Author Topic: Firearms in the home  (Read 358226 times)

Yaeger

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 759
  • Age: 34
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #50 on: February 28, 2016, 11:42:10 PM »
Out of pure curiosity, how does the government enforce the requirement of having firearms 'safe and secure'?

They don't, they can't. Cities pass laws like this as a means to punish people for accidents or theft.

mrpercentage

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1236
  • Location: PHX, AZ
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #51 on: February 29, 2016, 01:07:06 AM »
Quote
For some folks, safety is an issue regardless of area.

Do you know why people worry about this?   It seems like there are so many other things that could go wrong.  Is it just a cultural thing?

Up north (Northern BC, Alaska, Yukon, etc.) once in a while you read about an aggressive bear breaking into someone's house.    But home invasions seems very rare.

Had to comment. I should make a better habit of putting them all in one post.

I do take a gun into the wilderness. Mostly for a comfort feeling. I know it sounds silly but I live near mountain lions. I remember once running into some tracks when I didn't have a gun. It was a big cat paws, wide as my hand, and they looked fresh. It was in soupy mud near a creek. It may sound ridiculous but my butt puckered and I had a hard time enjoying myself. There was also a problem in Payson Arizona with a black bear attacking several people for a few months. I like to hike up there. That is were I saw the cougar tracks actually. I swear I was being watched the whole time. I didn't see him though.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2012/06/arizona-bear-attacks-up-to-three-in-a-month/
absolute truth... prison guard that has seen shanks does not makes 45k a year managing bullshit tech that was outsourced for what?.... cheaper tech and less taxes... probably

steviesterno

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 248
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #52 on: February 29, 2016, 04:48:33 AM »
my parents were pretty anti gun, since they grew up in NYC. But I went to school in semi-rural PA where hunting season is a school holiday and people made gun racks in shop.

My parents aren't willing to keep one in the house, but whenever they want to go to dinner downtown they always want me to go, and ask if I'm going to be bringing a "friend". so firearms are good to have around when they want to have them around.

They brought up the point that break ins are unlikely, which I agree with. But for some reason they aren't willing to post a "This family does not believe in or own firearms" sign in their front yard.

some people owning guns make them a deterrent to crime. here in Texas (where I live now) 1/3 people own a gun. So your chance of breaking into a house with a gun owner is about every 3rd time. it's also legal for anyone to carry in their car. as soon as this went into effect, car jacking went down significantly.

Fishindude

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1259
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #53 on: February 29, 2016, 05:34:16 AM »
Guns are a hobby of mine, have a bunch of them, shoot quite a bit, hunt quite a bit, work on them myself, reload ammo, etc.
Most are kept in the safe, but I keep a few around the shop and house that we can get our hands on quickly.   It's not unusual to shoot a coyote, groundhog or other such varmint in the barnyard or out the back door.   Also travel with a gun or carry occasionally, but nobody will ever see it or be aware of it, unless things got horribly bad.

We don't live in a crime area, have very little fear of a home invasion, but am prepared regardless.
I shoot a lot and consider myself basically proficient with most firearms.
My kids grew up around guns and were shooting BB guns very early, then .22's and bigger stuff as they got older.  They know how to handle firearms safely.
Regarding dealing with first responders, that is so unlikely to ever be needed, that I don't worry about it.  I do have some close friends in law enforcement, that would probably be my first call.



hdatontodo

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 230
  • Location: Balto Co, MD
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #54 on: February 29, 2016, 06:18:14 AM »
My point isn't that making a house harder to gain entry is an end in itself, but rather is a layer of defense, and part of a larger plan that might include a strong bedroom door and brace, alarm, dog, cameras, etc. If you might get in a shootout, where is your bulletproof vest and flashlight, and quick access combination locked box? What about training? You don't just buy a firearm and assume you are protected.

Midwest

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1110
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #55 on: February 29, 2016, 06:48:19 AM »
I am surprised that people will buy a gun for home protection before hardening their doors and windows against forced entry. Also, some people will open their door to talk to anyone that knocks.
Oh come now. We have a steel door. The perps kicked it in, on the hinge side.
Please explain how that could have been hardened. And still live like a normal person, I mean.

We replaced some of the short screws on the hinges with 3" screws that make it into the framing.  I suspect that would make the hinges harder to kick in.  Don't know what to do about the windows or the slider.
« Last Edit: February 29, 2016, 06:57:09 AM by Midwest »

golden1

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1323
  • Location: MA
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #56 on: February 29, 2016, 07:12:34 AM »
I am pro gun control, but if I lived in a more rural area where I could not count on police coming to my aid in a reasonable time frame in case of an emergency, I would have to balance that with the knowledge that owning a gun in the home is the biggest risk factor in being shot and killed by one.  I would probably take other measures instead, like maybe having a dog, an alarm system, strong locks etc...   

electriceagle

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 394
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #57 on: February 29, 2016, 07:15:54 AM »
1. There is no "safe" area in the world. However, we are not afraid precisely because we can protect ourselves. The police exist for law enforcement, not protection. When seconds count, police are minutes or hours away.

You really don't want to advertise that you don't have any self protection in your house -- known "gun free" zones are literally targets of opportunity.

Your username implies that you live in Texas.

According to Wikipedia, people in your state have about a 0.00005 chance of being murdered in a year. Across a 100 year lifetime, your chance of being murdered is half of a percent. Your chance of being a victim of any violent crime is 0.3% per year.

