Shootings

[ImLawBoy]

Guns are great defenses, but they're incredibly situational. If you aren't warned, it's unlikely you'll have immediate access to it when you need it unless you have it sitting ready and in the open. And even if you have it in hand, it takes a great deal of training to know when your shot is going to be clean, and when it is going to go through your target, through the wall, and into the neighbor's house. Or off of the ground and into traffic. For instance, how many people who have guns for self defense keep it ready with frangible ammunition? How many have taken the time to walk their property considering sight lines and backdrop to plan in advance where it will be safe to shoot? Have taken the time to know which of their walls will stop a bullet and which will not?

This is purely anecdotal, but it's a personal anecdote, so I'm going to let it fly. A few years back I fell asleep on the couch while watching the Cubs play a West Coast game that started at 9:00 my time. I had the back sliding door open, but I thought the screen was locked (never assume that with little ones running around, especially at the age where they like to flick things for the purpose of flicking them - like a lock). I woke up to a man in my kitchen. I jumped up (and I'm a big guy - 6'4"), roared, "WHO THE FUCK ARE YOU???" at him, and he scrambled for the backdoor and ran away. He got away with my work phone (which was promptly bricked) and a rather nice watch, albeit one with 15 years of wear and tear on it. Even if I had a gun, there is no way I would have been able to use it in that situation unless I just left it sitting on the table next to me or constantly wore it on a holster. Neither of those options seems terribly responsible (particularly with little ones running around, especially at the age where they like to flick things for the purpose of flicking them).

Obviously not all home invasions are like this, but my suspicion is that a responsible gun owner's ability to use a gun in most home invasion scenarios is similarly small. Maybe it's helpful if you keep it in a gun safe near your bed and you hear someone rummaging around downstairs waking you from sleep. In that case, you can grab your gun, get your adrenaline rushing, and head down to confront the invader (or the little one who is running around flicking things for the purpose of flicking them).

If I were into guns, it would be for the sport shooting or hunting aspects. The potential for self-defense might be a side benefit, but it also carries risks, even for a responsible gun owner who properly educates his kids (I can't tell you how many times we told the twins not to play with that lock).

[stessier]

I invite you to do whatever you want to keep yourself safe, and we'll do the same.

You're doing what you're legally allowed to do. I have no reason to doubt that if it were no longer legal, you'd find another way to keep your side safe. So the idea you need the gun is a non-starter for me.

[Smoove_B]

Obviously not all home invasions are like this, but my suspicion is that a responsible gun owner's ability to use a gun in most home invasion scenarios is similarly small. Maybe it's helpful if you keep it in a gun safe near your bed and you hear someone rummaging around downstairs waking you from sleep. In that case, you can grab your gun, get your adrenaline rushing, and head down to confront the invader (or the little one who is running around flicking things for the purpose of flicking them).

This was my conclusion after serious thought regarding the justification of purchasing a firearm for home protection. In order for it to be a viable option (in my mind) it would (1) always need to be loaded and (2) accessible without any type of difficulty - something that I would be able to figure out (at worst) from being dead asleep to then moving like Rainbow Six down my hallway.

So really, the best option would be to sleep with a loaded firearm on my nightstand or to constantly be wearing a loaded firearm around my house. Neither seems reasonable.

Other than being prepared to hold back a siege that gave me advanced warning, it didn't seem like a good option (for me) to think of a gun as a viable way to keep my house safe from a random intruder (day or night).

[Daehawk]

I dont know about my mom's house but all the others I was in or grew up in had loaded guns in them. I have no kids so mine stays loaded and near me. For other situations I have a black electric taped up axe handle under my mattress. A few years ago someone home invasioned some poor old man up the road. beat him nearly to death. Also deters strangers who pull into your driveway in the middle of the night.

[ImLawBoy]

I dont know about my mom's house but all the others I was in or grew up in had loaded guns in them. I have no kids so mine stays loaded and near me. For other situations I have a black electric taped up axe handle under my mattress. A few years ago someone home invasioned some poor old man up the road. beat him nearly to death. Also deters strangers who pull into your driveway in the middle of the night.

