Why is the average firearm owner, an unsafe gun owner?

[Scatty Kitty]

I am sorry you don’t know how percentages work. Maybe take a class sometime.

You're looking at the rate of gun owners. When you're trying to make a per capita argument. The problem is that in this case, we can look at those numbers and compare it per capita to other countries. Where they don't have these problems. If anything if you want to do a per capita analysis, then we'd see the number of gun fatalities in other countries is dramatically less. Since the key argument for gun ownership is that it makes us safer, then we shouldn't see people die from accidental firearms in the US. If anything it should be in countries with lower rates of gun ownership.

 

[Scatty Kitty]

It happens. Could be anything though.

The point is a 911 call will take over half an hour to get help.

Having dogs and a loaded 12 guage handy is standard practice.

Right but I'm asking what you think the number one threat is that qualifies as "home defense".

 

[EdwinWillers]

That's the thing, they're not being safe with their firearms. That's the hard point to get across.

Because it's a stupid point. Some, I admit are careless, but the vast majority are not - and for good reason.

There's a simple reason why we need to keep firearms separate from the ammo. To keep them accidental discharges down. Why else do you think I cited the last statistic in the OP? The last point is especially important, because it shows that firearm owners aren't protecting themselves from the actual threats, ie using the gun on themselves or a family member. Practicing basic gun safety like keeping a gun locked in storage with ammo separate helps to protect against these basic threats.

No. The vast majority of accidental deaths is among children. And as I just stated above, those households need different protective measures against that. No argument. In fact, stats show that the majority of such incidents involve children either playing with or showing off guns to their siblings or friends. That is a clear indication that those families where those tragedies occurred were definitely NOT practicing good gun safety - including teaching their children about firearms.

But again, storing ammo apart from the gun renders the gun entirely useless. So in a sense, your point is valid - however, it completely ignores the other reason for having a gun - self protection, family protection. What's the point in having a completely useless firearm when your house is being broken into?

 

[EdwinWillers]

Yeah. It's very racist. Do you not think that laws exist that are done out of racism?

Did you notice the photo you used before only had white people in it? So we're looking at a time most likely before schools were integrated. Judging by the clothes, probably 60's or 70's. We know at that time the Black Panthers were active and were militant with firearms. We know that gun regulations were passed at the time to limit the Black Panthers and other Black Nationalists at the time. So it makes sense to me as schools were integrated, those classes were dropped as a result. At least that's my theory.

Hooookaaaay.... I think this convo is officially over.

 

[Scatty Kitty]

Because it's a stupid point. Some, I admit are careless, but the vast majority are not - and for good reason.

Not according to the sources I cited. Gun owners are not safe, or at least there's a sizable minority of them that aren't.

No. The vast majority of accidental deaths is among children. And as I just stated above, those households need different protective measures against that. No argument. In fact, stats show that the majority of such incidents involve children either playing with or showing off guns to their siblings or friends. That is a clear indication that those families where those tragedies occurred were definitely NOT practicing good gun safety - including teaching their children about firearms.

Like keeping firearms locked, and ammo separate. But it's not just for children. It's for everyday people as well.

But again, storing ammo apart from the gun renders the gun entirely useless. So in a sense, your point is valid - however, it completely ignores the other reason for having a gun - self protection, family protection. What's the point in having a completely useless firearm when your house is being broken into?

So then why are gun owners more likely to die if they have a firearm in their home then if they don't have one? Remember what I said about gun owners not knowing what is the biggest threat in their household? One of the key problems behind it is not correctly identifying security risks.

 

[Scatty Kitty]

Hooookaaaay.... I think this convo is officially over.

I don't think you understand the racist history of gun control.

 

[soylentgreen]

Of course he has a right to kill with it. You, in New Zealand, have the same right to kill with a firearm.

No, actually we do not. There is no legal right to buy a gun for the purpose of self defense.

 

[soylentgreen]

Yes I deny your bs. And you have provided exactly zero to back up said bs. Which tells me I was right to deny your bs.

The pro gun crowd consists of millions of people. And just like in any crowd that large you can find just about any opinion your want. Doesn’t mean it is common or meaningful.

And sorry but I don’t care too much about the safety rules pushed by gun control zealots.