Furthermore, the overwhelming majority of violent crimes happen between people who live violent lifestyles. That is, they deal drugs or are in a gang. Rates of violent crime against people who are just minding their own business are vanishingly small.

You live in a safe area of the world.

If you don't deal drugs and aren't in a gang, the effort that you put into preparation for counter-violence is similar in return to the shoes-on, shoes-off that we're all forced to do at the airport.
« Last Edit: February 29, 2016, 07:27:35 AM by electriceagle »

GizmoTX

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 987
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #58 on: February 29, 2016, 08:07:32 AM »
People in Texas are statistically safer because of the culture of self sufficiency, including self protection. However, idiot criminals still exist & Texas is a border state.

Trusted Travellers don't remove shoes at the airport. Yes, I qualify.

Midwest

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1110
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #59 on: February 29, 2016, 08:43:44 AM »
1. There is no "safe" area in the world. However, we are not afraid precisely because we can protect ourselves. The police exist for law enforcement, not protection. When seconds count, police are minutes or hours away.

You really don't want to advertise that you don't have any self protection in your house -- known "gun free" zones are literally targets of opportunity.

Your username implies that you live in Texas.

According to Wikipedia, people in your state have about a 0.00005 chance of being murdered in a year. Across a 100 year lifetime, your chance of being murdered is half of a percent. Your chance of being a victim of any violent crime is 0.3% per year.

Furthermore, the overwhelming majority of violent crimes happen between people who live violent lifestyles. That is, they deal drugs or are in a gang. Rates of violent crime against people who are just minding their own business are vanishingly small.

You live in a safe area of the world.

If you don't deal drugs and aren't in a gang, the effort that you put into preparation for counter-violence is similar in return to the shoes-on, shoes-off that we're all forced to do at the airport.

I agree with you that unless you live in certain areas or participate in certain activities, your chances of dying via violent crime are exceedingly small.

On the other side of the coin, per wikipedia:

"11,208 deaths by homicide (3.5 per 100,000),[3] 21,175 by suicide with a firearm,[4] 505 deaths due to accidental discharge of a firearm,[4] and 281 deaths due to firearms-use with "undetermined intent"[5] for a total of 33,169 deaths related to firearms"

Looking at the 12,000 deaths not related to suicide, roughly 500 were accidental.  In a country of 300m+ with 300M+ guns, the odds of being involved in a gun accident are fairly low as well.

Not everyone wants a gun in their home and I respect that decision.  Having said that, the odds of death via an accident are exceedingly low.
« Last Edit: February 29, 2016, 09:01:35 AM by Midwest »

cheapass

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 361
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #60 on: February 29, 2016, 10:16:42 AM »
We prefer to insource our physical security (DIY: the mustachian way!) rather than outsourcing it to the police. A gun in the hand beats a cop on the phone. Although we live in a safe area, it turns out that criminals are mobile and they don't limit their antics to only "dangerous" zip codes.

We also have motion detection lights, deadbolts, an alarm system, and a dog.

In my opinion, it's irresponsible not to be prepared to protect your family from those who may do them harm.
« Last Edit: February 29, 2016, 10:19:33 AM by armueller2001 »

Jack

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4751
  • Location: Atlanta, GA
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #61 on: February 29, 2016, 11:11:24 AM »
I live in what ignorant, cowardly suburbanites might characterize as "the hood" and haven't bothered to buy a gun simply because it's not dangerous enough for it to be necessary. To be clear: I strongly support private ownership of guns*; I'm just too cheap to pay for the gun itself/ammo/carry permit/holster/safe/range training/etc. because the ROI isn't good enough. Maybe I'll buy some after FIRE or something; I don't know.

Also, I'd be more worried about a burglar breaking in and stealing my guns when I wasn't home, than a robber attacking me when I was.

I am surprised that people will buy a gun for home protection before hardening their doors and windows against forced entry. Also, some people will open their door to talk to anyone that knocks.
Oh come now. We have a steel door. The perps kicked it in, on the hinge side.
Please explain how that could have been hardened. And still live like a normal person, I mean.

We replaced some of the short screws on the hinges with 3" screws that make it into the framing.  I suspect that would make the hinges harder to kick in.  Don't know what to do about the windows or the slider.

  • As you said, use longer screws in the hinges and strike plate, ones long enough to go all the way into the studs, not just the door frame. Or install a door frame reinforcement kit.
  • Windows can be secured by sash pins and security film (to keep them from easily being broken out), or bars.
  • Sliding patio doors generally suck for security. However, they can be made to suck slightly less by bracing them with a security bar laid in the track. (Permanently installed on the outside, I suppose, and removable on the inside.) Or replace them with French doors, with dead bolts into the ceiling and floor.
(*In fact, I'm fairly radical: I believe the Second Amendment was written by the Founders, being terrorists freedom fighters themselves, specifically to enshrine our right as citizens to violently overthrow a tyrannical government. As such, IMO even bans on things like fully-automatic machine guns and such are unconstitutional.)

MoonShadow

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2544
  • Location: Louisville, Ky.
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #62 on: February 29, 2016, 12:16:57 PM »
I am pro gun control, but if I lived in a more rural area where I could not count on police coming to my aid in a reasonable time frame in case of an emergency, I would have to balance that with the knowledge that owning a gun in the home is the biggest risk factor in being shot and killed by one.  I would probably take other measures instead, like maybe having a dog, an alarm system, strong locks etc...

