Majority of Americans say guns make homes safer

[Monte_RCMS]

So? Let those who so wish post alarm signs, let those who want guns for self-defense instead have toy guns that look (and perhaps sound) convincingly like the real thing but will do no harm in the hands of the clumsy, the insane or criminals. The baddies aren’t going to know who is an undercover or off-duty cop or sporting shooter or whatnot with the real deal and who isn’t.

Gun control nuts and self-defence nuts ought to both be happy.

Yup … if YOU don’t WANT a gun, no one will force you to buy one or to carry one.

In fact, I was thinking of getting a concealed carry permit … without buying a gun. Just to add to the statistics of permit holders. The guns I want are kinda pricey.

Used to be the newspaper had the names of only three or four gun concealed carry permit applications … now there are PAGES of names. It’s a “growth industry”.

One of my friends does that.

He only actually carries on Sunday when he takes his family out for dinner.

 

[Sporkbeard]

100% Agreed.

From the Washington Post:
The failure of popular Senate gun proposals Wednesday affirmed — even in the wake of Newtown shootings — the rigidity of the politics on the issue.

Lost amid the debate is the fact that for the first time a majority of Americans say having a gun in the household makes it a safer place to be, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll. By a wide 51 to 29 percent margin, more people say a gun in the house makes it safer rather than more dangerous.

https://imgur.com/JyciUqI

See the links in the story, above, for the poll internals.

 

[TheRealJuliane]

Yup … if YOU don’t WANT a gun, no one will force you to buy one or to carry one.

In fact, I was thinking of getting a concealed carry permit … without buying a gun. Just to add to the statistics of permit holders. The guns I want are kinda pricey.

Used to be the newspaper had the names of only three or four gun concealed carry permit applications … now there are PAGES of names. It’s a “growth industry”.

One of my friends does that.

He only actually carries on Sunday when he takes his family out for dinner.

So whose gun would you use to qualify for the shooting part of the permit? Just rent one? Or do you have someone’s you could borrow and practice with? I’m not that good a shot with a handgun, would need to do a lot of practice rounds first, but I’ve thought of doing the same thing. I mean, getting the permit but not the gun for now. I know my neighbors are well-armed so if something went down, all of us could carry with no problems.

 

[Monte_RCMS]

So whose gun would you use to qualify for the shooting part of the permit? Just rent one? Or do you have someone’s you could borrow and practice with? I’m not that good a shot with a handgun, would need to do a lot of practice rounds first, but I’ve thought of doing the same thing. I mean, getting the permit but not the gun for now. I know my neighbors are well-armed so if something went down, all of us could carry with no problems.

Looks like most/all will rent a pistol for ~ $15.

And you don’t need to be a crack shot … defensive encounters would be at very close distance:

vipermi.com/faq.htm

 

[Monte_RCMS]

So? Let those who so wish post alarm signs, let those who want guns for self-defense instead have toy guns that look (and perhaps sound) convincingly like the real thing but will do no harm in the hands of the clumsy, the insane or criminals. The baddies aren’t going to know who is an undercover or off-duty cop or sporting shooter or whatnot with the real deal and who isn’t.

Gun control nuts and self-defence nuts ought to both be happy.

THAT would be interesting … REQUIRING everyone to have a concealed carry permit … but actually carrying a gun would be totally optional.

They have drivers education in high school.

Why not pistol education.

No one is forced to drive.

No one is forced to carry a gun.

But both are useful skills.

 

[LilyM]

Yup … if YOU don’t WANT a gun, no one will force you to buy one or to carry one.

In fact, I was thinking of getting a concealed carry permit … without buying a gun. Just to add to the statistics of permit holders. The guns I want are kinda pricey.

Used to be the newspaper had the names of only three or four gun concealed carry permit applications … now there are PAGES of names. It’s a “growth industry”.

One of my friends does that.

He only actually carries on Sunday when he takes his family out for dinner.

The people most likely to WANT guns are those who want to commit offences with them - they shouldn’t have them either!

You all have totally misread me. I mean NO gun licences and NO concealed carry licences-to-kill - except for law enforcement, military and sporting shooters (who have to prove that they do genuinely use them for sport). Everyone else can make do with toys since they are pretty much equally effective.

 

[Monte_RCMS]

The people most likely to WANT guns are those who want to commit offences with them - they shouldn’t have them either!

Someone intent on committing a violent crime would always be able to buy [or make] a black market gun … same as they can always buy black market cocaine.

There is no way to prevent someone from obtaining illegal stuff on the black market.

But at least, the law abiding person would not be punished because he or [increasingly] she wanted a gun for self-protection.
[Antinomianism … above the law … ]*

 

[LilyM]

Someone intent on committing a violent crime would always be able to buy [or make] a black market gun … same as they can always buy black market cocaine.

There is no way to prevent someone from obtaining illegal stuff on the black market.

But at least, the law abiding person would not be punished because he or [increasingly] she wanted a gun for self-protection.

**

Reread my post - self-defence does not require functioning guns. Why should they be allowed for self-defence then? Allow them where they are genuinely needed, not otherwise.

 

[Sporkbeard]

Good… so they are to be allowed then

Reread my post - self-defence does not require functioning guns. Why should they be allowed for self-defence then? Allow them where they are genuinely needed, not otherwise.

 

[Monte_RCMS]

Someone intent on committing a violent crime would always be able to buy [or make] a black market gun … same as they can always buy black market cocaine.

There is no way to prevent someone from obtaining illegal stuff on the black market.