So basically you will hide behind numbers. That many do not use a gun as badly as some does nothing to change the fact that some refuse to obey safety rules.

 

[soylentgreen]

Yes how dare we not just accept your bs as fact. The audacity.

Seeing you all butthurt because people don’t just take your BS as fact is hilarious.

Maybe try backing up your BS for a change.

And again all you can do is deny.

 

[jaeger19]

Lol

Stupid reply. This is not the real world.

What? The real world is that a person manages to break into your house without you or your wife or your dogs hearing them or your home alarm going off.
Manage to go through your house without disturbing anyone until

“When a bad guy has a guy to your head”

You think THATS the real world?

 

[jaeger19]

No, I am saying that you bought a gun thinking you had a right to kill with it.

Why the heck would you think that?

You have some deep seated issues dude.

 

[NolanVoyd]

Right but I'm asking what you think the number one threat is that qualifies as "home defense".

And I answered you.

But the risk is low, because rural people tend to have dogs and guns.

 

[Diomedes]

There's no easy way to say this but the average gun owner in the US is not safe with their guns.

That's because guns are not safe in the first place.

"Any bloody fool can pull the trigger."

 

[JMB1911A1]

That's the thing, they're not being safe with their firearms. That's the hard point to get across. There's a simple reason why we need to keep firearms separate from the ammo. To keep them accidental discharges down. Why else do you think I cited the last statistic in the OP? The last point is especially important, because it shows that firearm owners aren't protecting themselves from the actual threats, ie using the gun on themselves or a family member. Practicing basic gun safety like keeping a gun locked in storage with ammo separate helps to protect against these basic threats.

Your last “statistic” in the OP is a lie based on a flawed study. But you know that because I have already replied to you and you ignored it. So, I’ll post the info again.

Your “statistic” is based on the debunked Kellerman study of 1993.

“First, in the 1993 referenced study, Kellermann et al. break rule number one when creating an ethical scientific study: engaging in selection bias. The ‘controlled’ population in this study came from a cherry-picked population of reported burglaries in a single county, thus creating a biased population and variables.

Kellermann’s team also used data where the guns were brought to the victim’s home and not owned by the victim. It seems that Kellermann et al. already had their ‘conclusion’ settled before the “study” even began.”

“Of course, a cherry-picked population encompassed by individuals with criminal records, aggressive behaviors, and homicidal tendencies are going to be more dangerous with a gun in hand than the average responsible, law-abiding gun owner. But in this false reality created by Kellermann et al., the two populations are one and the same.”

NY Times Recycles Debunked Study to Weaponize Anti-Gun Lies, Push More Disarmament Agitprop - The Truth About Guns

By Salam Fatohi Anti-gun activists are getting so desperate that they are relying on incorrect methodology to spread their own gun control agenda in their battle against the firearm industry. Put simply: junk science will always be junk science. Regardless of whether the ‘scientist’ believes it...

www.thetruthaboutguns.com

 

[soylentgreen]

Why the heck would you think that?

You have some deep seated issues dude.

Even worse then. You bought a gun for self defense and gave not one thought to the idea that you might have to kill .

 

[RF667799]

And? Please compare to that rate to the rate of deaths from other countries and get back to me.

No, you do that if you wish to make the comparison.

 

[RF667799]

Hi, I've asked multiple gun owners on DP how they store their firearms. Not a single one keeps their firearms separate from their ammo. I've been asking this question for awhile now. There's nothing else to do. Gun owners I've asked, don't know how to do something as simple as store their firearms safely.

It's just a mystery why everyone doesn't comply with your opinions, isn't it?

I think you spent too much time bossing around children, and have no concept of adulthood.

 

[RF667799]

Accidental fatalities are preventable fatalities. Accidental injuries are preventable injuries. I won't lie, the post comes across moreso as not being able to make a cognizant point on guns.

You mean he demolished your false claim.

 

[RF667799]

That's the thing, they're not being safe with their firearms. That's the hard point to get across. There's a simple reason why we need to keep firearms separate from the ammo. To keep them accidental discharges down. Why else do you think I cited the last statistic in the OP? The last point is especially important, because it shows that firearm owners aren't protecting themselves from the actual threats, ie using the gun on themselves or a family member. Practicing basic gun safety like keeping a gun locked in storage with ammo separate helps to protect against these basic threats.