True, but everything is relative.  The odds remain incredibly low in any household that does not engage in other risk factors, such as drugs or alcohol.  Alcohol & firearms, in particular, do not mix well.  The largest risk factor for drowning is owning a pool, as well.  Notably, I don't own a pool, but I still force my kids to take swimming classes; because other people own pools.  (And there is this thing called an ocean.)

MoonShadow

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2544
  • Location: Louisville, Ky.
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #63 on: February 29, 2016, 12:27:17 PM »
My point isn't that making a house harder to gain entry is an end in itself, but rather is a layer of defense, and part of a larger plan that might include a strong bedroom door and brace, alarm, dog, cameras, etc. If you might get in a shootout, where is your bulletproof vest and flashlight, and quick access combination locked box? What about training? You don't just buy a firearm and assume you are protected.

Have you been reading the same thread I have?  Because I don't think there is a single gun owner that has posted here that hasn't had training.  The average police officer only actually practices with his weapon annually, and the average "gun nut" is way more proficient than that.  That said, of all the methods of self-defense that exist, the firearm is the one that requires the least amount of training and/or practice to achieve a basic level of proficiency and safety.  Most take years of training & practice, and even then the best masters can still be defeated by a thug that knows which end the bullet comes out.  And then, there are handguns that are designed to be carried by an adult that doesn't practice, such as the derringers produced by Bond Arms.  Any handgun that is capable of shooting 5 projectiles at once, is likely intended to only succeed in one or two actually hitting the target, and it's definitely not designed for marksmanship.

BeginnerStache

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 768
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #64 on: February 29, 2016, 01:29:49 PM »
Never had any inclination to own a gun myself. Shot them enough during my military days. Even have partial hearing loss as a result. The odds of someone breaking into my house and me being able to comprehend what is going on, retrieve my gun from it's locked place, and fire without incidence, I figure are so remotely low so as not to register on the scale of "fear." I live in a pretty small house and own very little. Killing someone isn't really worth having my 27" TV stolen. From my own knowledge I figure I don't have too many enemies, at least none that would necessitate protecting my family from mass murder.

All this and I am pretty sure my 60lb Pit mix would easily beat me to the punch of disposing of any would be serial killers. I am not anti-gun by any means, I just don't find them useful.


AZDude

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1172
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #65 on: February 29, 2016, 02:22:12 PM »
I was reading the contingency planning thread, and I realized that some of the posters feel the need to keep firearms in their house for protection.   I'm really not trolling, I'd like to understand your point of view better, because this seems foreign to me.

1.   Why don't you move to a less dangerous area?    It can't be much fun, being constantly on edge that someone is going to invade your house or assault you on the street.

Bad stuff happens everywhere. For me, I grew up in a household where one of my parents worked in law enforcement. This meant we were always a potential retaliation target(we had rocks thrown through our window and were threatened a few times in public while out and about). Gives a different perspective.

Quote
2.  Do you regularly practice with your firearm?   (I used to shoot cans with a .22 when I was a kid, but that's about the limit of my experience.   When I eventually FIRE, I'd like to try some practical shooting if I can find a good range.   But I don't have time for another hobby right now.)

Not recently, although I have plenty of practice shooting both handguns and rifles. Once you know the basics, its not difficult to point and shoot at someone in the same room as you.

Quote
3.  If you have children or a spouse, how have you trained them to stay out of the way if there's an incident?  i.e. so they don't get shot?

Its always up to the shooter to know what they are shooting and why. Don't panic and this is not a problem. Bottom line, in this situation, your family is in more danger from an intruder than from you.

Quote
4.  How to you plan to deal with the first responders after an incident?    Will the police arrest you?   Do you have a lawyer ready to call on your phone?  Or does your jurisdiction take the view that you're allowed to shoot in your home, so you don't expect to have issues with the authorities?

This is idiocy. Castle doctrine and the right to self-defense. If a stranger enters your home, there are few places in the world where it is unlawful to use deadly force. Different if you chase them, subdue them and execute, etc... In most cases, you have nothing to fear. However, you will need to make sure that when the police do show up that you clearly identify yourself and dont get shot by LE.

Quote
For the record, we don't have any firearms in the house.   In fact, DW can't stand them, so we're not likely to anytime soon.

Certainly your choice, but I made it clear to my wife early on in the relationship that I consider having a firearm in the home non-negotiable, although when we moved to California I gave it to a family member due to California's strict gun laws. I never got it back after coming back, but have considered buying one strictly for home defense.

tyort1

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1076
  • Age: 45
  • Location: Denver, Colorado
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #66 on: February 29, 2016, 02:50:53 PM »
I'm from Texas, owned a lot of guns growing up, did some hunting, a lot more "fun" target shooting (empty beer cans FTW).  But I don't have any guns where I live now, in Denver.  Even though I am very comfortable around them.  For 3 main reasons:

1.  Statistically our chances of getting being harmed in a violent altercation are very, very low.  Now some people say that statistics don't matter that much, but I say that they do.  Hell, my entire retirement portfolio is dependent upon statistics and math.  So yeah, I trust the stats.

2.  Following the whole stats theme, the one single thing I can do to raise my (and my family's) chances of being harmed by a gun is to bring a gun into my home.  Counterintuitive, but true.  So I am keeping my family safer by not bringing a gun into the equation.

3.  I know about myself that I am not eager to kill another human being.  If I'm in an confrontation, I will hesitate and the other person likely won't.  And that will likely get me killed in that situation. 

Oh, and I totally get the whole mentality of "you are never safe, always be prepared".  I used to feel exactly the same way.  But then I realized the above 3 points and thats a more rational approach.  Plus the other thing I realized - I personally have never been assaulted or been in a violent confrontation with someone armed.  And furthermore I didn't know anyone else that had been killed or even seriously injured in such a confrontation.  So yeah, it "might" happen, but then again I "might" get struck by lightening, too.  Or the stock market "might" go into a 20 year downward spiral.  But I'm not basing any of my decisions off that relatively unfounded fear.
Frugalite in training.

Jack

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4751
  • Location: Atlanta, GA
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #67 on: February 29, 2016, 03:13:31 PM »
Plus the other thing I realized - I personally have never been assaulted or been in a violent confrontation with someone armed.

I haven't either. Moreover, in the incidents that have come closest the other guy had not only a gun, but a badge too -- so I don't think me being armed would have been very helpful!

Mr.Bubbles

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 30
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #68 on: February 29, 2016, 03:24:14 PM »
Just my view on children being around guns.

I do not allow toy guns in my house (only real ones), i have a whole room for toys and you wont find a gun in their(blaster, bazooka, nerf, doesn't matter)

children in my house including nephews and nieces know that they are to treat ANY GUN, including toy, bb, water, as if it is a real gun.

You point a gun at something you intend to kill or shoot, not play.

I think its important to treat every gun as a real gun so there is no grey area, i was tought  at 5 years old that a bb gun is to be treated just like my dads 30-30, needed to be cleaned, and taken care of. never pointed at a person, house, or anything i did not intend to kill.

when you get yelled at for holding a bb gun wrong its easy to see how dangerous guns are.

once i mastered the BB gun and my dad thought i handled it just like i should a .22, i was gifted a .22 at christmas.

* all guns growing up including BB were locked in a gun safe and treated as a lethal weapon.

* all guns in my current house are locked in a gun safe (including the BB gun) while there are any children in the house that could possibly have access to them, other wise there is a loaded .45 (loaded clip in, nothing in the chamber) in my bed side desk with an extra clip.

scottish

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 707
  • Location: Ottawa
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #69 on: February 29, 2016, 03:34:50 PM »
I have to say, this is really impressive.   Pretty much every gun owner in this thread (not sure about blue house who just made one short post) is a fervent believer in firearms safety and takes all reasonable precautions with their weapons.

Al1961

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 193
  • Age: 55
  • Location: Alberta - B.C.
  • Dad of a husky Husky
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #70 on: February 29, 2016, 03:36:15 PM »


Quote
4.  How to you plan to deal with the first responders after an incident?    Will the police arrest you?   Do you have a lawyer ready to call on your phone?  Or does your jurisdiction take the view that you're allowed to shoot in your home, so you don't expect to have issues with the authorities?

This is idiocy. Castle doctrine and the right to self-defense. If a stranger enters your home, there are few places in the world where it is unlawful to use deadly force. Different if you chase them, subdue them and execute, etc... In most cases, you have nothing to fear. However, you will need to make sure that when the police do show up that you clearly identify yourself and dont get shot by LE.


The castle doctrine does not exist in Canada. The cops will charge you with assault/attempted murder/murder if you use a weapon to defend yourself in your own home. Even if your life is in immediate danger. OCCASIONALLY, the crown prosecutors will decide not to proceed with prosecution, but don't bet on it. http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/matt-gurney-after-two-years-judge-acquits-man-who-defended-himself-with-a-gun
FIREd July 2014

MoonShadow

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2544
  • Location: Louisville, Ky.
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #71 on: February 29, 2016, 04:13:02 PM »
I have to say, this is really impressive.   Pretty much every gun owner in this thread (not sure about blue house who just made one short post) is a fervent believer in firearms safety and takes all reasonable precautions with their weapons.

Thank you.  And this statement tells us something important about yourself.  While you may never own a weapon of your own, as it is certainly a personal choice; the realization you just expressed above implies that you will also never vote directly contrary to our interests, as gun owners, solely based upon an erroneous belief in the untrustworthy nature of gun owners generally.

Next, if you are willing, I think we would be happy to dispel any erroneous beliefs in the effectiveness of gun control measures as well.

MoonShadow

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2544
  • Location: Louisville, Ky.
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #72 on: February 29, 2016, 04:22:15 PM »


Quote
4.  How to you plan to deal with the first responders after an incident?    Will the police arrest you?   Do you have a lawyer ready to call on your phone?  Or does your jurisdiction take the view that you're allowed to shoot in your home, so you don't expect to have issues with the authorities?

This is idiocy. Castle doctrine and the right to self-defense. If a stranger enters your home, there are few places in the world where it is unlawful to use deadly force. Different if you chase them, subdue them and execute, etc... In most cases, you have nothing to fear. However, you will need to make sure that when the police do show up that you clearly identify yourself and dont get shot by LE.


The castle doctrine does not exist in Canada. The cops will charge you with assault/attempted murder/murder if you use a weapon to defend yourself in your own home. Even if your life is in immediate danger. OCCASIONALLY, the crown prosecutors will decide not to proceed with prosecution, but don't bet on it. http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/matt-gurney-after-two-years-judge-acquits-man-who-defended-himself-with-a-gun

You would if Canada still honored English Common Law.  That said, according to Wikipedia, you do, but not by that name...