But at least, the law abiding person would not be punished because he or [increasingly] she wanted a gun for self-protection.
[Antinomianism … above the law … ]*

OR … how about this for maximum protection.

[instead of “gun free zone” signs]

Every building shall have a sign that says: “everyone here is armed to the teeth” ]

[kind of makes the “gun free” signs seem sort of … diffident … fatalistic … disorderedly thinking … just begging for trouble … passively accepting whatever evil may come along … as if … pinning a “kick me” sign on your back provides protection … ]

 

[LilyM]

Good… so they are to be allowed then

Now you are again wilfully misunderstanding me. They are not required for civilian self-defence, and so not to be allowed for that purpose, as there are ample other ways of self-defending that I have outlined here and in other threads.

They are to be allowed for police and military, whose full time job is to defend whole communities and not just self or family, and for sporting shooters (and perhaps not even all of them - electronic scoring systems may be used for competition which render at least some use of real live ammo unnecessary).

 

[Samson01]

Now you are again wilfully misunderstanding me. They are not required for civilian self-defence, and so not to be allowed for that purpose, as there are ample other ways of self-defending that I have outlined here and in other threads.

They are to be allowed for police and military, who are defending whole communities and not just self or family, and for sporting shooters (and perhaps not even all of them - electronic scoring systems may be used for competition which render at least some use of real live ammo unnecessary).

yeah that’s great…here the cops are 45 minutes away and the kids have a week off school for opening week of deer season. Knife hunting seems like a pain. My twin 12 y.o. children just finished hunter safety courses at school. They learned all about handling, action types and safety…so they can get a hunting permit. They don’t need a permit though cause we are landowners, just tags. Your not from around here are you?

 

[LilyM]

yeah that’s great…here the cops are 45 minutes away and the kids have a week off school for opening week of deer season. Knife hunting seems like a pain. My twin 12 y.o. children just finished hunter safety courses at school. They learned all about handling, action types and safety…so they can get a hunting permit. They don’t need a permit though cause we are landowners, just tags. Your not from around here are you?

Let them get licensed through the school when they do those courses, then, which would be easier, and then issued with hunting permits before they want to shoot. I doubt it would be much more difficult than organising tickets and/or passports prior to a holiday trip, or drivers licences when they want to drive.

Why should the fact that you own land exempt you from any of this? My parents own a big farm. My father hunts. He has no difficulty doing whatever paperwork may be required for the guns and the hunting.

 

[Samson01]

Let them get licensed through the school when they do those courses, then, which would be easier, and then issued with hunting permits before they want to shoot. I doubt it would be much more difficult than organising tickets and/or passports prior to a holiday trip, or drivers licences when they want to drive.

Why should the fact that you own land exempt you from any of this? My parents own a big farm. My father hunts. He has no difficulty doing whatever paperwork may be required for the guns and the hunting.

Because they don’t need permits to hunt our land… It is not required. They just have to check in game at a station which is a general store down the road.

 

[Phil_Marinus]

Safer against What ?? A British invasion perhaps ? People are just a bit insecure I think…

 

[Sporkbeard]

No there not… there are also for arming citizens… if the governemnt are the only ones that have guns… then we are doomed. ARM YOURSELF… I just can’t understand why libs are so scared of guns. Unles… they only want thugs to have guns.

Now you are again wilfully misunderstanding me. They are not required for civilian self-defence, and so not to be allowed for that purpose, as there are ample other ways of self-defending that I have outlined here and in other threads.

They are to be allowed for police and military, whose full time job is to defend whole communities and not just self or family, and for sporting shooters (and perhaps not even all of them - electronic scoring systems may be used for competition which render at least some use of real live ammo unnecessary).

 

[LilyM]

Because they don’t need permits to hunt our land… It is not required. They just have to check in game at a station which is a general store down the road.

Why should they NOT require permits to hunt? It is a dangerous activity during which people frequently (a la Dick Cheney) get wounded or even killed. A system of permits puts a limit on this danger.

There are few other similarly dangerous activities - think skydiving, bungee jumping, whitewater rafting, car racing - that are not well regulated and checked no matter whether they occur on private land or not.

 

[LilyM]

No there not… there are also for arming citizens… if the governemnt are the only ones that have guns… then we are doomed. ARM YOURSELF… I just can’t understand why libs are so scared of guns. Unles… they only want thugs to have guns.

Sporting shooters are not the government.

And there are plenty of other effective weapons citizens can have - why oh why are guns seen as the only solution? And why are they the only ones that are to be unfettered? Why not bombs (which the Boston bombers employed)? Or, as I said earlier, rocket launchers, grenades, ICBMs or nukes?

 

[Samson01]

Why should they NOT require permits to hunt? It is a dangerous activity during which people frequently (a la Dick Cheney) get wounded or even killed. A system of permits puts a limit on this danger.

Because it is the law…no permits required for landowners hunting their own land on my state. And if an relative wants to hunt here they don’t need a permit either, just a note signed by me. I really don’t see why that is difficult. I do think it is kind of sad to have to fill out papers to take game off your own land though. Doesn’t seem right to me.

 

[Sporkbeard]

Hmmm good idea. But I cannot afford or even know where to begin to get them… got it! I’ll just tell obama i’m in mexico and send some more guns

Sporting shooters are not the government.

And there are plenty of other effective weapons citizens can have - why oh why are guns seen as the only solution? And why are they the only ones that are to be unfettered? Why not bombs (which the Boston bombers employed)? Or, as I said earlier, rocket launchers, grenades, ICBMs or nukes?