Fear and gun ownership.

[ttwtt78640]

You don't really "need" a gun if it isn't a life or death matter.

I can't begin to count how often I've seen that particular equivocation bandied about.

That’s likely to be a bit too late to start shopping for a gun.

 

[Integrityrespec]

The argument is that much of the pro gun arguments are based on fear. And that can be easily dismissed as an appeal to emotions rather than a good reason for having a gun.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41599-019-0373-z

Of course the dramatic rise in crime, including violent crimes and property crimes is not a reason to obtain a legal firearm! Well does it matter to you that home invasion crimes, violent assualts, murder, rape, and other crimes have been prevented, lives probably saved, by private citizens defending themselves and others with legally obtained firearms? Many crimes are committed and over before police can arrive on the scene to stop a crime.

average time for police to respond to a violent crime - Search

www.bing.com

 

[Artymoon]

My question would be why is the gun at the number one option? Either crime is so bad that it needs to be there or it is not very likely and should be further down the list.

For my options, the gun allows me to achieve my best personal outcome. There are many scenarios that would require different responses. Just because it is my #1 option, doesn't mean it would be used. Hence the moniker option.

 

[soylentgreen]

Wouldn’t that “perpetuating fear” argument apply to fire extinguisher ownership as well? Fire extinguishers are handy in a very limited number of cases, yet the fear of fire is a completely valid reason to own them.

Before you chime in with the few criminal (or self harm) abuse possibilities of fire extinguishers, that simply switches the argument to one’s fear of gun crime (or ease of suicide) being used to justify “gun control” measures. The ‘having lots of guns in society is scary’ argument appears to be the most common reason put forth to support having more “gun control” laws.

No, a fire extinguisher is a safety feature used on fires. Where as in the argument of self defense a gun is a tool used to kill or injure other people.

Pointing out that there is such a thing as a weapons effect and that many of the pro gun arguments here are based on the fear of not having a gun is not a scare tactic. It is about awareness of how people behave around guns.

And I agree with you. It does not matter which side uses fear as a motivator it is a wrong choice. Pointing out that a pro gun person is using fear as a reason is not itself a scary story.

 

[RF667799]

That’s likely to be a bit too late to start shopping for a gun.

Sure. But if you can dismiss that "need", you can dismiss anything else as trivial.

Twain supposedly wrote to a friend of his who was asking if he would need take a gun on an anticipated trip out West, "You may need a gun, or you may not need a gun. If you need one though, you will need it right then."

 

[soylentgreen]

Assuming you have a home, do you have a fire extinguisher in your home?

Of course. I am far more likely to have an incident with a fire than I am to have defend myself from thieves intent on murder.

 

[ttwtt78640]

Correct me if I am wrong here but if you are one of the pro gun group who go by the creed of "from my cold dead hands," then you forfeit the right to call your self a law abiding citizen. As law abiding does not mean you get to choose which laws you will obey. That's what criminals do.

I am not against obeying the law, but I rely on the government adhering to the 2A as well as the other BoR restrictions (limits?) on its powers. The founders of this nation were (initially) considered not only to be criminals but traitors as well. Not only did they refuse to obey “gun control” laws, they used their guns to help put themselves in charge of making the laws.

 

[soylentgreen]

Yes .. emotions like .. guns will suddenly "do something" that is evil, and we won't hold the person accountable ... just the gun; Meanwhile, guns account for 300 - 500K+ interactions every year in a positive sense to deter theft, rape and other bad guys from doing their thing.

No idea what you mean. A gun is an object it does not do good or evil.

 

[VanceMack]

Of course. I am far more likely to have an incident with a fire than I am to have defend myself from thieves intent on murder.

Do you live your life in fear of a fire? The statistics would indicate you are a hell of a lot more likely to be attacked than to have to fight a fire in your home.

 

[ttwtt78640]

Well, there is gun suicide by law abiding folks, killing more, by far, than gun homicide. There's that.

Yep, but making suicide (by gun) illegal would be rather pointless.

 

[jotathought]

No idea what you mean. A gun is an object it does not do good or evil.

Exactly .. yet .... it gets demonized as "an object" that somehow kills people; regardless of the person actually using it.

 

[RF667799]

Of course. I am far more likely to have an incident with a fire than I am to have defend myself from thieves intent on murder.

Even if murderous thieves are unlikely, a gun is pretty cheap insurance in advance. And invaluable if that situation arises.

Damn. Much like a fire extinguisher.

