Pulpsmack
Posts: 394
Joined: 4/15/2004
From: Louisiana
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: juliaoceania
pulpsmack,
It is a political issue, I am not anti-second amendment at all, but what you seem to be siting is ancedotal evidence how how effective guns are in the home. The only study I have heard of states that you are more likely going to have your gun used against you or a member of your family than it will defend against home robberies. I have never known anyone personally that defended themselves with a gun in their home. On the other hand my aunt had her uterus shot out accidently by her own brother while he was cleaning his hunting rifle, and one of my grade school friend's lost her little brother to an accidental hand gun shooting, the back of his head was blown out. Now from my own ancedotal evidence these facts made me anti gun for many years.. but then I figured that if people want something that dangerous around and feel they can handle it they have that right. I wouldn't own one myself.
If you have any links that you could post that shows that the above isn't true.. I would really be interested,.. perhaps I overlooked the benefits of being armed in my home.
My brother inlaw is a peace officer, he shoots at paper targets all the time, and he practices around his home. He has to pass tests annually with high percentage accuracy, yet has trouble with moving targets around his home, like rattle snakes. I asked him about this thread, and he told me that when he went through the academy they told him that accuracy goes down as stress and unpredictability go up, and he wouldn't rely on a gun to protect his home. They have a Queensland heeler for that purpose.. she is very alert and very protective.
It would be completely hypocritical of me to bash statistics on one hand then rally behind them on the other. If you want supporting "evidence" about why guns are sooooo bad you can read all about it on the Brady campaign site (which includes that more likely to be used against you business). If you want supporting evidence for why guns are soooo great you can find the same thing on sites like RKBA and NRA. I lend very little credence in any statistical analysis because like one has little idea on how (accurately) they are recorded. For example, during the assault weapons controversy, the Brady Bunch jackasses railed behind the ATF "study" that 1 in 5 gun crimes were committed with an "assault weapon". Turns out they lumped "assault weapons" in with "sporting rifles", shotguns, and any other longarm.
I'll do you one better. There is a "statistic" out there that shows that people who brandish weapons in defense of an armed assailant are likely to have a violent occurance as a result. Some asshole tried to rob me at gunpoint but as he turned around he saw the finger of reath upon him. I made the mistake of letting him live and it nearly cost me my life as he ran off firing at me. Ignoring that for a moment you could say that had I not been armed there would not have been a gunfight. I simply could have given my wallet and it "might" have ended there. I didn't have a dollar in my wallet, so maybe not. Then again, I had an acquaintance who was held up with his girlfriend in the nearby area. The robber took the money then marched them over to the ATM where he held each hostage out of the camera's view as the other was ordered to max withdraw. He then ordered them to their car, raped the woman inside, and had the guy drive while he made jokes about what just transpired. He then had the two strip and ordered them out naked on a deserted block of a terrible part of town. This is not the typical occurance of a mugging, but this is a true story that happened to someone I know of personally. Any day I will take the risk of violence whilst defending my right to live free of victimization over placing my life or of those I care about at the mercy and whims of the person who would assault us in the first place. That goes tenfold for anybody who would dare to violate the sanctity of my home to visit his crimes upon me/us.
You are at least 75% more likely to get into an accident within 10 or fewer miles of the home. Does this mean you drive extra safe within this parameter and more recklessly outside? isn't this enough to put you off car transportation for local travel? Nonesense. We have lost more lives to highways in the past 30 years than we have lost people to guns (INCLUDING OUR WAR DEAD FROM ALL WARS FOUGHT IN AMERICAN HISTORY). Cars by statistics are arguably the most dangerous thing created. Nevertheless, very few of us are persuaded off the road by these statistics, and few if any would call you foolish for ignoring these statistics.
The truth is that if you are a safe, observant driver the chances that YOU become a statistic are minimal. The same is true of firearms. If you are a safe, responsible firearms owner the chances of you having a gun related tragedy is minimal. The fact is that your Aunt's brother is/was a moron who had no business handling the weapon. Simple observance of the 4 rules of firearms safety would have ensured that tragedy would NEVER have happened. Part of the reason why we as a nation are fucked is that we refuse to attribute responsibility to the individual. Sue the cigarettes because they killed 2 pack smoker Uncle Jack. Sue Mc Donald's because they didn't put "Hot" on the coffee cup. Sue Bushmaster because they made the rifle that the DC sniper used. Why not sue Anheiser-Busch for putting out a product that is the common denominator between the lion's share of road-related deaths and Domestic violence, or Chevrolet for the other side of the DWI coin or for building a product that exceeds all known speed limits for its contribution of reckless/speeding deaths? Weeellllllll.... too many of us would stand to lose out on a product that we base our lifestyles around, so we'll make an exception there and assess responsibility to the person. Guns are not cobras, they are not imbued with evil intelligence. Current safeguards implemented in the weapons sold ensure that guns don't go off. There are no accidents, but negligent users who have caused the dangerous situation and pulled the trigger.
If you own a gun YOU are responsible for understanding its safehandling and use, for training with the weapon if you intend on using one for defensive purposes, and securing it from children who would have access to the home. If you can't handle the responsibility, if you aren't interested in training properly, and you are not sure you can drop the hammer on another and take the life of a human being (before said "human" takes yours), owning a gun for defensive purposes is NOT for you, end of story.
If you are willing to accept the responsibility and act/train accordingly you have armed yourself with a tool capable of saving your life or the life of another human being who is being attacked by another. This is a devestating equalizer in the hands of women who would be assaulted by a male aggressor who is significantly larger and stronger and/or multiple aggressors. The facts are that most reasonable people would trade their second amendment RIGHTS in exchange for the iron clad guarantee that the citizen and citizen's family would be free from violence (to say nothing of the 2nd's intended purpose of freedom from tyranny). The fact is that Police are impotent so far as crime prevention is concerned. Police "may" be relied upon to arrest your rapist after the deed or find your sister's murderer 24 days after the slaying, but police cannot be relied upon to come bursting through the door before the rapist penetrates or the psycopath strangles.
Criminals will always have access to weapons whether or not the nation bans weapons or not. If we cannot stop Mexicans from running across the desert or heroin from flying under the radar, what makes anybody think automatic weapons, explosives, etc can be repelled from our borders as well? The best thing you can have to combat crime is a totalitarian police state that uses civillian informants to it visit non-patriot witch hunts upon anybody who does not fall in line with the program. We prize our freedoms too much to accept such a solution (and rightfully so) making this impossible. Therefore the best solution is granting the potential victims access to the tools necessary to defend themselves.
|
RE: Weaponry, protecting what's yours - 
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread