Poll: is a gun a good tool to have in a household?

[SilentHunter7]

No,

All a gun can do is destroy things. It's about as defensive as a drop kick, the most likely outcome from having a gun in a house is that one of the occupants will either shoot them self or someone else, either by accident or on purpose.
Either way all the possible outcomes that come with a gun are negative.

I've been living in a house with a handgun for 10 years now, (3 of which has been with my nephew, who is 7 now) and so far noone's shot themselves or anything else except for paper targets at the local shooting range (I'm actually proud of myself, I'm starting to get to be a pretty decent shot). It's only dumbasses who don't buy trigger-locks, keep the gun loaded when they're not using it, and let the kids find out where you keep it, who you have to worry about.

Though I have to admit, with all the safeties we put on it, it's pretty abysmal in terms of usability in a break-in. You have to open the strong box it's in, open the trigger lock, open the safe we keep the ammo in, and load it. It's far easier just to use the baseball bat I keep in my room, or the taser my mom sleeps with.

 

[sneakypenguin]

Even with the expectation of a heavily armed and trained intruder what good would a gun do? If you got the jump on the person then you would be heavily injuring them (at the least) with minimal knowledge of their intents, identity or possible threat. This places you in a position of wrongdoing if you are attacking such a person.

U.S. courts have established that if someone is in your house all bets are off so to speak, this is the castle doctrine and you can not be held liable.
To those that worry about kids getting guns, yeah they are curious creatures but education fixes that . I am sure my younger siblings if coming across a firearm they would either clear it/safe it and tell the parental s or tell the parentals. And if they are too young to understand/use firearms just keep them out of reach, I doubt you all have 5 year old ninja children that can reach the top of a 7 ft shelf .

And to those that say it escalates a situation well that may be the case I wouldn't deny it. But I would rather have the right and ability/option to defend myself rather than trust the attacker to be of fine moral character and not kill me. I just think it's better to be proactive with my safety. I'm a little guy 6/3 130 lbs a gun levels a playing field.

The Dalai Lama: "If someone has a gun and is trying to kill you, it would be reasonable to shoot back with your own gun." (May 15, 2001, The Seattle Times)

Ted Nugent: "To my mind it is wholly irresponsible to go into the world incapable of preventing violence, injury, crime, and death. How feeble is the mindset to accept defenselessness. How unnatural. How cheap. How cowardly. How pathetic."

 

[sirdanrhodes]

You need a "depends" option.

Also, google chrome has a pretty good spell checker...

 

[Hunde Des Krieg]

bottom line-a gun is a tool, albeit a tool designed to kill... but a tool none the less. Now if you live in an area where some one may break into your home and threaten your life, it will pay to have a gun. if you live in a fancy loft in some well-to-do neighborhood, then you probably don't need one.
but this whole notion of, you don't need a gun if no one has a gun is just fantasy, you will never be able to rid a country completely of guns. In the U.S. the only way to gurantee a gun free society would be to have the feds tear apart nearly every home in the country as well as find all the weapons caches hidden by the "militias". It will never happen here in the U.S. there are too many places to hide guns, too many people that want to keep their guns, and not enough real incentive for any kind of intervention. as well as the fact that most guns used in violent crimes, gang related and such, are illegal weapons that were smuggled into the country, weapons that if not caught are un-enforcable anyway.

 

[Gildedtongue]

I think Scott Adams said it best. "I think everyone should have a gun. Except I should be the only one with bullets."

 

[Blind Punk Riot]

How else are you going to open beer bottles and the neighbours children?

 

[Alleged_Alec]

I don't think a gun is a good idea. However, I live in a non-violent country, where no one really owns guns. If you do think you need to defend yourself though, I'd rather go for a taser or another 'non-lethal weapon'.

 

[jamesworkshop]

Not really I can't think of a single time when a firearm would have been useful to me inside my house

 

[Chechosaurus]

Not really I can't think of a single time when a firearm would have been useful to me inside my house

Same here. I have never thought, "I gun would come in real handy about now". I live in the UK so guns really aren't much of an issue of here but I still don't think its a useful tool. Unless ofcourse you are a Neo-Nazi with plans to kill the one guy who might actually manage to regain some of the lost respect for America. Yup... then it's a real useful tool.

 

[BallPtPenTheif]

Why get a gun when you can just get homeowners insurance and not stress about any of it? Sure a gun's cheaper, that's about the only advantage.

"Oh no... you are going to take my things! BANG BANG BANG!"

That being said, guns are insanely fun to play with though.

 

[gamebrain89]

I have to agree with Rebel...

If you are single or something, a gun is fine.
But if you have kids or grand-kids or something, I would say no...

Bullshit

Unless you're going to have your two year old fire your gun for you who does it hurt?

...
Kids are curious. They is a chance that one of them would shoot themselves, you, or each other.

So because parents are irresponsible enough to not keep their guns under lock and key, with the ammo stored else where also under lock and key, no one period should have a gun? Its a very simple fact that in any of the times where a child has shot himself or another person, if the gun had been locked in a safe or had a trigger guard installed, and the ammo had been stored else where, LIKE ITS SUPPOSED TO BE, it would not have happened. As a sportsman, I am definately opposed to outlawing guns. I do think that who guns are sold to should be more closely paid attention to, and any gun owners should be required to take a gun safety course before purchasing one. But outlawing guns is a very, very stupid idea.