Wait, if someone pulled up to your house in the middle of the night you'd go out there brandishing a gun? I thought we were talking about responsible gun ownership here . . . .

[stessier]

I dont know about my mom's house but all the others I was in or grew up in had loaded guns in them. I have no kids so mine stays loaded and near me. For other situations I have a black electric taped up axe handle under my mattress. A few years ago someone home invasioned some poor old man up the road. beat him nearly to death. Also deters strangers who pull into your driveway in the middle of the night.

Wait, if someone pulled up to your house in the middle of the night you'd go out there brandishing a gun? I thought we were talking about responsible gun ownership here . . . .

Maybe he meant the axe handle?

[Blackhawk]

I thought he meant beating people nearly to death.

[Smoove_B]

Why would you give up the advantage of cover by going outside? It's like you people never played Jagged Alliance before.

[Daehawk]

Think Fallout wit ha gun taped to an axe handle then.

[LawBeefaroni]

Guns are great defenses, but they're incredibly situational. If you aren't warned, it's unlikely you'll have immediate access to it when you need it unless you have it sitting ready and in the open. And even if you have it in hand, it takes a great deal of training to know when your shot is going to be clean, and when it is going to go through your target, through the wall, and into the neighbor's house. Or off of the ground and into traffic. For instance, how many people who have guns for self defense keep it ready with frangible ammunition? How many have taken the time to walk their property considering sight lines and backdrop to plan in advance where it will be safe to shoot? Have taken the time to know which of their walls will stop a bullet and which will not?

This is purely anecdotal, but it's a personal anecdote, so I'm going to let it fly. A few years back I fell asleep on the couch while watching the Cubs play a West Coast game that started at 9:00 my time. I had the back sliding door open, but I thought the screen was locked (never assume that with little ones running around, especially at the age where they like to flick things for the purpose of flicking them - like a lock). I woke up to a man in my kitchen. I jumped up (and I'm a big guy - 6'4"), roared, "WHO THE FUCK ARE YOU???" at him, and he scrambled for the backdoor and ran away. He got away with my work phone (which was promptly bricked) and a rather nice watch, albeit one with 15 years of wear and tear on it. Even if I had a gun, there is no way I would have been able to use it in that situation unless I just left it sitting on the table next to me or constantly wore it on a holster. Neither of those options seems terribly responsible (particularly with little ones running around, especially at the age where they like to flick things for the purpose of flicking them).

Obviously not all home invasions are like this, but my suspicion is that a responsible gun owner's ability to use a gun in most home invasion scenarios is similarly small. Maybe it's helpful if you keep it in a gun safe near your bed and you hear someone rummaging around downstairs waking you from sleep. In that case, you can grab your gun, get your adrenaline rushing, and head down to confront the invader (or the little one who is running around flicking things for the purpose of flicking them).

If I were into guns, it would be for the sport shooting or hunting aspects. The potential for self-defense might be a side benefit, but it also carries risks, even for a responsible gun owner who properly educates his kids (I can't tell you how many times we told the twins not to play with that lock).

What you did is exactly what a trained firearm owner would do as a first step. The gun is the last option, not the first. Try to scare the guy off with verbal commands, retreat if you can, gather the kids if you can, barricade if you can, call the cops if you can. The gun is just another input in the OODA loop. If you don't have it you make do.

[ImLawBoy]

Guns are great defenses, but they're incredibly situational. If you aren't warned, it's unlikely you'll have immediate access to it when you need it unless you have it sitting ready and in the open. And even if you have it in hand, it takes a great deal of training to know when your shot is going to be clean, and when it is going to go through your target, through the wall, and into the neighbor's house. Or off of the ground and into traffic. For instance, how many people who have guns for self defense keep it ready with frangible ammunition? How many have taken the time to walk their property considering sight lines and backdrop to plan in advance where it will be safe to shoot? Have taken the time to know which of their walls will stop a bullet and which will not?

