
all combined Ive spent over a year of my life visiting/ being in the US ( luv your Country and have many good friends there), Ive also never felt unsafe there and Ive walked alone in DT Baltimore, Atlanta, DC, Buffalo been with my family in some interesting areas of Charlotte and Detroit , NYC as well as many several other areas. with all due respect It sounds more like paranoia you speak of versus common sense.

candukid

Do your research. Find out the number of gun-related homicides in gun-free zones comprising LA, NY, Chicago in 2017 to current and compare that to the number of innocent people who are killed (accidentally) because of irresponsible gun ownership. Then get back to me.

And make no mistake - gun ownership should come with enormous responsibility. I'm not suggesting that those instances shouldn't be considered. What I am saying is that an overwhelming majority of legal gun owners in this country are like me... they keep their firearms secure. They went through an extensive background check process. And above all else - they don't leave their firearms out where kids or others can have access to them. And in those instances where these type of accidental tragedies happen - yes - hold the gun owner solely responsible! Put him in front of a judge, afford him his rights, and give him an opportunity to prove why he should never again be allowed to purchase a firearm of any sort!

I've no problem with that whatsoever. Owning a firearm comes with responsibilities!

But keep in mind that the media these days aren't going to paint a rosy picture. They're going to promote their biased agendas. Which is why it is completely foolish to take anything that they "report" remotely accurate.

I trust the media about as much as I trust the fucking meth dealer in downtown Allentown. And guess what - despite numerous run-ins with the law, despite a criminal rap sheet that takes no fewer than 40 pages to detail - you can bet your sweet ass he has a gun in his house.

Yet I shouldn't. LOL...

And although I do appreciate you considering me an exception to the norm, I don't personally feel that I am.

Weirfan

No, you are ignorant. Which isn't a personal attack... you just don't know, because your experiences don't necessarily represent the mean.

Two blocks from my house, last year... the police raided two apartments. They were Meth Labs. The perps were big-time dealers in this very rural area, who were also found guilty of breaking into several local homes here and stealing personal property.

They also had an arsenal of weapons that were confiscated.

That's not paranoia. That's reality. Two blocks from my house. Rural Northeast Pennsylvania.

The drug problem here, like everywhere else, has forced people to be concerned for their personal safety. And given the 30-minute average reaction time for the police to show up - well.... do you or do you not choose to be vulnerable? If you do - I respect that. But don't hold it against me if I choose otherwise.

PA-PLAYA

we have the same here. I live minutes from the largest city in Canada with a general population of close to 7 million. We have all the same issues that you have , have the the Russian,Asian, Italian mafias , every gang under the sun with mob and gang people targeted all the time. there are stories every day of drug busts and guns seized, we have shootings in high crime low income areas daily. we have meth labs, no different than you. this summer A kid up my street was arrested for stealing and dealing coke and meth , 3 cop cars on a Sunday morning on his lawn. A grow op around the corner that I walk the dogs by every day with my son. its all just noise and Nobody feels the need to be armed in self defense and we still have some of the lowest gun deaths in the world. Many do own guns for recreational use but they are locked away as is the ammo. There are home invasions and in almost 100% of the cases nobody is killed , the perps get what they want and leave even if they have guns which in many cases they dont. Now if there were homeowners carrying a loaded weapon that's not likely to be the case..... somebody is probably going to be shot likely on both sides of the equation.... fact remains that you have a far greater chance of choking at dinner than being subject to a home invasion. Add to that that only 1/100 home invasions occur when people are at actually at home and of that tiny percentage only 7% of that 1 percent were the victim of a violent crime , even less were actually killed. I cant be convinced that guns are needed or help in any way. it IS nothing more than paranoia. heck I dont even have a home security system and never have but they are commonly used. I am glad you store your guns properly. Its the law up here, they cannot be outside of the locker only to be transported with mandatory trigger locks and when that is the case they cannot be loaded. its a criminal offense to carry a concealed weapon, many types are outright banned completely and that common sense translates to significantly less guns, less gun deaths which we are happy about and laws that nobody complains about . this all obviously helps and saves many of the gun deaths that rsvman references . almost all of the banned weapons that are used and confiscated in Canada and used in many of the violent crimes are tracked back to coming from the US.

Really difficult to understand that way of thinking. You are willing to take a chance that someone with a gun who willfully breaks into your house knowing you are in there is only there to take your stuff, but not willing to trust a person who has never committed a felony with a gun because an accident might happen or a person bent on committing suicide might access it?

Also, there are quick access safes these days that one can keep on the bedside table these days if that is a worry.

johnnydoom

Nobody is saying that, it's just the perceived threat is negligible . Home invasions are rare , home invasions where it's done with somebody at home are extremely rare( 1 percent) . Home invasions with somebody home and where the home invader has a gun are exceedingly rare and it's even rarer that a home invasion with somebody home results in the homeowner being killed. The rationale of needing a gun for such a rare situation makes zero sense . You might as well wrap your whole family up in bubble wrap when they leave the house too. Nobody is saying that legal gun owners should have their guns taken away but the facts are indisputable that homes with guns have significantly more gun deaths. nothing with any reputable research behind it can say that having a gun helps in those situation verus no guns, in fact often the opposite result ( confrontation ) happens. You want and need my 55 inch tv that badly take it I will help you load it in the car. They are $900 , I'll buy another tomorrow. Do random bad things happen, sure everywhere. US is historically steeped in gun culture, that's not going to change nor do I think that is what is wanted. There will always be gun gangs and gun death. Also unfortunately accidental and suicidal deaths with so many guns in close proximity to the home. Perhaps the latter is acceptable.?
For me personally I question those high powered military grade mass killing units and why they are needed and available so easily. How does a guy get 47 legally so easily. If these types of guns were banned some will still find there way in, we have them and they come from places where they are legal but it's much harder to get them and they are much less frequently found and used and it's jail time if caught with one. It does make a big difference

Weirfan

What would those percentages of home invasions be if the would-be invaders knew that the homeowners had no means of personal protection, beyond a golf club, baseball bat, etc.? Are we to assume that the criminals are likewise merely armed with golf clubs or baseball bats? Prohibition has proven that this logic doesn't hold water.

Stats can be manipulated however one wants to reinforce their opinion.

Known knowns vs unknown unknowns. Which is why stats, often times, are meaningless. Lots of extenuating circumstances that go both ways.