How many fatalities per year can be attributed to this particular circumstance that so concerns you?

 

[RF667799]

You're looking at the rate of gun owners. When you're trying to make a per capita argument. The problem is that in this case, we can look at those numbers and compare it per capita to other countries.

I'm sorry. I must have missed where you presented that data necessary for that comparison.

Where they don't have these problems. If anything if you want to do a per capita analysis, then we'd see the number of gun fatalities in other countries is dramatically less. Since the key argument for gun ownership is that it makes us safer, then we shouldn't see people die from accidental firearms in the US. If anything it should be in countries with lower rates of gun ownership.

Oh. You're just going to speculate, and make up the data.

 

[SMTA]

I don't think you understand the racist history of gun control.

More bullshit
Gun control will never happen to the level that you want

 

[RF667799]

Even worse then. You bought a gun for self defense and gave not one thought to the idea that you might have to kill .

False dichotomy.

 

[jaeger19]

Even worse then. You bought a gun for self defense and gave not one thought to the idea that you might have to kill .

I didn’t buy my firearm for self defense.
So now what?

 

[Infinite Chaos]

1. And why not compare European countries to each other since they are much more similar to each other than the us.

Erm... the thread was about American Gun ownership - rules are pretty clear in most of Europe about checks on gun ownership and gun safety. I'm quite happy about the rules in most of Europe.

I notice that you dismiss the comparison of Idaho and New York State

I didn’t dismiss it… I gave you an answer.

Well, did it occur to you the difference between the us and European countries could be
1. Lack of universal healthcare
2. Difference in social safety nets
3 Access to public education including trade schools and university
4. Americas long history of slavery and segregation and institutional racism?

Funny, those are exactly 4 reasons behind most of your blue collar crime rate. "White collar" or business crime is something different entirely.

you anti gunners

I’m not an anti-gunner. I enjoy shooting, I enjoy guns but I don’t believe you should be able to randomly walk into a local corner shop and buy a pack of eggs and a handgun before breakfast.

It's because I am not "rabidly pro guns" in school teachers hands, local supermarkets, concealed carry on the street etc that most Americans see people like me as anti-gun.

2. Why separately and why just “ gun crime”

Well, truth be told, your knife crime rates are also horrendous compared to most of Europe but this is a gun control thread in a gun control forum.

3. Why should population density matter? Are you saying that population density means MORE than gun ownership . A difference of 60% to 20%.

4, well let’s examine that theory about firearms and black people.
Idaho has 60% gun ownership one of the highest in the nations
African American population is 1.5%

New York State has gun ownership of 20%
African American population of 17.6%.

So based on these statistics explain how they support your theory that American gun owners own guns “ in the hope of shooting a black invader”.

Your stats are telling you a story you should be able to tell for yourself. Go back and look at the differences between the US and European nations for your clues.

 

[Infinite Chaos]

Tell me what’s wrong with leaving a firearm loaded and within easy reach .

If I have the risk of bears / lions / crocodiles etc on my farm then yeah a loaded firearm in easy reach makes sense. But then the three times I lived in Africa, neither I nor my family needed guns in easy reach. Twice, we lived in more remote areas but still - in some cities, you will get leopards patrolling at night even into homes. Go figure.

I get that impression as well. I don't think most of the people who are American Pro-gun here really can think about the things they're saying. Like for example, they're saying that despite tens thousands of people dead from firearms, because there are a lot of them it makes the deaths insignificant. Or that they need a gun for self defense. I am curious if you have any ideas or points about this.

Putting it simplistically, our British police don't want to be armed because what happens is criminals then take weapons with them. You are allowed to kill in self-defence here but 99% of burglars and robbers don't take guns with them when breaking into someone's house because they don't expect the homeowner to be about to shoot them.
Basically the general approach in America is escalation - homeowners arm heavily and so robbers equally "tool up" and you end up with an arms race.

In Germany, there is more gun ownership and most European police forces walk around with guns strapped to themselves but their training is different - they are trained in de-escalating rather than escalating. You don't see anywhere near as many road traffic violations turn into a police killing unless they have been chasing a known armed criminal like Mark Duggan and then in the UK - we would bring in an armed police unit for that and not your average policeman.