This is purely anecdotal, but it's a personal anecdote, so I'm going to let it fly. A few years back I fell asleep on the couch while watching the Cubs play a West Coast game that started at 9:00 my time. I had the back sliding door open, but I thought the screen was locked (never assume that with little ones running around, especially at the age where they like to flick things for the purpose of flicking them - like a lock). I woke up to a man in my kitchen. I jumped up (and I'm a big guy - 6'4"), roared, "WHO THE FUCK ARE YOU???" at him, and he scrambled for the backdoor and ran away. He got away with my work phone (which was promptly bricked) and a rather nice watch, albeit one with 15 years of wear and tear on it. Even if I had a gun, there is no way I would have been able to use it in that situation unless I just left it sitting on the table next to me or constantly wore it on a holster. Neither of those options seems terribly responsible (particularly with little ones running around, especially at the age where they like to flick things for the purpose of flicking them).

Obviously not all home invasions are like this, but my suspicion is that a responsible gun owner's ability to use a gun in most home invasion scenarios is similarly small. Maybe it's helpful if you keep it in a gun safe near your bed and you hear someone rummaging around downstairs waking you from sleep. In that case, you can grab your gun, get your adrenaline rushing, and head down to confront the invader (or the little one who is running around flicking things for the purpose of flicking them).

If I were into guns, it would be for the sport shooting or hunting aspects. The potential for self-defense might be a side benefit, but it also carries risks, even for a responsible gun owner who properly educates his kids (I can't tell you how many times we told the twins not to play with that lock).

What you did is exactly what a trained firearm owner would do as a first step. The gun is the last option, not the first. Try to scare the guy off with verbal commands, retreat if you can, gather the kids if you can, barricade if you can, call the cops if you can. The gun is just another input in the OODA loop. If you don't have it you make do.

It seems unlikely (although certainly not impossible) that you'd get to the gun stage in this scenario. If you've been able to retreat and get to a safe area with your family, a home invader is not really likely to pursue you outside of a Liam Neeson movie. I figure most home invaders want an easy target with no contact so that they can get away with some items they can fence. It's a remote scenario where the gun would come in useful, I think (although I'm not claiming to be an expert here). The question becomes whether the level of benefit from the additional security of a gun in the home is worth the level of risk that the gun will be fired at someone in the house or otherwise in error. Obviously proper training and education can reduce that risk, but I don't think it can be completely eliminated. I know where I fall on that line, but I don't pretend to draw that line for others. Mostly I'm just expanding on my personal thoughts on the topic.

[Zarathud]

A competent burglar is in and out in less than 10 minutes. They will take the easy opportunity of an open door. Or unwatched purse.

An incompetent burglar is going to be scared off or is dangerous when confronted.

What you feel doesn’t matter. You do you, but factually having a security blanket doesn’t make you safe. Your gun for hunting or sport shooting is fine, but unless your wife regularly trains for high-stress situations it isn’t going to make her safer. Or you.

I don’t mean that as a personal attack. My uncles hunt and are responsible gun owners. But they taught me the gun is not a defensive weapon and to respect it’s as much a danger as it was satisfying to shoot. My aunt’s first husband died of an accidental discharge while drunk with his gun, so this is real to my family. Much more than some burglar or attacker.

[Isgrimnur]

Guns and alcohol should not mix.

[ImLawBoy]

Guns and alcohol should not mix.

Well now you've taken all the fun out of sport shooting!

[Daehawk]

If the wrong person is in your house with a gun and you jump up and yell they are going to insta kill you.

[ImLawBoy]

If the wrong person is in your house with a gun and you jump up and yell they are going to insta kill you.

Do you live in a Liam Neeson movie? Are armed people constantly creeping into your home?

[Smoove_B]

That's where this all falls apart for me. If someone comes into my house armed, the only advantage I have is knowing the layout. And if they're coming in armed, they're coming in armed for a specific reason - like they know they should be armed based on what they're planning. In this scenario (thinking armed people are going to randomly come into my house) my only logical conclusion is that I need armed security 24/7 in my home to monitor all points of entry. I mentioned it a while ago in another thread, but I live in a pretty rural part of NJ. A few years ago there was big news when a group of armed intruders entered a seemingly random house in a quiet neighborhood, roughed up the home owners and stole a bunch of stuff. Locals were horrified and pointing out this is exactly why they're armed to the gills - to stop this type of brazen home invasion. Well, it turned out it wasn't a random home invasion, the homeowners were drug dealers - hiding in rural NJ. The wrong people found out, and they got rolled.

