Why own a gun?

[CamB]

Originally posted by dd74
Cam - this is the first time I've completely disagreed with you. But I need to first know what exactly the handgun problem is inside the U.S.? Where do you get your information about the so-called problem?

I did sort of allude to it in the last post I made - I am surmising that the difference is handguns (they are the main difference in gun ownership to all those other countries). I'll admit the statistical basis for my complain is worse than weak.

I have to reiterate that I have no problem with (responsible) people who want a gun to shoot/hunt/collect. This includes handguns for those purposes.

But I still disagree on the "protection" aspect. Whether it is law abiding citizens or gangbangers carting around hand cannons for "protection", it (appears) obvious that more guns on the streets overall leads to more people being shot.

It is important to add that I would expect large cities to have way more of a problem (allied to more crime). It is fair to say that NZ has a small population, but Australia doesn't really (30m people, incl two large cities) and just look to Europe. All the big cities have gang problems, but the US leads the way in gang problems with guns.

To change tack slightly. So... lets say people can carry guns for protection, and it is semi-widespread. Maybe you need a licence like a car, and (of course) there will be people who carry (drive) without the licence. So be it.

You can't drive a car when you're drunk. Can you/should you carry a gun?

[jyl]

I earlier suggested that hardly anyone on this board has actually used a gun in self-defense.

Let's find out. Have you personally aimed or fired a gun at another person in self-defense?

Stories you heard from others, times when having a gun made you "feel" safer, times when you felt safer because you "displayed" your gun, and experiences by non-civilians DO NOT count.

[FrayAdjacent911]

Originally posted by CamB
So why do you need one "for protection"?


Or I'll give you guys another choice, in my humble opinion:

a) the US has a problem with handguns; and/or
b) US citizens are, as a group, not sufficiently responsible to own guns.

You have the highest rate of gun death in the OECD, and generally there is no relationship (in the remainder of countries) between gun ownership and gun deaths. So, I conclude that either the widespread availability of handguns is the problem, or you have a problem with the mentality of gun owners.

As for 'needing' a gun. I don't 'need' one. But I do have the CHOICE. Freedom is about choice. I have the freedom of choice to choose how I defend myself. After all, court case after court case in this country have shown that the police have NO RESPONSIBILITY for protecting individuals, only society at large.

If availability were the problem, then the increase in gun ownership would have resulted in an increase in deaths. Simple DOJ statistics show the decrease in violent crimes and in shootings. They are pretty simple statistics, and can't really be jacked around with much to obscure them. Also looking at how many firearms have been sold over the last few decades. Again, the increase in guns in private hands, and the decrease in deaths would indicate it is NOT availability that drives firearm related homicide.

As for Americans not being responsible enough. Roughly half of the adults in this country own at least one firearm. If we were not somewhat responsible about it, accidental shooting injuries and deaths would be through the roof. I'm talking 120 million plus adults in this country. So I don't think it's irresponsibility.


I think the big thing you're failing to realize and differentiate between is the difference between a law abiding citizen, and a criminal.

"The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crime. ~~ Cesare Beccaria, quoted by Thomas Jefferson "

A law abiding citizen is not inclined nor determined to commit crimes. A criminal is.

America has a much different society than, I will gamble, you are used to. A lot of it does sadden me. Gangster rap, movies and music glorifying crime and drug use. The apathy of the youth today, and the sad lack of parenting because people are too busy to raise their kids.

[CamB]

I can't carry a handgun, but I have more freedom than you. Why? I can ride my bicycle around the largest city in the country (1 million people - big enough to get unsafe) through dodgy areas... at night... and not fear for my life.

Something's different.

One of the things is that no-one is going to pull a gun on me. Full stop. We have lots of rifles/shotguns, few handguns. We have no national mentality of using guns for crime or protection from crime.

[FrayAdjacent911]

Originally posted by CamB
But I still disagree on the "protection" aspect. Whether it is law abiding citizens or gangbangers carting around hand cannons for "protection", it (appears) obvious that more guns on the streets overall leads to more people being shot.

It is important to add that I would expect large cities to have way more of a problem (allied to more crime). It is fair to say that NZ has a small population, but Australia doesn't really (30m people, incl two large cities) and just look to Europe. All the big cities have gang problems, but the US leads the way in gang problems with guns.

To change tack slightly. So... lets say people can carry guns for protection, and it is semi-widespread. Maybe you need a licence like a car, and (of course) there will be people who carry (drive) without the licence. So be it.

You can't drive a car when you're drunk. Can you/should you carry a gun? [/B]

You're touching on some good points, and still making some false assumptions.

In the US, most states have a provision for citizens to obtain a license to carry a concealed handgun for the purpose of self defense. The anti gunners cried about blood in the streets and shoot outs over fender benders... EVERY TIME they cried the same things. But it didnt happen.

I think you're still associating an object with a behavior. You seem to think that if an ordinary law abiding adult were carrying a pistol, they'd just haul out and shoot over any slight.

I know many people who carry, and participate on a couple very large firearm related forums, and have only read barely a handful of stories where someone had to even draw their weapon, much less fire it.

You should also consider, showing a firearm is very often enough deterrant to make a would be rapist/mugger/attacker change his mind. Self defense with a firearm doesn't mean someone has to be dead or shot.

To your last point, as mentioned, many states in the US do have a license for carrying a firearm, and I can say without a sliver of a doubt, carrying while intoxicated IS a crime.

We do have laws and regulations and licenses... but you need to be able to differentiate between those who obey them, and those who don't.

[FrayAdjacent911]

Originally posted by CamB
I can't carry a handgun, but I have more freedom than you. Why? I can ride my bicycle around the largest city in the country (1 million people - big enough to get unsafe) through dodgy areas... at night... and not fear for my life.

