[W:2270] Does a Gun Make Your Home Safer?

[CLAX1911]

You do realize that there is no actual law of physics that makes that impossible. Right? I mean you do realize that right?

I didn't say there was. There's no gun registration there's no bureau that issues licenses.

The Constitutional protection you currently enjoy (and I dearly hope YOU don't have a gun) is already infringed and it is already circumscribed and limited by court cases. So it is quite possible that we as a nation will install much more strict controls on guns.

We might try but we've been trying for 200 years.

 

[CLAX1911]

To try and be clear about the meaning of a gun left unattended. I have described it as a gun in a room while the owner is not in the room.

that's a bit absurd. What's going to happen to the gun when you leave the room?

Of course they do not. Safety rules are not a cause of accidents.

this isn't a safety rule it's paranoia.

There is a clear safety rule written in most links about gun safety and specifically for this argument gun storage safety. Not one of them mention an accident will happen if you follow them. Accidents are random events. When was the last time you got out of bed and planned the next accident for the day?

What accident could happen if you leave the room is the gun going to magically fly around and shoot people?

It is your job to now explain why you think objects magically move themselves because I just placed a spell of safetyrullium on them.

I'm not the one to sing an accident is likely or possible when I'm out of the room

The "if "is a bit of a sticking point. And while I admit that I do concede it is still your choice to make. It's how you reason your way through to that choice.

right if I leave my gun in my room and I'm the only person in the house I feel perfectly safe.

Some of the other progun here have agreed that some of their other guns are kept in a manner that follows the same rules that they demand do not exist. That they use metal secured lockable boxes with unloaded guns and ammo locked in another lock box.

guns not in use sure.

The rule exists it is just a case of your lot refusing to apply it to one gun.

I've never heard a rule that says you have to keep your gun in a lock box all the time even when you're using it.

Perhaps you misinterpreted that

Just as a thought experiment. If you owned a hundred guns and of them 99 you kept stored as safety protocol states. and have one gun in which you choose to ignore safety.
1. Which gun in your house is the most dangerous?
2. What makes you think you are immune to accidents?

1. None.
2. I didn't suppose anybody is immune to accidents but you can greatly reduce the likelihood of them happening by being careful.

I don't think it's necessary to give your side arm and a lock box it's not going to accidentally get up on its own volition fly around and shoot people.

If anytime you handle your gun you treat it as though or loaded then you don't have a problem with accidentally shooting somebody.

 

[CLAX1911]

How you keep your guns is your choice.

I would think the analogy would be more like you do not park your car and leave the keys in the ignition and the car door unlocked.

well I never leave my gun in the street at all so that analogy fails

And again nothing in the way of how I have talked about accidents suggests that objects move themselves. That is all on you.

how would a gun become dangerous even if it's loaded if it's just sitting on a shelf when someone have to be some outside force on it

Good! Glad to have established your not one of those gun owners who do believe in demons.

The part in bold. Is that an admittance that there is such a level of security?

well sure there's people that don't even keep firearms. I choose the extraordinarily small risk of owning firearms. I take a much greater risk driving.

You can never be perfectly safe and if that's your rationale for what you call and safety rule then I don't think it's rational

 

[soylentgreen]

that's a bit absurd. What's going to happen to the gun when you leave the room?

You asked what is unattended defined as. Probably nothing will happen to the gun. Inanimate objects do not move themselves.

this isn't a safety rule it's paranoia.
What accident could happen if you leave the room is the gun going to magically fly around and shoot people?
I'm not the one to sing an accident is likely or possible when I'm out of the room

You do need to understand that any idea of a gun magically moving is all yours. There is nothing in my description of a safety rule or my description of an accident that would suggest guns can move by themselves.

right if I leave my gun in my room and I'm the only person in the house I feel perfectly safe.

And again I would ask when was the last time you sat down and planned out having an accident? I would hope you do feel safe in your house but then wonder why if you feel safe then the need to ignore a safety rule.

guns not in use sure.
I've never heard a rule that says you have to keep your gun in a lock box all the time even when you're using it.

Perhaps you misinterpreted that

Neither have I. The misinterpretation must be yours if you think that is what I have been saying. There are safety rules for when handling a gun and safe rules when storing a gun. Where as the rule you just made up does not seem to recognise that fact.