By court ruling in 2011, a resident is permitted to use "reasonable and necessary" force in subduing an intruder in his or her private domicile or business. By definition, killing the intruder is only an option if non-lethal means cannot be carried out, and excessive force with obvious intent to kill is not necessarily defensible in court.

The part I bolded is also true in every "Castle Doctrine" state in the US, it's just that those laws force the court to presume that the homeowner was acting properly, unless and until a prosecutor can show otherwise.  The castle doctrine does not protect homeowners from arrest, it mostly puts an additional burden of proof upon a prosecutor, that didn't exist before.  As I stated before, if I were to ever shoot someone in my own home, I'm going to get arrested.

Tom Bri

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 527
  • Location: Small Town, Flyover Country
  • More just cheap, than Mustachian
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #73 on: February 29, 2016, 06:34:16 PM »
US 32% of households have firearms. (It might be a bit higher, I have seen different estimates)
Canada, 25% households have firearms. http://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/rp-pr/csj-sjc/jsp-sjp/wd98_4-dt98_4/p2.html

Um. Really not that big a difference. Some provinces have far higher ownership levels than the US average. It's the people, not the number of guns. Some countries have lots of violent people, and others have fewer.

The US is the second-safest country in the New World though, after Canada. So, the two countries with the highest gun ownership rates are the two safest. Odd fact.

MoonShadow

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2544
  • Location: Louisville, Ky.
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #74 on: February 29, 2016, 06:44:38 PM »
The US is the second-safest country in the New World though, after Canada. So, the two countries with the highest gun ownership rates are the two safest. Odd fact.

If no one challenges that odd fact, I'll eat my hat.

Tom Bri

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 527
  • Location: Small Town, Flyover Country
  • More just cheap, than Mustachian
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #75 on: February 29, 2016, 07:02:33 PM »
The US is the second-safest country in the New World though, after Canada. So, the two countries with the highest gun ownership rates are the two safest. Odd fact.

If no one challenges that odd fact, I'll eat my hat.

;-) Cuba claims lower crime, and maybe even has lower crime than the US. No way to verify Cuban numbers though. No other country comes close to US levels though.

Letj

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 307
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #76 on: February 29, 2016, 07:19:15 PM »
The US is the second-safest country in the New World though, after Canada. So, the two countries with the highest gun ownership rates are the two safest. Odd fact.

If no one challenges that odd fact, I'll eat my hat.

Keep in mind the use of the term New World so the poster is comparing the US and Canada to developing countries like Mexico, Brazil, Colombia, Jamaica, etc. These countries are hands down way more dangerous than the US.

yuka

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 324
  • Location: East coast for now
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #77 on: February 29, 2016, 08:39:19 PM »
...

They brought up the point that break ins are unlikely, which I agree with. But for some reason they aren't willing to post a "This family does not believe in or own firearms" sign in their front yard.

...

I'm just going to point out that, from a security perspective, giving your adversary a chance to enumerate your vulnerabilities is seldom wise.

(Vaguely) on that note, I guess the best signs would indicate your regular recreational use of hard drugs, alcohol, and semi-automatic sidearms. That's announcing yourself as a person who is probably home and armed all the time, but rational very little of the time... Making it the most dangerous Geneva Convention-abiding residence of all.

tyort1

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1076
  • Age: 45
  • Location: Denver, Colorado
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #78 on: February 29, 2016, 08:51:04 PM »
US 32% of households have firearms. (It might be a bit higher, I have seen different estimates)
Canada, 25% households have firearms. http://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/rp-pr/csj-sjc/jsp-sjp/wd98_4-dt98_4/p2.html

Um. Really not that big a difference. Some provinces have far higher ownership levels than the US average. It's the people, not the number of guns. Some countries have lots of violent people, and others have fewer.

The US is the second-safest country in the New World though, after Canada. So, the two countries with the highest gun ownership rates are the two safest. Odd fact.

Haha, of course.  Because the other "New World" countries are not first world nations.  Of course Canada and the US is going to be after than Central and Southern America.  But if you compare the US to other FIRST WORLD countries, things are not so impressive. 

But it's all a bunch of worthless discussion - whether you are pro gun or anti-gun, it does not matter.  There is no way in hell the US is ever going to change their basic attitudes towards guns.  If they do then "I" will eat my hat.
Frugalite in training.

nnls

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 747
  • Location: Perth, AU
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #79 on: February 29, 2016, 09:06:08 PM »

Crime is always an issue, and fewer guns does not equal fewer crimes. There are mass knife attacks in china, violent crime went up in england and australia when they decreased civilian gun possessions, and all major dictatorships started with a disarming of the population. Guns don't cause violence, people do.


Just wondering where you got the figures for violent crime increasing in England and Australia when they decreased civilian gun possessions. As to my understanding and from a very quick google search violent crime in Australia didnt increase

http://edition.cnn.com/2015/06/19/world/us-australia-gun-control/

mrpercentage

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1236
  • Location: PHX, AZ
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #80 on: February 29, 2016, 09:19:44 PM »
I have to say, this is really impressive.   Pretty much every gun owner in this thread (not sure about blue house who just made one short post) is a fervent believer in firearms safety and takes all reasonable precautions with their weapons.

