Guns rarely used for self defence

[Dragonlady]

Have to remember that these far left drones want no one to have guns except the criminals while leaving the border wide open..

You've just described Canada.

 

[Wildman]

gun owners are far more likely to hurt themselves or others,

 

[OKTexas]

Total crap because they only consider homicides to be "usage". The overwhelming majority of defensive uses of firearms the trigger is never pulled. Bad guys, amazingly enough, don't like to get shot.

you have a valid point, yet the facts remain you and your family are more likely to die if there is a gun in the house

You're even more likely to die if you ride in a car.

That's why we test, license, and insure drivers.

I've been tested and licensed to carry my guns.

 

[g5000]

Of course, citizens aren't required to 'justify' the exercising of a Constitutional right as a 'prerequisite' to indeed do so.

This.

This, this, this, this.

I keep telling the rubes that if I have to justify my second amendment right to a gun, they have to justify their first amendment right to midget porn.

You don't neeeeeeeeeed midget porn!

 

[g5000]

Total crap because they only consider homicides to be "usage". The overwhelming majority of defensive uses of firearms the trigger is never pulled. Bad guys, amazingly enough, don't like to get shot.

I have an M-1A in the corner right now.

What is it doing?

It is being used for self-defense.

By it presence.

Buy it presents?

Sure. Only the best oil, bullets, and magazines.

 

[g5000]

This just in: Children who live in homes with a swimming pool are eleventy times more likely to die from drowning!

 

[OKTexas]

...and yet it is the weapon of choice for the police in close in riot type conditions. For example, the cops all carried shotguns when breaking up looters during Katrina.

I wonder why that is?

The large bore is very intimidating, tends to get peoples attention.

You think a crook is looking at bore size????

Ever had a gun pointed at you, you notice the bore size. Back in my younger days I was leaving a bar, there were two guys fighting which blocked the path to my car, so I just stopped and watched. Some woman behind me yelled everyone get back, I turned and was looking down the barrel of a .38, trust me even that looked like a cannon.

 

[Correll]

Of course, citizens aren't required to 'justify' the exercising of a Constitutional right as a 'prerequisite' to indeed do so.

This.

This, this, this, this.

I keep telling the rubes that if I have to justify my second amendment right to a gun, they have to justify their first amendment right to midget porn.

You don't neeeeeeeeeed midget porn!

Now, now, maybe they do.

 

[Skylar]

Totally ignored the pilot who murdered all those people didn't you.

That's anecdotal evidence. And argument by anecdote is a classic fallacy of logic. Why would I ignore the CDC yearly totals for the entire nation....in favor of one cherry picked anecdotal example when we're discussing probability?

Intellectual dishonesty is a trait prevalent in almost every anti gun person I have ever seen.

Or....you can't refute or even address what is actually being said. So you refute arguments that aren't being made,and recite a predigested script. I'm not even antigun. I own two. I'm simply aware that trying to use one for self defense is far more likely to result in harm to me and my family than it is an intruder.

Again, its 80 times more likely that you or a member of your family will kill themselves with a fire arm than kill an intruder. And having a gun in the house increases the likelihood of suicide by about double. The odds of an accidental shooting is about double that of shooting an intruder.

Why would you subject your family to this? For the literal 1 in a million odds that you'll shoot some intruder?

Again, those are absolute shit odds. You'd laugh in a bookie's face if he offered you those numbers. Yet you double down on them with your own family?

No thank you.

You do not fail to follow up the tradition.

You're going through the motions in some predigested script titled 'anti-gun debate' in your head. But you're not actually addressing anything I've said. You're refuting studies I've never cited, debunking points I've never made...

.....and failing spectacularly to even address the points I've made. Let alone refute them with anything more than naked denial.

Again, no thank you.

That's because what you are saying is not relevant. A person who uses a gun to commit suicide is GOING TO COMMIT SUICIDE. Taking the gun away from him won't alter the result.

And that's where you're wrong. Take a gun out of the scenario and the odds of suicide drop by HALF. Access to guns doubles the odds of suicide. Even taking into account all other means available. The methods available for suicide dramatically impacts the odds of committing suicide. With guns DOUBLING those odds.

That's what you don't seem to be getting.

Even go state by state and you can see the difference. With the states with highest gun ownership rates having significantly higher suicide rates. While the states with the lowest gun ownership rates have significantly lower suicide rates.

Accidental shootings are more than TWICE as likely you shooting an intruder. You or your family using the gun for suicide is 80 times more likely. And guns in the home double the rates of suicide.

Why would you subject your family to this? For the literal 1 in 1,000,000 chance that you're going to shoot an intruder instead? That's shit. Absolute shit odds.