[Jaymann]

Personal anecdote:

My Dad bought a gun at the behest of his disturbed (to put it charitably) wife. She ended up shooting him while he was asleep in bed then shot herself in the temple, but it didn't finish the job. My Dad survived, but his leg was permanently damaged. His wife was in a coma on his dime until he eventually pulled the plug.

Unfortunately this type of scenario is probably much more likely than staving off a home intruder.

[noxiousdog]

I do not own a gun for many of the reasons listed here, but primarily because it just doesn't seem likely that I'd need to use it.

However, I know plenty of folks that have had to use one as a threat tactic defending their own homes and family.

When exes no longer commit violence (the most likely scenario for needing protection) or we have zero drugs in this country (the ability of law enforcement to prevent criminals from having weapons while victims do not) I'll believe there is no reason to have a gun for self defense.

[coopasonic]

Guns are great defenses, but they're incredibly situational. If you aren't warned, it's unlikely you'll have immediate access to it when you need it unless you have it sitting ready and in the open. And even if you have it in hand, it takes a great deal of training to know when your shot is going to be clean, and when it is going to go through your target, through the wall, and into the neighbor's house. Or off of the ground and into traffic. For instance, how many people who have guns for self defense keep it ready with frangible ammunition? How many have taken the time to walk their property considering sight lines and backdrop to plan in advance where it will be safe to shoot? Have taken the time to know which of their walls will stop a bullet and which will not?

This is purely anecdotal, but it's a personal anecdote, so I'm going to let it fly. A few years back I fell asleep on the couch while watching the Cubs play a West Coast game that started at 9:00 my time. I had the back sliding door open, but I thought the screen was locked (never assume that with little ones running around, especially at the age where they like to flick things for the purpose of flicking them - like a lock). I woke up to a man in my kitchen. I jumped up (and I'm a big guy - 6'4"), roared, "WHO THE FUCK ARE YOU???" at him, and he scrambled for the backdoor and ran away. He got away with my work phone (which was promptly bricked) and a rather nice watch, albeit one with 15 years of wear and tear on it. Even if I had a gun, there is no way I would have been able to use it in that situation unless I just left it sitting on the table next to me or constantly wore it on a holster. Neither of those options seems terribly responsible (particularly with little ones running around, especially at the age where they like to flick things for the purpose of flicking them).

Obviously not all home invasions are like this, but my suspicion is that a responsible gun owner's ability to use a gun in most home invasion scenarios is similarly small. Maybe it's helpful if you keep it in a gun safe near your bed and you hear someone rummaging around downstairs waking you from sleep. In that case, you can grab your gun, get your adrenaline rushing, and head down to confront the invader (or the little one who is running around flicking things for the purpose of flicking them).

If I were into guns, it would be for the sport shooting or hunting aspects. The potential for self-defense might be a side benefit, but it also carries risks, even for a responsible gun owner who properly educates his kids (I can't tell you how many times we told the twins not to play with that lock).

One additional note on this, that I think has been brought up around here before, is that your work phone and watch are not worth anyone's life. If someone steals your shit, file a police report, make an insurance claim, consider better security or maybe consider moving. Why does someone have to die? I have rifle training, unarmed combat training and a little steel baton that extends with a flick and will fuck you up but as long as you aren't heading for my kids rooms, and why would you, nothing of value up there, I'm staying out of your way.

[Daehawk]

I need to buy a bigger gun.

[noxiousdog]

If someone steals your shit, file a police report, make an insurance claim, consider better security or maybe consider moving.

That's easy for someone with a police department that cares, that you have property insurance, can get security, or have the means or capability to move.