Don't be too impressed. You are on a frugality forum. The ability to suspend a temporary reward to achieve a better longer term one is a hallmark of intelligence. Those browsing here are undoubtably wiser than the standard gun owner. I would bet the futures on that one. All in.

if someone is not familiar with guns please consider something like this https://www.copsplus.com/prodnum8643.php

that might prevent something like this
http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/breaking-news/os-mom-accidentally-shot-killed-daughter-20151230-story.html
absolute truth... prison guard that has seen shanks does not makes 45k a year managing bullshit tech that was outsourced for what?.... cheaper tech and less taxes... probably

cheapass

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 361
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #81 on: March 01, 2016, 07:11:58 AM »
I also am pro gun control and support stricter gun laws like we have in Calif but not bans.

Curious, what additional laws does California have that are more stringent than federal regs?

Paul der Krake

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3125
  • Age: 9
  • Location: WA
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #82 on: March 01, 2016, 07:59:21 AM »
Gun prices aren't the largest deterrent. It's the ongoing cost of ammo and range fees that will sink your budget. They make a $8 bucket of golf balls that look cheap in comparison.

AZDude

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1172
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #83 on: March 01, 2016, 08:25:26 AM »
I also am pro gun control and support stricter gun laws like we have in Calif but not bans.

Curious, what additional laws does California have that are more stringent than federal regs?

Depends on the municipality, but across the entire state you cannot drive with a loaded gun in the car. The gun and the ammunition have to be separated and the gun must be in some kind of closed container(If I remember right, its been a couple of years). You also have to register a gun if its being brought in from another state(if you are moving to CA).

City of San Diego, for example, was very strict and did not allow concealed weapons and getting a permit to do so was entirely subjective. Basically the local PD had to specifically approve you.  There were more, but I forget exactly what they were.

Contrast that to Arizona, where concealed weapons are legal as long as you are not legally barred from owning a firearm. I can walk around in public with a handgun under my coat and its 100% legal. You can drive a car with a gun under the seat(and I have), although be on your best behavior if you get pulled over.

Fishindude

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1259
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #84 on: March 01, 2016, 08:53:37 AM »
Indiana is similar to AZ.  I have a lifetime concealed carry permit, so legally could take a gun most anywhere, concealed out of sight or in a holster in plain view.
No special rules about transporting in vehicles either.    We can also purchase silencers (suppressors) with the proper permit.

cheapass

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 361
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #85 on: March 01, 2016, 08:59:14 AM »
I also am pro gun control and support stricter gun laws like we have in Calif but not bans.

Curious, what additional laws does California have that are more stringent than federal regs?

Depends on the municipality, but across the entire state you cannot drive with a loaded gun in the car. The gun and the ammunition have to be separated and the gun must be in some kind of closed container(If I remember right, its been a couple of years). You also have to register a gun if its being brought in from another state(if you are moving to CA).

City of San Diego, for example, was very strict and did not allow concealed weapons and getting a permit to do so was entirely subjective. Basically the local PD had to specifically approve you.  There were more, but I forget exactly what they were.

Contrast that to Arizona, where concealed weapons are legal as long as you are not legally barred from owning a firearm. I can walk around in public with a handgun under my coat and its 100% legal. You can drive a car with a gun under the seat(and I have), although be on your best behavior if you get pulled over.

Ah, so it sounds like in certain municipalities if the sheriff doesn't like your skin color or your perceived sexual orientation, you can be arbitrarily denied the right to defend yourself outside the home. Or maybe you just didn't donate to his re-election campaign.

Having a firearm unloaded and locked sure makes it difficult to stop an attempted carjacking or abduction. Especially detrimental to those who can't physically fight off an attacker like a small female or an elderly person.

These are the laws we want to model our federal regulations after? Seriously?

GuitarStv

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8191
  • Age: 35
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #86 on: March 01, 2016, 09:55:36 AM »
There are plenty of guns in Canada.  They're used as tools . . . for hunting, pest control, sport shooting primarily.  We're required to get a license when we get a gun, which means getting a background check and training.  You're required to register your weapon, so that police have information to keep them safe in case of a dangerous situation.  You have to keep weapons locked away and unloaded in your home to prevent accidents.

In the US at first glance there appears to be an awful lot of fear around guns and gun use.  It's assumed that your gun will not be a tool, but will need to be used as a weapon . . . which is why the idea of keeping the weapon locked away is unpalatable.  There's fear that the government is nefarious and out to get you, so keeping a national registry of weapons owners is unpalatable.  Background checks aren't required in most states for private sales for some reason (?).  You don't usually need a license to own a gun, so there's no kind of screening regarding competence.  I don't really understand the reasoning that argues against requiring some training to own a firearm . . . is it also fear based?

From my perspective, the US is just knotted up with fear of everything and that's why the conversation there seems to be so emotionally charged and angry any time people talk about firearms.  It's weird.  Like, look how terrified everyone is of ISIL . . . and then realize that toddlers killed more people in the US with guns than terrorists did last year.  It is heartening to know that many of the gun owners on this forum do take prudent precautions regarding safety.  It's disheartening to know that these precautions are all voluntary.

BlueMR2

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1654
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #87 on: March 01, 2016, 10:05:58 AM »
1. I live in a very low crime area.  Does not mean that's perfectly safe though.  Bad things happen everywhere.  Oddly, criminals have cars and have noticed that people in "safe" neighborhoods make really easy targets as long as you don't hit them too often...