1. None.
2. I didn't suppose anybody is immune to accidents but you can greatly reduce the likelihood of them happening by being careful.

1. None! So if a criminal does break into your house you will point your gun at him and say, "don't worry "the gun is not dangerous."
Is it not the case that the one gun you leave out and ignore a safety rule with is for the purpose of being lethal should it need to be. Please keep in mind that absolutely no one gives a crap how good or experienced you think you are with a gun. The question is not how good are you with a gun or if you might have an accident with a gun. Instead the question is for what purpose are you using that gun. Which would be defense, or at least that is what I assume you would argue it's use for. In which case you must have decided you will be dangerous for someone should the circumstance arise.

2. Go on, finish that sentence . "and you can be careful by following the safety rules. "

I don't think it's necessary to give your side arm and a lock box it's not going to accidentally get up on its own volition fly around and shoot people.

Yet not only do the statistics deny that such a simple plan works, it still ignores the nature of an accident.

If anytime you handle your gun you treat it as though or loaded then you don't have a problem with accidentally shooting somebody.

Pretending something is so is never as good as knowing it is so.

A reason for some safety rules such as always unloading your gun when not using it is that if followed it will eventually give you an automatic response to always check if your gun is loaded when picking it up rather than just assume it is.

 

[Lursa]

A reason for some safety rules such as always unloading your gun when not using it is that if followed it will eventually give you an automatic response to always check if your gun is loaded when picking it up rather than just assume it is.

100% wrong again. If you had read the 4 universal rules of gun safety that I posted multiple links to, you'd see that one of them says to ALWAYS treat every gun like it's loaded. So you ALWAYS check.

When individuals at the range or at practice hand another person a gun for them to try...it's automatic that even if that person saw you load/unload the gun, they STILL check. This is a universal rule that shows, for one thing, the other person that you are a responsible and safe gun handler.

Your ignorance on this subject is overwhelmingly spectacular.

Edit: and of course it's stupid to keep a gun intended for protection...unloaded

 

[soylentgreen]

well I never leave my gun in the street at all so that analogy fails
how would a gun become dangerous even if it's loaded if it's just sitting on a shelf when someone have to be some outside force on it
well sure there's people that don't even keep firearms. I choose the extraordinarily small risk of owning firearms. I take a much greater risk driving.

You can never be perfectly safe and if that's your rationale for what you call and safety rule then I don't think it's rational

Your kidding! You do not have to try and take parts of an analogy literally. The analogy does not fail because you now think a car is a gun. Why not say it failed because no one has ever said to you, "Is that a car in your pocket, or are you just glad to see me."
A gun could not become dangerous unless some force acts upon it. It is not that just the act of sitting on a shelf will cause an accident. However should by some chance, that million in one shot that could never happen to you, happened. If you had followed the safety rules the chances are whatever happened would have been less dangerous if the gun was unloaded and in a safety box than if it was a loaded gun sitting on a shelf.

I agree it is all about risk management. But no one here has made a good argument that the potential for risk from a random house invasion is greater than the potential risk from an accident.

No, we can never be perfectly safe, even though the arguments from the pro gun crowd seem to be along the line of an accident has not happened and will not happen. And while we can never be perfectly safe we can, as you suggested, be careful. And we can be careful by following safety rules.

 

[CLAX1911]

You asked what is unattended defined as. Probably nothing will happen to the gun. Inanimate objects do not move themselves.

in my house? Most certainly nothing will happen to the gun.

You do need to understand that any idea of a gun magically moving is all yours. There is nothing in my description of a safety rule or my description of an accident that would suggest guns can move by themselves.

I'm not the one claiming that it needs to be unloaded and placed in a long box every time you leave the room or fall asleep.

You're so cold safety rule is not really a safety rule.

And again I would ask when was the last time you sat down and planned out having an accident? I would hope you do feel safe in your house but then wonder why if you feel safe then the need to ignore a safety rule.

I typically ignore imaginary safety rules or 100% of the time.

Neither have I. The misinterpretation must be yours if you think that is what I have been saying. There are safety rules for when handling a gun and safe rules when storing a gun. Where as the rule you just made up does not seem to recognise that fact.

setting it on the nightstand when you leave the room or calling asleep with it there is not storing it it's using it so your rules about storage don't apply when it's not being stored.