Something's different.

One of the things is that no-one is going to pull a gun on me. Full stop. We have lots of rifles/shotguns, few handguns. We have no national mentality of using guns for crime or protection from crime.

That's not about freedom, that's about your 'feeling of security'.

I can ride my bike through rough neighborhoods, unarmed. Whether or not I get through unscathed has nothing to do with freedom. It has to do with society.

[CamB]

OK, I come at this from a slightly different angle (still).

Why do so many people get shot?

[FrayAdjacent911]

It's mostly due to the segments of society they choose to associate with.

Again, let me mention, about 70% of gunshot victims in this country have a criminal record. What does that tell you?

[Groesbeck Hurricane]

A .45ACP can be a good weapon to use but a .45LC revolver has that sound when being cocked that gets a person's attention.

That said, how many of you have been shot at? Try having the building you work in shot at because someone wants to see what their semi-auto can do. Or because of turf warfare spilling over to the work district. Or finding three dead drug dealers on your office's doorstep in the morning. Or having your position targeted by terrorists. Trust me, none of those situations will leave you wishing you did not have a weapon.

I own for hunting/sport/protection. It is my choice. I would not force others to own if they don't want to/feel the need to. Please don't suggest that I should not because you feel it is better for me. We have the freedom of choice and many of us have put our lives on the line to ensure others maintain that freedom. I am very appreciative of being able to disagree with others and of being disagreed with.

Oh, I'm first generation American.

[CamB]

That guns are too easily available to criminals?

That criminals want to shoot each other (in NZ, killing ANYONE for any reason, appears to be pretty low on the list of goals for even really hardened criminals).

[FrayAdjacent911]

Cam, do you know what it takes to purchase a gun in the US?

It's really not that easy.

And yeah, it's mostly criminals shooting other criminals. I have no problem with that. Call it natural selection.

Although, I have a problem when they affect innocents, and when people are afraid to go to certain places. We have a problem with a 'revolving door' justice system here. We need harsher punishments and longer prison sentences to keep the criminal element off the streets.

[Seahawk]

jyl,

I live in a rural area so my experience may be askew, but on two occasions I have used a firearm as a deterent to folks who have come on my property without cause at hours that made them suspect.
FYI, the only thing I hunt, besides the dreaded groundhog, are clay pideons and the occasional Corona beer bottle coup attempt, which I dispatch with alacrity.
BTW, I am a fairly large human, but odds never favor the innocent in an unfair fight. It is problemmatic with intruders whether it is fair or not.

[CamB]

Yeah, but your jails are full too. You have one of the highest jail populations (percentage) in the world.

I think you probably just generally have a crime problem. Crime might have gone down recently (due to tougher sentences etc), but I dunno if that has an enduring effect or not. I hope so.

[skipdup]

I think what our friends outside this country fail to realize is why we have the kind of crime we do in this country. It's a societal problem, not a gun problem. I guarantee that murders and violent crime would continue in this country at the same rate with or without guns in our society.

And I have never had to use a firearm for defense.

- Skip

[FrayAdjacent911]

Originally posted by CamB
Yeah, but your jails are full too. You have one of the highest jail populations (percentage) in the world.

I think you probably just generally have a crime problem. Crime might have gone down recently (due to tougher sentences etc), but I dunno if that has an enduring effect or not. I hope so.

Agreed on all accounts.

[CamB]

I think I'll shut up now - I'm imagining up a scenario for you which is impossible. It is probably less about gun control and more about the attitude (amongst (especially) criminals or law abiding citizens) that carting around a gun is necessary in case you need it.

The need for a gun probably doesn't cross anyone's mind much here. I guess that is the main thing. It appears criminals settle their disputes the (extremely) old-fashioned way - with blunt or sharp objects.

[FrayAdjacent911]

Cam, there is a reality here that, even though remote, bad things can happen to good people, even in good areas of town.

We all have insurance on our cars. Carrying a sidearm is just insurance. That's the way we think about it here.

It's always been quoted and applied to many things. "it's better to have one and not need one, than need one and not have one"

[Hugh R]

I was on a trail for a home invasion, double execution of the homeowners. Can't say a gun would have helped, they were woken up in the middle of the night in bed with two guys with guns in their faces. What they did to this married couple was absolutely sickening before they killed them. Have a gun now.

How about the LA Riots 10+ years ago. Had friends who had cinderblocks thrown on their cars from bridges. How about Reginald Denny, the trucker who got pulled from his truck and was almost beaten to death while the police watched on TV from blocks away. How about the well dressed black man in a suit who after the riots said maybe next time instead of burning down their neighborhoods, they come out to "Whities" house.

How about in urban disaster planning for the big earthquake in Los Angeles they tell you you need three things, food, water and something to protect the first two.

Mormons are supposed to keep supplies for something like a year or more, I don't remember exactly. Anyway, a friend of mine says his disaster survival plan is that he has a 357, and a list of where the Mormons in the neighborhood live.

[skipdup]

Mormons are supposed to keep supplies for something like a year or more, I don't remember exactly. Anyway, a friend of mine says his disaster survival plan is that he has a 357, and a list of where the Mormons in the neighborhood live.

That is so bad.

[350HP930]

Unfortunately many violent criminals walk free because our legal system and jails are clogged with non-violent drug offenders.

Not to mention many of the people shooting at each other are doing so due to conflicts within the US multibillion dollar black market that our modern day prohibition spawns.

If the US were to decriminalize recreational drug use I guarantee you that you would see a dramatic drop in violent crime in america, plus you would have the added benefit of having the jail space to put violent criminals behind bars for a very long time.