[ImLawBoy]

I do not own a gun for many of the reasons listed here, but primarily because it just doesn't seem likely that I'd need to use it.

However, I know plenty of folks that have had to use one as a threat tactic defending their own homes and family.

When exes no longer commit violence (the most likely scenario for needing protection) or we have zero drugs in this country (the ability of law enforcement to prevent criminals from having weapons while victims do not) I'll believe there is no reason to have a gun for self defense.

I think the scenario where you have a specific threat, like a concern about a potentially violent ex, is different from the general concept that you have a gun to protect against home invasion. It changes the risk/benefit analysis when you have an actual threat instead of a potential threat.

[noxiousdog]

I think the scenario where you have a specific threat, like a concern about a potentially violent ex, is different from the general concept that you have a gun to protect against home invasion. It changes the risk/benefit analysis when you have an actual threat instead of a potential threat.

Yes. But if there's laws against it, we don't get to consider those scenarios.

[ImLawBoy]

I think the scenario where you have a specific threat, like a concern about a potentially violent ex, is different from the general concept that you have a gun to protect against home invasion. It changes the risk/benefit analysis when you have an actual threat instead of a potential threat.

Yes. But if there's laws against it, we don't get to consider those scenarios.

And if I'm drinking coffee, don't offer me tea.

I'm not sitting here arguing for laws against gun ownership.

[Paingod]

Obviously not all home invasions are like this, but my suspicion is that a responsible gun owner's ability to use a gun in most home invasion scenarios is similarly small.

Where we live, there's no sneaking in the back door unless they also walked through a mile of wilderness first. Not impossible, but unlikely.

There's a strong element of anti-gun here, and that's totally fine if it's your way of life. We live somewhere where your loudest scream wouldn't draw anyone's attention and police are 10+ minutes away. We do sell relatively high-value pets and our address is in the hands of several dozens of people who've bought them from us before. I happen to enjoy shooting as a hobby and my family has a contingency plan that simply involves my wife and kids retreating to a closet with her cell phone and a gun in the event that someone comes up our driveway, gets out of their car, and heads towards our home and she feels threatened. The only time the gun would even be used is if someone tried to enter the closet. That doesn't make us paranoid kooks. We're not doing tactical drills in our yard, playing out terrorist scenarios, or planning for the end of the world. Our kids know how to be safe around guns and we do understand that it's virtually impossible to have a "firearms accident" in a home without firearms.

[coopasonic]

If someone steals your shit, file a police report, make an insurance claim, consider better security or maybe consider moving.

That's easy for someone with a police department that cares, that you have property insurance, can get security, or have the means or capability to move.

Yeah, totally my privilege showing. For those of us with that privilege I think it is a consideration. I can certainly see justifications for owning a gun and I am not really anti-gun... I am just anti-worrying about my kids getting killed at school and upset that nobody can figure out how to deal with it and factions actively working to keep it from even being discussed (NRA, etc not anyone here).

[ImLawBoy]

Obviously not all home invasions are like this, but my suspicion is that a responsible gun owner's ability to use a gun in most home invasion scenarios is similarly small.

Where we live, there's no sneaking in the back door unless they also walked through a mile of wilderness first. Not impossible, but unlikely.

There's a strong element of anti-gun here, and that's totally fine if it's your way of life. We live somewhere where your loudest scream wouldn't draw anyone's attention and police are 10+ minutes away. We do sell relatively high-value pets and our address is in the hands of several dozens of people who've bought them from us before. I happen to enjoy shooting as a hobby and my family has a contingency plan that simply involves my wife and kids retreating to a closet with her cell phone and a gun in the event that someone comes up our driveway, gets out of their car, and heads towards our home and she feels threatened. The only time the gun would even be used is if someone tried to enter the closet. That doesn't make us paranoid kooks. We're not doing tactical drills in our yard, playing out terrorist scenarios, or planning for the end of the world. Our kids know how to be safe around guns and we do understand that it's virtually impossible to have a "firearms accident" in a home without firearms.