1. None! So if a criminal does break into your house you will point your gun at him and say, "don't worry "the gun is not dangerous."

catch phrases are for action movies if you think that's reality you have no concept of what you're talking about.

Is it not the case that the one gun you leave out and ignore a safety rule with is for the purpose of being lethal should it need to be.

there's no safety rule that I'm ignoring you made it up.

 

[PIPEWRENCH]

Data shows guns do not make you safer; and increase the odds of a bad outcome in the home.

Guns are shit.

Data shows that stupid people do stupid things with guns. Those of us smart enough and responsible enough to have guns are clearly safer with them than without them.

 

[CLAX1911]

Your kidding! You do not have to try and take parts of an analogy literally. The analogy does not fail because you now think a car is a gun. Why not say it failed because no one has ever said to you, "Is that a car in your pocket, or are you just glad to see me."
A gun could not become dangerous unless some force acts upon it. It is not that just the act of sitting on a shelf will cause an accident. However should by some chance, that million in one shot that could never happen to you, happened. If you had followed the safety rules the chances are whatever happened would have been less dangerous if the gun was unloaded and in a safety box than if it was a loaded gun sitting on a shelf.

I agree it is all about risk management. But no one here has made a good argument that the potential for risk from a random house invasion is greater than the potential risk from an accident.

No, we can never be perfectly safe, even though the arguments from the pro gun crowd seem to be along the line of an accident has not happened and will not happen. And while we can never be perfectly safe we can, as you suggested, be careful. And we can be careful by following safety rules.

What kind of accident do you think will happen to a gun all by itself that will cause it to become dangerous?

For there to be a practice put into place to avoid a possible danger and there has to be a danger.

This is why I keep telling you guns don't fly around and kill people I know this frustrates you but that seems to be the only scenario at which your safety rule would be of any kind of use.

 

[soylentgreen]

in my house? Most certainly nothing will happen to the gun.

I'm not the one claiming that it needs to be unloaded and placed in a long box every time you leave the room or fall asleep.

You're so cold safety rule is not really a safety rule.


I typically ignore imaginary safety rules or 100% of the time.




setting it on the nightstand when you leave the room or calling asleep with it there is not storing it it's using it so your rules about storage don't apply when it's not being stored.

catch phrases are for action movies if you think that's reality you have no concept of what you're talking about.
there's no safety rule that I'm ignoring you made it up.

If your house is so safe then why the need for a gun? You have a, "just in case" contingency for a house invasion but not one for an ordinary accident. Even though statistically accidents of all sorts happen more often than house break ins.
Of course it is a safe rule. Your need to defend yourself with a gun is a far more questionable argument. Not that you or any will try and get into any detail about why you need a gun.

Yet I can point to that exact rule. Give you a link. The only one using imagination is you when you pretend it does not exist.

No that is magic if you think you are using a gun while asleep.

Ridiculous then that you made the catch phrase up.

Of course there is such a rule. Easily shown in any credible link on gun safety.

 

[soylentgreen]

What kind of accident do you think will happen to a gun all by itself that will cause it to become dangerous?

For there to be a practice put into place to avoid a possible danger and there has to be a danger.

This is why I keep telling you guns don't fly around and kill people I know this frustrates you but that seems to be the only scenario at which your safety rule would be of any kind of use.

Once again you are back to claiming an accident happens by magic. How many times must I point out and explain how my argument gives you no reason to assume a gun moves by itself. Either except the fact that this is your attempt to distort the argument or stop using this lame tactic of trying to pretend and absurdity fallacy by you is a plausible argument.

Of course there is a danger. Any gun left loaded by the very nature of a gun as a lethal instrument is a danger when used. The danger in this case is the fact that accidents can happen and the state of the gun as loaded makes that accident more likely to be more dangerous.

What frustrates me is that you ignore the explanation of an accident and continue to create your own argument about magical guns that move themselves. It is not a rebuttal to me it is just a flight into fantasy by you.

 

[CLAX1911]

If your house is so safe then why the need for a gun? You have a, "just in case" contingency for a house invasion but not one for an ordinary accident. Even though statistically accidents of all sorts happen more often than house break ins.
Of course it is a safe rule. Your need to defend yourself with a gun is a far more questionable argument. Not that you or any will try and get into any detail about why you need a gun.