 

[darthzew]

Depends. If you live out in rural territory, then yes. If you live in the city, then no. I think guns should be limited. Possibly limited to some sort of limited recreational rental service. For example, if someone wants to go hunting they have to rent a rifle from the park owner. Or if someone wants to go pistol shooting at a range, he has to rent a handgun from the range owner.

 

[Rooster Cogburn]

Why get a gun when you can just get homeowners insurance and not stress about any of it? Sure a gun's cheaper, that's about the only advantage.

"Oh no... you are going to take my things! BANG BANG BANG!"

That being said, guns are insanely fun to play with though.

Better get life insurance while you're at it.

Same here. I have never thought, "I gun would come in real handy about now". I live in the UK so guns really aren't much of an issue of here but I still don't think its a useful tool. Unless ofcourse you are a Neo-Nazi with plans to kill the one guy who might actually manage to regain some of the lost respect for America. Yup... then it's a real useful tool.

In that case, if you don't agree with me, you're... I don't know, a rapist. Why the hell not?

A gun has plenty of uses. For example, guns can perform cosmetic surgery. If I had a gun that time I was assaulted, my face would likely look like it used to. I don't look worse, really, but I can tell the difference. Every time I look in a mirror I'm reminded what guns are good for.

 

[GothmogII]

Humm...I don't know, wouldn't an instantaneous and wholly non-lethal device be preferable? Which is unfortunate that one hasn't been devised, and a taser isn't exactly 100% effective in all situations.

I mean, I do understand defending oneself, it's just the deadly force part I don't like, even if my assailant was fully prepared to use such force on me. I'd rather have something that could incapacitate my attacker with the same speed a gun can, but without killing them.

And yes, a gun -technically- is a tool. Albeit with very limited uses. It can kill. It can damage objects. That's about it.

 

[Sexual Harassment Panda]

I live in England where there are no guns, and no gun crime. I'm not sure self defence is a valid arguement. My house has been broken into twice in the last few years and both times the thief shit himself and ran when confronted.

 

[gamebrain89]

Depends. If you live out in rural territory, then yes. If you live in the city, then no. I think guns should be limited. Possibly limited to some sort of limited recreational rental service. For example, if someone wants to go hunting they have to rent a rifle from the park owner. Or if someone wants to go pistol shooting at a range, he has to rent a handgun from the range owner.

The inherent problem with the rental solution is that rental anything are generally not well taken care of. If the weapon is not well taken care of, It goes against the concept of "The Clean Kill", which is part of the concept of "Fair Chase" One of the first things you learn about in hunters education here in the U.S. is that if you are going to take an animals life, you do it in the cleanest, least traumatizing way possible. for rifle hunting, if the weapon is not taken care of, the weapon is NOT going to be accurate, which prevents "the clean kill". I take good care of my rifles, they stay accurate, so when I do hunt, I follow "Fair Chase".

Also, I am preemptivly stating my position on hunting before anyone starts screaming "Hunting Is Inhumane!!!!" . I am a meat hunter. We hunt for food, which is generally cheaper than beef. The animals we are hunting have a 85 percent chance of getting away from us with out a scratch on them, which is much better than beef cattle, which have a ZERO percent chance of survival. /rant

 

[gerrymander61]

Yes guns are a great tool. In a rural/country setting, it's a necessary tool. If you frequent the shooting range or enjoy hunting, then it's useful to have one. For self-defence, keep one in your house, and then take your kids to the shooting range and let them use it in a safe, controlled environment so they won't be tempted to come looking for it and find out what it does. All the people who argue that kids will hurt themselves or each other need to learn to educate their kids and take proper precautions. If they don't, then i'm glad that their kids get into accidents and stuff. Maybe it'll teach their neighbours not to be idiots like they were.

Oh, and about criminals and gang members shooting each other and whatnot, good. Their only positive contribution to society is population control in the form of gunning each other down. Evolution.

 

[aks9]

No.

I don't think guns are a good way to protect your household at all. Firstly because of all the dangers of accidents and that sort of thing which people have already discussed, secondly, because the chances of you shooting the intruder before they shoot you are so slim.

If someone intrudes in your house, they will be alert and will be open to be possibility or even expecting an encounter with the habitants of the place he or she is breaking into. You, on the other hand, will probably be listening to music with your headphones or doing yoga or sleeping or something, and by the time you realise there is an intruder in your home, it'll be too late, gun or not, since they will be prepared and you will not.


As for guns "leveling the playing field", that wouldn't be necessary if guns were completely illegal. There is an argument that says, those who truly want to get their hands on a gun will be able to, which is true, but these people will most likely be in gangs and mafias, and not breaking into random homes in order to steal your ps3 or your fine art (how many burglaries in the UK or AUS involved guns?).

I agree very much with mr fluffylandmine and his description of peace of mind. That is exactly what is missing, especially in certain parts of the USA, and bringing true peace of mind back to people and making the dangerous places safer will involve so much more than giving people guns and "leveling out the playing field".