Again, I'm not saying you shouldn't own a gun, and I'm not saying there should be laws against gun ownership (I'm also not saying there shouldn't be laws against gun ownership - I don't think it's an all-or-nothing scenario). I mostly chimed in to say that I think that most arguments for gun ownership as self defense aren't terribly strong. Even the scenario you describe is extremely remote, although non-zero. It's up to you to weigh the remote but non-zero chance you will need a firearm for home protection vs. the remote but non-zero chance that the firearm will cause harm to you or your loved ones instead of an intruder. Hopefully (and most likely) it's a moot point because neither scenario occurs.

[Paingod]

I am just anti-worrying about my kids getting killed at school and upset that nobody can figure out how to deal with it and factions actively working to keep it from even being discussed (NRA, etc not anyone here).

If you told me I'd have to pass a mental health check on a yearly basis in order to keep my firearms, and had to pass a background AND proficiency test in order to get one, and had to limit myself to single shot rifles and shotguns that had to be manually reloaded between shots - I wouldn't vote against that. I'd still have firearms, though. I'd just be shooting a helluva lot slower at the range.

Hopefully (and most likely) it's a moot point because neither scenario occurs.

Like all bad things in life, from suddenly keeling over due to an aneurism to getting cancer to dying in a car accident, you hope it never happens.

[Blackhawk]

One additional note on this, that I think has been brought up around here before, is that your work phone and watch are not worth anyone's life. If someone steals your shit, file a police report, make an insurance claim, consider better security or maybe consider moving. Why does someone have to die? I have rifle training, unarmed combat training and a little steel baton that extends with a flick and will fuck you up but as long as you aren't heading for my kids rooms, and why would you, nothing of value up there, I'm staying out of your way.

Hell, I will help you carry my shit to your car.

The scenarios where I would kill somebody are very limited, and all of them involve the alternative being that somebody else dies or is crippled. In every case where I would take a life, it would be where the other person decided that a life was forfeit and I was in a position to decide which life it would be. It would never be for 'stuff', ego, or someone being in my space. I've spent a lot of hours thinking about this, starting from the time that I took my first armed job and accepted the responsibility of being in a position where I might have to make that decision.

[Paingod]

Hell, I will help you carry my shit to your car.

That's mostly to free up space in your house for more stuff, though.

[Holman]

I need to buy a bigger gun.

Why not a longer axe handle?

[coopasonic]

One additional note on this, that I think has been brought up around here before, is that your work phone and watch are not worth anyone's life. If someone steals your shit, file a police report, make an insurance claim, consider better security or maybe consider moving. Why does someone have to die? I have rifle training, unarmed combat training and a little steel baton that extends with a flick and will fuck you up but as long as you aren't heading for my kids rooms, and why would you, nothing of value up there, I'm staying out of your way.

Hell, I will help you carry my shit to your car.

The scenarios where I would kill somebody are very limited, and all of them involve the alternative being that somebody else dies or is crippled. In every case where I would take a life, it would be where the other person decided that a life was forfeit and I was in a position to decide which life it would be. It would never be for 'stuff', ego, or someone being in my space. I've spent a lot of hours thinking about this, starting from the time that I took my first armed job and accepted the responsibility of being in a position where I might have to make that decision.

I didn't think about it at all, shot all kinds of guns as a teenager, joined the Army, they put an M-16 in my hands (and an M-60, M203, frag grenade, etc) and made me very, very good with it despite the fact my vision was sketchy (eye doctor I saw when I was in college was shocked that I had never worn glasses before). For fairly obvious reasons, the Army doesn't (didn't?) really impress any understanding of the value of human life. Of course the idea being that if we are in combat, we aren't fighting over property/things (ha!). It wasn't until years later that I was made aware of that gap in my thought process.

[Isgrimnur]

I need to buy a bigger gun.

Why not a longer axe handle?

with a nail through it.

[Zaxxon]

There's a strong element of anti-gun here, and that's totally fine if it's your way of life.

Quoting this as preamble to the next part...