Yet I can point to that exact rule. Give you a link. The only one using imagination is you when you pretend it does not exist.

No that is magic if you think you are using a gun while asleep.

Ridiculous then that you made the catch phrase up.

Of course there is such a rule. Easily shown in any credible link on gun safety.

What kind of accident do you think this is a preparation for?

 

[CLAX1911]

Once again you are back to claiming an accident happens by magic. How many times must I point out and explain how my argument gives you no reason to assume a gun moves by itself. Either except the fact that this is your attempt to distort the argument or stop using this lame tactic of trying to pretend and absurdity fallacy by you is a plausible argument.

Of course there is a danger. Any gun left loaded by the very nature of a gun as a lethal instrument is a danger when used. The danger in this case is the fact that accidents can happen and the state of the gun as loaded makes that accident more likely to be more dangerous.

What frustrates me is that you ignore the explanation of an accident and continue to create your own argument about magical guns that move themselves. It is not a rebuttal to me it is just a flight into fantasy by you.

Well the kind of accident you're telling me I need to prepare for who would probably have to involve some sort of sorcery.

You can insist that there's a danger but until you can articulate it I don't believe you.

You're frustrated because I don't accept your alternate reality where some sort of accident that you can't describe seems to be something I need to be focused on.


Safety rules are to prevent real accidents.

Maybe you're frustrated because you know you're not talking about anything and I've caught you on that.

 

[soylentgreen]

What kind of accident do you think this is a preparation for?

Once again you demonstrate a complete lack of understanding about accidents. You realise you are asking for a prophecy not an accident. Not to mention the question itself is obviously loaded. Any example of an accident I could give can be easily countered by demonstrating there is a solution to that accident. Which tells us that hindsight is a wonderful thing rather than anything useful about accidents.
The question really should be what makes you think you are bullet proof and an accident could never happen to you.

 

[soylentgreen]

Well the kind of accident you're telling me I need to prepare for who would probably have to involve some sort of sorcery.

You can insist that there's a danger but until you can articulate it I don't believe you.

You're frustrated because I don't accept your alternate reality where some sort of accident that you can't describe seems to be something I need to be focused on.


Safety rules are to prevent real accidents.

Maybe you're frustrated because you know you're not talking about anything and I've caught you on that.

not at all, it is your imagination that creates sorcery. Accidents are things that actually happen in the real world.

I do not have to articulate any danger what so ever. All I need point out is that accidents do happen.

No, I am frustrated because you ignore the explanation of an accident because you cannot refute it and instead make up magic as a cause for accidents.

Safety rules do not prevent accidents .Please tell me you are not that foolish that you think if you put a seatbelt on then that act of safety alone will stop an accident. Again you could not make it any more clear that you have no idea what an accident is even after it has been explained to you.

All you have caught is a bad case of not knowing what an accident is if you think putting a seatbelt on means you have prevented an accident.

 

[CLAX1911]

Once again you demonstrate a complete lack of understanding about accidents. You realise you are asking for a prophecy not an accident. Not to mention the question itself is obviously loaded. Any example of an accident I could give can be easily countered by demonstrating there is a solution to that accident. Which tells us that hindsight is a wonderful thing rather than anything useful about accidents.
The question really should be what makes you think you are bullet proof and an accident could never happen to you.

You can't give an example of the type of accident you're talking about.

Further to be a safety rule to follow there has to be a reason.

 

[CLAX1911]

I do not have to articulate any danger what so ever.

If you can't articulate any danger then you can't call this a safety rule and have any credibility.

Safety rules are too mitigate danger.

 

[RF667799]

Once again you are back to claiming an accident happens by magic. How many times must I point out and explain how my argument gives you no reason to assume a gun moves by itself. Either except the fact that this is your attempt to distort the argument or stop using this lame tactic of trying to pretend and absurdity fallacy by you is a plausible argument.

Of course there is a danger. Any gun left loaded by the very nature of a gun as a lethal instrument is a danger when used. The danger in this case is the fact that accidents can happen and the state of the gun as loaded makes that accident more likely to be more dangerous.