Having a gun doesn't make you safer. As gun ownership doesn't reduce the odds of ANY major crime, including burglury, home invasion, or robbery. Women in households with guns are 3 times more likely to be murdered even without domestic violence. Include domestic violence and they are 5 times more likely to be murdered. With 3/4 of women who are killed in their homes, most of them by guns.

Having a gun in your home for self defense does NOT make your family safer. Having a gun in your home for self defense increases the odds of a whole bunch of horrible outcomes. Which is why I don't keep a loaded weapon in my home.

Pull the firing pin out of your weapon and keep it unloaded. Its far more likely to protect you and your family than if you left it in. As you get all the benefit of 'intimidation' but none of the risk to your family. While the odds of you actually pulling the trigger on an intruder are less than half getting of struck by lightning.

 

[Correll]

Totally ignored the pilot who murdered all those people didn't you.

That's anecdotal evidence. And argument by anecdote is a classic fallacy of logic. Why would I ignore the CDC yearly totals for the entire nation....in favor of one cherry picked anecdotal example when we're discussing probability?

Intellectual dishonesty is a trait prevalent in almost every anti gun person I have ever seen.

Or....you can't refute or even address what is actually being said. So you refute arguments that aren't being made,and recite a predigested script. I'm not even antigun. I own two. I'm simply aware that trying to use one for self defense is far more likely to result in harm to me and my family than it is an intruder.

Again, its 80 times more likely that you or a member of your family will kill themselves with a fire arm than kill an intruder. And having a gun in the house increases the likelihood of suicide by about double. The odds of an accidental shooting is about double that of shooting an intruder.

Why would you subject your family to this? For the literal 1 in a million odds that you'll shoot some intruder?

Again, those are absolute shit odds. You'd laugh in a bookie's face if he offered you those numbers. Yet you double down on them with your own family?

No thank you.

You do not fail to follow up the tradition.

You're going through the motions in some predigested script titled 'anti-gun debate' in your head. But you're not actually addressing anything I've said. You're refuting studies I've never cited, debunking points I've never made...

.....and failing spectacularly to even address the points I've made. Let alone refute them with anything more than naked denial.

Again, no thank you.

That's because what you are saying is not relevant. A person who uses a gun to commit suicide is GOING TO COMMIT SUICIDE. Taking the gun away from him won't alter the result.

And that's where you're wrong. Take a gun out of the scenario and the odds of suicide drop by HALF. Access to guns doubles the odds of suicide. Even taking into account all other means available. The methods available for suicide dramatically impacts the odds of committing suicide. With guns DOUBLING those odds.

That's what you don't seem to be getting.

Even go state by state and you can see the difference. With the states with highest gun ownership rates having significantly higher suicide rates. While the states with the lowest gun ownership rates have significantly lower suicide rates.

Accidental shootings are more than TWICE as likely you shooting an intruder. You or your family using the gun for suicide is 80 times more likely. And guns in the home double the rates of suicide.

Why would you subject your family to this? For the literal 1 in 1,000,000 chance that you're going to shoot an intruder instead? That's shit. Absolute shit odds.

Having a gun doesn't make you safer. As gun ownership doesn't reduce the odds of ANY major crime, including burglury, home invasion, or robbery. Women in households with guns are 3 times more likely to be murdered even without domestic violence. Include domestic violence and they are 5 times more likely to be murdered. With 3/4 of women who are killed in their homes, most of them by guns.

Having a gun in your home for self defense does NOT make your family safer. Having a gun in your home for self defense increases the odds of a whole bunch of horrible outcomes. Which is why I don't keep a loaded weapon in my home.

Pull the firing pin out of your weapon and keep it unloaded. Its far more likely to protect you and your family than if you left it in. As you get all the benefit of 'intimidation' but none of the risk to your family.

It is true that a gun is a more effective means of suicide.

Removing guns would lead to more FAILED suicide attempts, and thus fewer deaths.

It is also true that counting ONLY shot intruders and excluding intruders who fled when confronted by a firearm is a dishonest tactic designed to mislead about how many times guns are used in self defense.

I personally know two men who have used handguns to protect themselves. IN neither instance was the gun fired.

In both cases they saved themselves from AT LEAST a serious beating.

IN both cases they might have saved themselves from being murdered.

 

[Skylar]

Total crap because they only consider homicides to be "usage". The overwhelming majority of defensive uses of firearms the trigger is never pulled. Bad guys, amazingly enough, don't like to get shot.

you have a valid point, yet the facts remain you and your family are more likely to die if there is a gun in the house

Then pull the firing pin out of your gun and don't keep any ammo in the house. You get all the 'intimidation' value, which the poster admits is the 'overwhelming majority of defensive uses of fire arms' and none of the risk to your family. Or yourself.

When a toy gun works almost as well as a real one......but doesn't hurt your family as a real one is far more likely to do, then why keep a real one loaded in your home?