2. I regularly practice when I have the money available.  Unfortunately, I'm already looking at being 50% overbudget for this year due to some really ugly unexpected repairs.  The firearms practicing will be one of the things sacrificed to limit my financial damage this year.

3. My wife is trained and has her own firearm.  She does not practice as much, which we take into account in our planning.

4. I expect to be held for questioning.  Things could go so bad that I end up serving time, but more likely I'll just face civil lawsuits.  I'll probably be able to defend those, but expect to lose most of what I have in the process.  However, I plan on being alive...

dramaman

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 700
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #88 on: March 01, 2016, 10:16:41 AM »
I don't have a gun in my house, although I inherited from my grandfather a couple of shotguns that are kept in the garage at my mom's house. I've occasionally wondered whether I should have a gun and have always concluded that the possible benefit of a gun being useful in the extremely rare event of a break-in is vastly outweighed by the general worry and paranoia that having a gun in the house would bring, not to mention the hassle of actually learning how to use and maintain the gun. Course, if a zombie apocalypse happens, I'm so screwed.

Midwest

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1110
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #89 on: March 01, 2016, 10:18:06 AM »
I also am pro gun control and support stricter gun laws like we have in Calif but not bans.

Curious, what additional laws does California have that are more stringent than federal regs?
The Feds generally don't regulate gun laws, with a few exception such as banning some types of firearms, and that is left up to each state and county. Some states have very loose restrictions and some like Calif have more strict ones. These generally deal with type of  gun and ammo that can be purchases, waiting periods, background checks,  training and safety courses required to purchase, how to carry and transport firearms, concealed carry licenses, magazine capacity,  etc.. A long list of regulations and laws that very greatly from state to state with Calif being one of the most restrictive in the nation.

Spartana - As a gun owner in a state which has fewer state gun laws (other than the federal which are enforced), I can't agree with you that the Feds don't regulate guns.  ATF?  There are tons of laws on the books that are enforced by the feds  From what I know about California, the laws seem overly restrictive (additional weapon and magazine bans come to mind). 

As it relates to conceal carry, in my state you have to have an FBI background check and training.  If you pass those, you get a concealed carry.  The sheriff has no choice if you follow those requirements. 

What is the process in CA?  I thought it was quite difficult in some jurisdictions to get a concealed carry there.
« Last Edit: March 01, 2016, 10:26:05 AM by Midwest »

MoonShadow

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2544
  • Location: Louisville, Ky.
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #90 on: March 01, 2016, 12:23:45 PM »
I also am pro gun control and support stricter gun laws like we have in Calif but not bans.

Curious, what additional laws does California have that are more stringent than federal regs?
The Feds generally don't regulate gun laws, with a few exception such as banning some types of firearms,

I suspect that you were over-simplifying for the uninitiated audience, Spartana, but the fact is that there really is no such thing as a federal weapons ban.  What happens is that special licenses are required for Class II & Class III weapons, that are typically expensive & heavily regulated.  Even the "assault weapons ban" of the Clinton era didn't ban any weapons, and particularly not actual assault weapons, which are already regulated as Class III weapons.

To interrupt the confusion in advance; a Class III weapon is either anything one might consider a "machine gun", an automatic weapon, or an explosive weapon, whereas a Class II weapon is the "miscellaneous" group that doesn't fit into either Class I (typical semi-automatic handguns & rifles, of a caliber of .50 or less) and doesn't fit into Class III (as noted above, weapons of exclusive military applications).  The kinds of items that are in Class II included firearms that are disguised such as pen guns, suppression devices & 'bang sticks'.  It is possible to get the licenses necessary for these items, in states that permit it (not California, which is one reason action films often have to be filmed at a studio in Arizona or on location.   Yes, those guns they use on film are often the real thing) but it is an extremely expensive process involving the civilian equivalent of a national security clearance.  I know this because there are a lot of wealthy rednecks in this region, and they like to spend money doing things like this...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9MBf_LvqUsQ

BTW, Knob Creek gun range, where this event is filmed twice a year, is only a 20 minute drive beyond the city limits of Louisville, Kentucky.  Roughly half way to Fort Knox.  The GE Minigun can be rented, but the renter has to buy their own ammo, which costs about $200 for enough ammo to last about 25 seconds.  Not mustachian at all.

frugalconfederate

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 523
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #91 on: March 01, 2016, 03:36:38 PM »


Quote
4.  How to you plan to deal with the first responders after an incident?    Will the police arrest you?   Do you have a lawyer ready to call on your phone?  Or does your jurisdiction take the view that you're allowed to shoot in your home, so you don't expect to have issues with the authorities?

Being in Kentucky, I have no worries about prosecution for defending myself in my own home... but I have always heard that if you shoot someone climbing through your window, make sure he falls inside and not outside.

MoonShadow

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2544
  • Location: Louisville, Ky.
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #92 on: March 01, 2016, 03:43:32 PM »


Quote
4.  How to you plan to deal with the first responders after an incident?    Will the police arrest you?   Do you have a lawyer ready to call on your phone?  Or does your jurisdiction take the view that you're allowed to shoot in your home, so you don't expect to have issues with the authorities?

Being in Kentucky, I have no worries about prosecution for defending myself in my own home... but I have always heard that if you shoot someone climbing through your window, make sure he falls inside and not outside.

You need to stop listening to hillbillly lawyers. 