 

[Artymoon]

Of course. I am far more likely to have an incident with a fire than I am to have defend myself from thieves intent on murder.

and you're less likely to struck by lightning than both of those but I hope you exercise caution during storms.

 

[ttwtt78640]

Once guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns? Seems like an easy way for LOE to determine who is breaking the law.

Bans (permanent and nationwide) have certainly proven effective in reducing the abuse of ‘street drugs’.

 

[soylentgreen]

Once guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns? Seems like an easy way for LOE to determine who is breaking the law.

Do americans learn nothing from their own history. How well did prohibition work for america?

To argue that all guns should be banned is to argue that you have no understanding of how bans can work.

 

[soylentgreen]

I am not against obeying the law, but I rely on the government adhering to the 2A as well as the other BoR restrictions (limits?) on its powers. The founders of this nation were (initially) considered not only to be criminals but traitors as well. Not only did they refuse to obey “gun control” laws, they used their guns to help put themselves in charge of making the laws.

Isn't that what dictators do?

 

[ttwtt78640]

No, a fire extinguisher is a safety feature used on fires. Where as in the argument of self defense a gun is a tool used to kill or injure other people.

Pointing out that there is such a thing as a weapons effect and that many of the pro gun arguments here are based on the fear of not having a gun is not a scare tactic. It is about awareness of how people behave around guns.

And I agree with you. It does not matter which side uses fear as a motivator it is a wrong choice. Pointing out that a pro gun person is using fear as a reason is not itself a scary story.

If I have a gun (especially when it is pointed at you) then you are much more likely to decide to respect my authority and right to my life, liberty and property. That form of DGU, very common for LEOs, is too often ignored. Many LEOs, as well as quite a few lawful gun owners, have taken advantage of their armed status and never fired a shot to do so.

 

[soylentgreen]

and you're less likely to struck by lightning than both of those but I hope you exercise caution during storms.

Of course. Just as I would exercise a different set of caution when crossing a busy road but not when I am sitting on a couch. Exercising caution when caution is due is not a problem. Where as the pro gun would exercise caution 24/7 on nothing more than a fear of not having a gun.

 

[ttwtt78640]

Isn't that what dictators do?

Yep, until they are replaced (by force) for acting like dictators. Do you consider the founders of the USA to have been dictators or did they offer to protect the rights of people and abide by, rather than ignore, their wishes?

 

[soylentgreen]

If I have a gun (especially when it is pointed at you) then you are much more likely to decide to respect my authority and right to my life, liberty and property. That form of DGU, very common for LEOs, is too often ignored. Many LEOs, as well as quite a few lawful gun owners, have taken advantage of their armed status and never fired a shot to do so.

And again I should point out that your argument is based on creating fear.

Threatening someone does not deserve respect. Subservience to survive perhaps but no reason to respect a person who need to point guns at people.

 

[soylentgreen]

Yep, until they are replaced (by force) for acting like dictators. Do you consider the founders of the USA to have been dictators or did they offer to protect the rights of people and abide by, rather than ignore, their wishes?

I consider that the people whose wishes they respected are long dead and gone as are those who created the constitution.

 

[ttwtt78640]

And again I should point out that your argument is based on creating fear.

Threatening someone does not deserve respect. Subservience to survive perhaps but no reason to respect a person who need to point guns at people.

Nope, their fear of being shot already existed - that possibility was just being made more apparent. My rights deserve respect, if it takes being armed to convey that message then so be it.

 

[RF667799]

Nope, their fear of being shot already existed - that possibility was just being made more apparent. My rights deserve respect, if it takes being armed to convey that message then so be it.

Isn't their fear of being shot just fallacious appeal to emotion, according to the OP?

 

[joko104]

If people who were injured in a serious car accident are more likely to wear their seatbelt does that make a case against seatbelts? That seems to be the reasoning of the OP.

 

[Artymoon]

Of course. Just as I would exercise a different set of caution when crossing a busy road but not when I am sitting on a couch. Exercising caution when caution is due is not a problem. Where as the pro gun would exercise caution 24/7 on nothing more than a fear of not having a gun.

Any time I step outside my home, caution is due. Whether it be crossing the street, eyeing the weather or being aware of people.
It should be natural to be aware and to hopefully position oneself for the best outcome, no matter the situation. Tools such as guns, knives, seatbelts, crosswalks, phones, etc. assist to provide an advantage to realize that outcome. For me, this has little to do with fear and a lot to do with common sense.

I recognize owning a gun may be foreign to other nations but it really isn't a big deal here. I'm more likely to gawk at my neighbor's new leaf blower than his new handgun.