 

[Iceweasel]

For every justifiable homicide involving a gun, 32 criminal homicides carried out with a firearm occurred. Also, gun owners are far more likely to hurt themselves or others, than to use them for self defense.

LOL. Move to Cuba you pussy.

 

[Skylar]

Totally ignored the pilot who murdered all those people didn't you.

That's anecdotal evidence. And argument by anecdote is a classic fallacy of logic. Why would I ignore the CDC yearly totals for the entire nation....in favor of one cherry picked anecdotal example when we're discussing probability?

Intellectual dishonesty is a trait prevalent in almost every anti gun person I have ever seen.

Or....you can't refute or even address what is actually being said. So you refute arguments that aren't being made,and recite a predigested script. I'm not even antigun. I own two. I'm simply aware that trying to use one for self defense is far more likely to result in harm to me and my family than it is an intruder.

Again, its 80 times more likely that you or a member of your family will kill themselves with a fire arm than kill an intruder. And having a gun in the house increases the likelihood of suicide by about double. The odds of an accidental shooting is about double that of shooting an intruder.

Why would you subject your family to this? For the literal 1 in a million odds that you'll shoot some intruder?

Again, those are absolute shit odds. You'd laugh in a bookie's face if he offered you those numbers. Yet you double down on them with your own family?

No thank you.

You do not fail to follow up the tradition.

You're going through the motions in some predigested script titled 'anti-gun debate' in your head. But you're not actually addressing anything I've said. You're refuting studies I've never cited, debunking points I've never made...

.....and failing spectacularly to even address the points I've made. Let alone refute them with anything more than naked denial.

Again, no thank you.

That's because what you are saying is not relevant. A person who uses a gun to commit suicide is GOING TO COMMIT SUICIDE. Taking the gun away from him won't alter the result.

And that's where you're wrong. Take a gun out of the scenario and the odds of suicide drop by HALF. Access to guns doubles the odds of suicide. Even taking into account all other means available. The methods available for suicide dramatically impacts the odds of committing suicide. With guns DOUBLING those odds.

That's what you don't seem to be getting.

Even go state by state and you can see the difference. With the states with highest gun ownership rates having significantly higher suicide rates. While the states with the lowest gun ownership rates have significantly lower suicide rates.

Accidental shootings are more than TWICE as likely you shooting an intruder. You or your family using the gun for suicide is 80 times more likely. And guns in the home double the rates of suicide.

Why would you subject your family to this? For the literal 1 in 1,000,000 chance that you're going to shoot an intruder instead? That's shit. Absolute shit odds.

Having a gun doesn't make you safer. As gun ownership doesn't reduce the odds of ANY major crime, including burglury, home invasion, or robbery. Women in households with guns are 3 times more likely to be murdered even without domestic violence. Include domestic violence and they are 5 times more likely to be murdered. With 3/4 of women who are killed in their homes, most of them by guns.

Having a gun in your home for self defense does NOT make your family safer. Having a gun in your home for self defense increases the odds of a whole bunch of horrible outcomes. Which is why I don't keep a loaded weapon in my home.

Pull the firing pin out of your weapon and keep it unloaded. Its far more likely to protect you and your family than if you left it in. As you get all the benefit of 'intimidation' but none of the risk to your family.

It is true that a gun is a more effective means of suicide.

Removing guns would lead to more FAILED suicide attempts, and thus fewer deaths.

We're in agreement. Save you don't even need the failed suicide attempts. Impulsiveness is strongly associated with suicide. You can make the impulsive decision to kill yourself with a gun and do it in a hand full of seconds. Most other methods of suicide take longer. And give you more time to come to your senses before you even attempt them.

There's also accidental shootings. Which are more than double the odds of shooting an intruder. I'm not counting all the injuries due to accidental shootings. Only the deaths.

It is also true that counting ONLY shot intruders and excluding intruders who fled when confronted by a firearm is a dishonest tactic designed to mislead about how many times guns are used in self defense.

Christ, you guys are on autopilot. Read the post you're actually replying to rather than reciting from a script;

Pull the firing pin out of your weapon and keep it unloaded. Its far more likely to protect you and your family than if you left it in. As you get all the benefit of 'intimidation' but none of the risk to your family.

Skylar

Did you just miss that part? Or did you 'dishonestly' omit it?

Per posters in this thread, pulling a gun by NOT firing it is the overwhelming majority of defensive uses of a fire arm. And you get all of those advantages with a gun with no firing pin and no ammo....with none of risk to your family. None of the suicides with a fire arm. None of the doubling of rates of suicide. None of the increases in the rates of murder to women. None of the increased rates of murder to women in DV situations. None of the accidental shootings.

None of it.

That's the solution I use, sans removing the firing pin. It works great. And no one in my home has ever shot themselves.