Tom Bri

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 527
  • Location: Small Town, Flyover Country
  • More just cheap, than Mustachian
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #93 on: March 01, 2016, 05:01:32 PM »


In the US at first glance there appears to be an awful lot of fear around guns and gun use.  It's assumed that your gun will not be a tool, but will need to be used as a weapon . . . which is why the idea of keeping the weapon locked away is unpalatable.  There's fear that the government is nefarious and out to get you, so keeping a national registry of weapons owners is unpalatable.  Background checks aren't required in most states for private sales for some reason (?).  You don't usually need a license to own a gun, so there's no kind of screening regarding competence.  I don't really understand the reasoning that argues against requiring some training to own a firearm . . . is it also fear based?


One US political party has a fair number of leaders who constantly harp on taking all guns away from US citizens. So, we worry about that. They tell us they will take our stuff, and we believe them. So, we don't want unified lists of who owns guns in their hands, because we believe them when they tell us they will abuse that power. The US political system is a bit insane, but plenty of countries have had bans put in place, so I don't think it is crazy to think the US could do it too.

GuitarStv

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8191
  • Age: 35
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #94 on: March 01, 2016, 05:45:44 PM »
Who has ever said that they want to take all guns away from US citizens though?  My understanding was that occasionally people talk about limiting magazine size, reducing access to semi-automatic weapons, stuff like that.  I've never heard anyone propose taking away shotguns and single shot rifles though . . . am I missing something?

Midwest

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1110
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #95 on: March 01, 2016, 05:58:34 PM »
Who has ever said that they want to take all guns away from US citizens though?  My understanding was that occasionally people talk about limiting magazine size, reducing access to semi-automatic weapons, stuff like that.  I've never heard anyone propose taking away shotguns and single shot rifles though . . . am I missing something?

Guitarstv - This is a recent article with President Obama praising Australian gun control  which as I understand it is effectively confiscation of many weapons.

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/jun/23/obama-backs-australias-gun-laws-while-condemning-latest-mass-shootings-in-us

GuitarStv

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8191
  • Age: 35
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #96 on: March 01, 2016, 06:05:59 PM »
Who has ever said that they want to take all guns away from US citizens though?  My understanding was that occasionally people talk about limiting magazine size, reducing access to semi-automatic weapons, stuff like that.  I've never heard anyone propose taking away shotguns and single shot rifles though . . . am I missing something?

Guitarstv - This is a recent article with President Obama praising Australian gun control  which as I understand it is effectively confiscation-

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/jun/23/obama-backs-australias-gun-laws-while-condemning-latest-mass-shootings-in-us

You understand incorrectly.  Australians can still buy firearms (rifles, shotguns, hand guns, etc.) as long as they follow the regulations in place.  There was no confiscation of all guns, just enforced regulation.
« Last Edit: March 01, 2016, 06:09:21 PM by GuitarStv »

Tom Bri

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 527
  • Location: Small Town, Flyover Country
  • More just cheap, than Mustachian
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #97 on: March 01, 2016, 06:10:29 PM »
Who has ever said that they want to take all guns away from US citizens though?  My understanding was that occasionally people talk about limiting magazine size, reducing access to semi-automatic weapons, stuff like that.  I've never heard anyone propose taking away shotguns and single shot rifles though . . . am I missing something?
It's a pretty common sentiment on the far left, Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, among other top politicians. Outside politics, pretty common among big-name leftists to talk this line. I take them at their word. The weird thing is this is a leftist position in the US, but a righty position in for example Britain, where Maggie Thatcher was a big confiscation proponent.

MoonShadow

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2544
  • Location: Louisville, Ky.
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #98 on: March 01, 2016, 06:13:57 PM »
Who has ever said that they want to take all guns away from US citizens though?  My understanding was that occasionally people talk about limiting magazine size, reducing access to semi-automatic weapons, stuff like that.  I've never heard anyone propose taking away shotguns and single shot rifles though . . . am I missing something?

Yes, you are.  The Democratic Party learned long ago that they can't openly discuss amending the 2nd, nor any kind of piecewise or partial ban at the federal level, or half of their own voter base will abandon them.  So instead, they have been using a step-wise, and mostly state by state, strategy to achieve the same ends.  It's called "gun control", and if they can swing it without someone laughing, "common sense gun control".  The problem  is that a lot of their (very liberal) base in certain states very much believe that our "gun culture" is an impediment to their long view, which is a "civilized society" that looks much more like Europe.  However, to change "gun culture" they actually have to change the culture, which involves limiting the influences of "gun nuts" upon the next generation.  The traditional, and current, interpretation of the 2nd Amendment stands in the way of that long view; and they continue to undermine it by whatever means remains available to them.

GuitarStv

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8191
  • Age: 35
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #99 on: March 01, 2016, 06:14:47 PM »
Who has ever said that they want to take all guns away from US citizens though?  My understanding was that occasionally people talk about limiting magazine size, reducing access to semi-automatic weapons, stuff like that.  I've never heard anyone propose taking away shotguns and single shot rifles though . . . am I missing something?
care
It's a pretty common sentiment on the far left, Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, among other top politicians. Outside politics, pretty common among big-name leftists to talk this line. I take them at their word. The weird thing is this is a leftist position in the US, but a righty position in for example Britain, where Maggie Thatcher was a big confiscation proponent.

Quotes that show they want to confiscate all guns?