What frustrates me is that you ignore the explanation of an accident and continue to create your own argument about magical guns that move themselves. It is not a rebuttal to me it is just a flight into fantasy by you.

You're conflating storage with use. And it appears you feel the only safe way to use a gun is to make sure it is never loaded.

 

[soylentgreen]

You can't give an example of the type of accident you're talking about.

Further to be a safety rule to follow there has to be a reason.

Where as you laughably think that if you put a seat belt on then an accident can be prevented.

It is not that i cannot give an example it is that that trick has already been played. If you really think you have something then you give an accident that might happen.

If you can't articulate any danger then you can't call this a safety rule and have any credibility.

Safety rules are too mitigate danger.

Now you put me in a tricky position. You have changed your statement from safety rules prevent accidents to mitigate accidents.
My problem now is do I do the right thing and acknowledge that change and move on or should I play the same dishonest game you are playing and refuse to acknowledge any explanation and just keep pretending you think safety rules will prevent accidents. Just as you are doing by repeating that i think magic causes accidents when every explanation i have given does not include magic of any sort.

I will compromise. Every time you make the dishonest claim I think accidents are caused by magic I will throw back in your face that you think safety rules prevent accidents.

 

[soylentgreen]

You're conflating storage with use. And it appears you feel the only safe way to use a gun is to make sure it is never loaded.

No that is what others are trying to do. A pretense that they need their gun 24/7 to be safe is their excuse of being used. Where as I am pointing out that if you leave a gun in your bedroom and you are in another room then that is not using a gun. That is leaving a gun unattended.

I would point out that not once in this debate have I said anything about keeping a gun unloaded. This is nothing more than an exaggeration on your part.

 

[CLAX1911]

Where as you laughably think that if you put a seat belt on then an accident can be prevented.

It is not that i cannot give an example it is that that trick has already been played. If you really think you have something then you give an accident that might happen.


Now you put me in a tricky position. You have changed your statement from safety rules prevent accidents to mitigate accidents.
My problem now is do I do the right thing and acknowledge that change and move on or should I play the same dishonest game you are playing and refuse to acknowledge any explanation and just keep pretending you think safety rules will prevent accidents. Just as you are doing by repeating that i think magic causes accidents when every explanation i have given does not include magic of any sort.

I will compromise. Every time you make the dishonest claim I think accidents are caused by magic I will throw back in your face that you think safety rules prevent accidents.

What kind of accident would happen with a gun in a room by itself?

 

[trouble13]

Some 'interesting' articles out there, articles that contradict the claims of many gun advocates.

View attachment 67332840​

The 'statistics' in this meme seem a bit high but research does show that guns in the house are more likely to harm a resident than an intruder.

Reconsidering Risks of Gun Ownership and Suicide in Unprecedented Times​

Guns in Home, Greater Odds of Family Homicide​

Living in a house with a gun increases your odds of death​

A gun makes me more dangerous which makes my home safer from criminals

 

[RF667799]

No that is what others are trying to do. A pretense that they need their gun 24/7 to be safe is their excuse of being used. Where as I am pointing out that if you leave a gun in your bedroom and you are in another room then that is not using a gun. That is leaving a gun unattended.

I would point out that not once in this debate have I said anything about keeping a gun unloaded. This is nothing more than an exaggeration on your part.

Seriously? A simple search of your posts using the term "unloaded" returns several pages of results. You have harped and harped about guns being unloaded when stored, and continually conflated being stored with being used.

 

[RF667799]

No that is what others are trying to do. A pretense that they need their gun 24/7 to be safe is their excuse of being used. Where as I am pointing out that if you leave a gun in your bedroom and you are in another room then that is not using a gun. That is leaving a gun unattended.

I would point out that not once in this debate have I said anything about keeping a gun unloaded. This is nothing more than an exaggeration on your part.

Yes, that would be an unattended gun. Not necessarily an unsecured gun, though.

 

[soylentgreen]

What kind of accident would happen with a gun in a room by itself?

What accident will be prevented by putting a seat belt on.

Again not one word can you quote of me, not one post can you point to that gives you the ability to say i have argued that an accident can happen just because a gun is in a room. Where as I can point to the exact post and your exact words where you believe safety rules prevent accidents.