Somehow we missed this: another school shooting

[toastedbread]

That's a simplistic take on a very complex equation. You're simply looking at the gun deaths that would be prevented by the removal of guns from the situation, and assuming that's the end of it. It wouldn't be. You also have to consider that demand for illegal goods leads to black markets. Some people will have guns, legal or not. Who will those people be?

You also have to consider the lives saved by guns. Scientists estimate anywhere from 100K to 350K defensive uses of guns each year. Not every use saved a life, but the number that did is undoubtedly non-zero.

Finally, once you do all that math, you can't simply look at which number is bigger. There's a qualitative aspect here, too. Most gun deaths are suicides. But why should gun policy favor the potential suicide over the potential self-defense? I would argue the tie goes to the runner, in this case, in favor of more freedom and more choice. If policy A results in 10 lives saved by self-defense, and policy b results in 10 prevented suicides, I'm going with policy A, and looking for another way to attack the suicide problem.

Fair. Has such a study been conducted?

And that doesn't address the individual level. On an individual level, it is mostly likely irrational for your average person to be purchasing a gun for reason of personal safety.

 

[NPT]

I'm sure some animals experience fear similarly to the way humans do, but so what?

What's stupid is pretending that owning a gun is some kind of autonomic response of our baser selves. There are a lot of reasons people own guns, including fear. But each person is an individual. You're treating them like robots. It's not only stupid, it's also insulting, because it's obvious to even an amateur psychologist why you're doing it. By explaining gun ownership this way, you aggrandize non-ownership of guns as somehow due to your own unusual level of self-awareness and ability to overcome base instinct. In short, it makes you feel superior.

What gets me is the fact that people who don't own guns simply can't or refuse to understand that a lot of people who own guns simply like the sport of trying to shoot and hit a target same as a person that likes to play basketball likes to try to make hoops. I have a little 22 Ruger pistol and I love to go out and shoot at targets. People panic over guns but alcohol kills more people than guns.

 

[Aloha Hoosier]

I'm sure some animals experience fear similarly to the way humans do, but so what?

What's stupid is pretending that owning a gun is some kind of autonomic response of our baser selves. There are a lot of reasons people own guns, including fear. But each person is an individual. You're treating them like robots. It's not only stupid, it's also insulting, because it's obvious to even an amateur psychologist why you're doing it. By explaining gun ownership this way, you aggrandize non-ownership of guns as somehow due to your own unusual level of self-awareness and ability to overcome base instinct. In short, it makes you feel superior.

I cut the grass and came back to see what was going on found you posted something very close to what I was thinking about posting. Thanks for saving me the time.

 

[Aloha Hoosier]

Toasty, I find it hard to believe that Goat and Aloha cannot see defending yourself against other human beings who may want to harm you is a fear, and fear is a natural human instinct.

Just saying I own a weapon because I can, without feeling a need to own one ( such as self defense for a majority of people as shown by surveys), just doesn't make sense to me.

I'm sure if someone attacked me and I had to defend myself there'd be some element of fear. So what? If I went out to buy another gun today it would have nothing to do with fear. It would be because I wanted to own one not because I need one. I happen to like shooting at targets at the range for example, and so do several of my friends. I've been thinking about joining them, but I haven't made that decision. If I did buy it, I'd obviously have it somewhere in the house and I could use it for self defense if I ever needed to. I don't expect to ever need to, but I'm sure most people that have used one for self defense never expected to either.

 

[TheOriginalHappyGoat]

Fair. Has such a study been conducted?

And that doesn't address the individual level. On an individual level, it is mostly likely irrational for your average person to be purchasing a gun for reason of personal safety.

I doubt it. I'm not sure such a study is even possible. But even if it was, and even if you could justify your policy, I'd suggest that you're still wrong to call the individual choice to own a gun irrational. It's true that most people will never need a gun for self defense. But you also have to consider the potential cost of not being able to defend yourself if that rare situation arises.

 

[NPT]

I have two friends who committed suicide with a firearm. One was a 16 year old boy, the other, a father of 4. Both were extremely rash, spur of the moment decisions, neither had ever attempted it, been depressed, etc. One was about to get caught for having an affair, the other was in trouble at school. Both were at home with family. I can't imagine any way they could have gone through with their decision, had there not been a firearm available.

That's just the opposite of my experience.... I have several friends are alive today because the had a gun to protect themselves.

 

[Bruce1]

As toasted has mentioned, the presence of a gun in your home or your car, makes you more likely to be a victim of gun violence, not less. I'm glad that woman feels safe, but she's much more likely to have that gun used against her.

Not if she is trained, practices, and is aware of her surroundings. I have to believe the lack of training and practice is a huge factor in accidents. I think, as with driving, gun owners should be required to be trained and certified periodically. I know based on personal experience that the NRA classes are very heavily weighted to safety and how not to get into a situation where you need to use your gun.

 

[TheOriginalHappyGoat]

I have two friends who committed suicide with a firearm. One was a 16 year old boy, the other, a father of 4. Both were extremely rash, spur of the moment decisions, neither had ever attempted it, been depressed, etc. One was about to get caught for having an affair, the other was in trouble at school. Both were at home with family. I can't imagine any way they could have gone through with their decision, had there not been a firearm available.

That's just the opposite of my experience.... I have several friends are alive today because the had a gun to protect themselves.

I think this is a great example of why we shouldn't base policy on personal experience. Some people can think of times when a gun was a good thing. Others can think of times when it was a bad. Chances are you both also know people who are examples for the other side, and just aren't aware of it. For example, if not owning a gun prevented someone from committing suicide in a sudden fit of depression, there is a chance no one would ever know. Similarly, if a burglar decided not to break into your house because you have a reputation for being good with a weapon, you'd probably never know that either.

Heck, just by being here and talking with me, although you wouldn't have known it, I can tell you that you know at least one person whose life was saved by an umbrella. Honest to goodness truth, it deflected a falling limb away from my head when I was a kid. Would have crushed my skull. However, if you are ever in a position to debate reasonable umbrella regulations, I hope you don't use my singular example as proof of anything.

 

[toastedbread]

But you also have to consider the potential cost of not being able to defend yourself if that rare situation arises.

And what is the potential cost of riding in a motor vehicle?

 

[TheOriginalHappyGoat]

And what is the potential cost of riding in a motor vehicle?

Huh?

 

[MrBing]

My only point in all of this is that owning a gun for reasons of self-defense is intuitive, but illogical. And since the majority of guns are purchased for this illogical purpose, and the majority of gun deaths are not from homicide, it suggests that the best solution is to remove guns from the equation.

Unless you are prepared to limit purchases to reasons of non-self defense? Then again, my rental model removes the need to purchase one, since no one would need one for self defense.

It's not illogical and it's not fear based. I'm logical and fear doesn't motivate me. You are adamantly opposed to guns and don't understand those of us that own them. You don't want to understand us.

 

[Hank Reardon]

Fair. Has such a study been conducted?

And that doesn't address the individual level. On an individual level, it is mostly likely irrational for your average person to be purchasing a gun for reason of personal safety.

Look at this situation in Cleveland. So there is an unstable and violent fugitive on the run, likely desperate. I guarantee you that if I lived in an area where he might be I'd have a gun out of the safe, just in case.

You never know. One day you're safe and snug and the next day you might not be. It's not irrational fear. It's reality.