If you told me I'd have to pass a mental health check on a yearly basis in order to keep my firearms, and had to pass a background AND proficiency test in order to get one, and had to limit myself to single shot rifles and shotguns that had to be manually reloaded between shots - I wouldn't vote against that. I'd still have firearms, though. I'd just be shooting a helluva lot slower at the range.

I think this perception of 'strong element of anti-gun here,'--and elsewhere, all over the place, really any time 'gun control' in America is brought up--is a huge strawman that will simply not die. I don't mean to single you out, Paingod, so much as use your less-than-30-minutes-apart posts to demonstrate a thought process that I perceive to be rampant among those who tend to react poorly to discussions of how we might address this country's unique gun violence problem.

I would venture that the overwhelming majority of people here that you perceive as 'anti-gun' are not, in fact, against your right to own a gun to defend your home, or shoot at the range, or go hunting. The list of items that you mention in your follow-up post are the sorts of things that make a ton of sense and should pretty clearly (IMO) be enacted post-haste. The fact that this country struggles so mightily over such obvious actions is infuriating.

No one's coming for your guns. There is precisely a 0.00% chance that America ever (ok, in my lifetime or that of my kids) bans the types of guns that you need for those activities.

What you call 'anti-gun,' I call 'largely in agreement with what I believe you, Lawbeef, ND, and other folks who value the right to bear arms would agree with' if they sat down and dispassionately evaluated options. (And again let me state that I am not intending to single any of you out--I think you all have sat down and dispassionately evaluated options, on this board, even.)

I disagree with the notion that having a firearm in the home 'for protection' is likely to prove out as a positive cost-benefit calculation for most homes, most of the time, but I am totally for your right to make that decision for yourself. The problem (again IMO) is that the reality in this country is so far divorced from that being the question actually at hand that it's just exhausting to have these discussions continually devolve into that 'debate.'

The other side of that coin is that because we can't have a productive debate about realistic gun control measures, the practical effect is that others are taking away my rights, for example to have my kids attend school without needing to practice active shooter drills. My choice is live with this uniquely American risk for my children (and my grocery shopping adults, etc), or leave the country for one with a more mature approach to firearms. The actual rights-reduction is borne by those you call anti-gun.

No one serious is suggesting that everyone lose their right to own a pistol in the nightstand, go hunting with a rifle, or shoot at the range. No one (serious), because it's not a thing that's happening here on a timescale measured in decades at minimum. Let's do the things you mentioned being OK with as a start, and that would be a massive step forward.

[Z-Corn]

I need to buy a bigger gun.

You probably face more harm from the rats and snakes and possums that invade your home.

[Isgrimnur]

Hantavirus, etc.

[Smoove_B]

https://twitter.com/RepJasonCrow/status ... 2275630083

I grew up a hunter and served as an Army Ranger.

I didn’t take my deer hunting rifle to Afghanistan, nor did I take my assault rifle deer hunting.

Don’t be fooled by the gun lobby. The type of gun matters.

Weapons of war have no place in our communities

[dbt1949]

I just want to point out I have more than 90 guns in my collection.
About a third are muzzleloaders. Quite a few are 22s. The rest are a mixture of just about everything, except I don't own any "assault rifles". I've had them in the past but every time I fire them I would go thru 3-4 30rd magazines. Too damn expensive to fire and any of the other guns are good for self defense.
But I do like historic guns that I see in the movies or TV or read about. For instance I have two PPKs. 32 auto was Bonds earliest one and then he went to the 380 version.

[gbasden]

The other side of that coin is that because we can't have a productive debate about realistic gun control measures, the practical effect is that others are taking away my rights, for example to have my kids attend school without needing to practice active shooter drills. My choice is live with this uniquely American risk for my children (and my grocery shopping adults, etc), or leave the country for one with a more mature approach to firearms. The actual rights-reduction is borne by those you call anti-gun.

No one serious is suggesting that everyone lose their right to own a pistol in the nightstand, go hunting with a rifle, or shoot at the range. No one (serious), because it's not a thing that's happening here on a timescale measured in decades at minimum. Let's do the things you mentioned being OK with as a start, and that would be a massive step forward.

Thank you - you really captured my feelings around this as well.