 

[bendog]

It's all irrelevant since we each have a right to buy firearms if we choose. I'd like more disposable income for more guns, personally. Colt's defunct, and the darn gun grabbers got them to stop making the King Cobra two decades ago.

 

[westwall]

Totally ignored the pilot who murdered all those people didn't you.

That's anecdotal evidence. And argument by anecdote is a classic fallacy of logic. Why would I ignore the CDC yearly totals for the entire nation....in favor of one cherry picked anecdotal example when we're discussing probability?

Intellectual dishonesty is a trait prevalent in almost every anti gun person I have ever seen.

Or....you can't refute or even address what is actually being said. So you refute arguments that aren't being made,and recite a predigested script. I'm not even antigun. I own two. I'm simply aware that trying to use one for self defense is far more likely to result in harm to me and my family than it is an intruder.

Again, its 80 times more likely that you or a member of your family will kill themselves with a fire arm than kill an intruder. And having a gun in the house increases the likelihood of suicide by about double. The odds of an accidental shooting is about double that of shooting an intruder.

Why would you subject your family to this? For the literal 1 in a million odds that you'll shoot some intruder?

Again, those are absolute shit odds. You'd laugh in a bookie's face if he offered you those numbers. Yet you double down on them with your own family?

No thank you.

You do not fail to follow up the tradition.

You're going through the motions in some predigested script titled 'anti-gun debate' in your head. But you're not actually addressing anything I've said. You're refuting studies I've never cited, debunking points I've never made...

.....and failing spectacularly to even address the points I've made. Let alone refute them with anything more than naked denial.

Again, no thank you.

That's because what you are saying is not relevant. A person who uses a gun to commit suicide is GOING TO COMMIT SUICIDE. Taking the gun away from him won't alter the result.

And that's where you're wrong. Take a gun out of the scenario and the odds of suicide drop by HALF. Access to guns doubles the odds of suicide. Even taking into account all other means available. The methods available for suicide dramatically impacts the odds of committing suicide. With guns DOUBLING those odds.

That's what you don't seem to be getting.

Even go state by state and you can see the difference. With the states with highest gun ownership rates having significantly higher suicide rates. While the states with the lowest gun ownership rates have significantly lower suicide rates.

Accidental shootings are more than TWICE as likely you shooting an intruder. You or your family using the gun for suicide is 80 times more likely. And guns in the home double the rates of suicide.

Why would you subject your family to this? For the literal 1 in 1,000,000 chance that you're going to shoot an intruder instead? That's shit. Absolute shit odds.

Having a gun doesn't make you safer. As gun ownership doesn't reduce the odds of ANY major crime, including burglury, home invasion, or robbery. Women in households with guns are 3 times more likely to be murdered even without domestic violence. Include domestic violence and they are 5 times more likely to be murdered. With 3/4 of women who are killed in their homes, most of them by guns.

Having a gun in your home for self defense does NOT make your family safer. Having a gun in your home for self defense increases the odds of a whole bunch of horrible outcomes. Which is why I don't keep a loaded weapon in my home.

Pull the firing pin out of your weapon and keep it unloaded. Its far more likely to protect you and your family than if you left it in. As you get all the benefit of 'intimidation' but none of the risk to your family. While the odds of you actually pulling the trigger on an intruder are less than half getting of struck by lightning.

And once again, the Japanese experience proves you are wrong. They have no guns and yet they kill themselves at a higher rate than we do. You simply can't bullshit that fact away.

 

[2aguy]

Totally ignored the pilot who murdered all those people didn't you.

That's anecdotal evidence. And argument by anecdote is a classic fallacy of logic. Why would I ignore the CDC yearly totals for the entire nation....in favor of one cherry picked anecdotal example when we're discussing probability?

Intellectual dishonesty is a trait prevalent in almost every anti gun person I have ever seen.

Or....you can't refute or even address what is actually being said. So you refute arguments that aren't being made,and recite a predigested script. I'm not even antigun. I own two. I'm simply aware that trying to use one for self defense is far more likely to result in harm to me and my family than it is an intruder.

Again, its 80 times more likely that you or a member of your family will kill themselves with a fire arm than kill an intruder. And having a gun in the house increases the likelihood of suicide by about double. The odds of an accidental shooting is about double that of shooting an intruder.

Why would you subject your family to this? For the literal 1 in a million odds that you'll shoot some intruder?

Again, those are absolute shit odds. You'd laugh in a bookie's face if he offered you those numbers. Yet you double down on them with your own family?

No thank you.

You do not fail to follow up the tradition.

You're going through the motions in some predigested script titled 'anti-gun debate' in your head. But you're not actually addressing anything I've said. You're refuting studies I've never cited, debunking points I've never made...

.....and failing spectacularly to even address the points I've made. Let alone refute them with anything more than naked denial.

Again, no thank you.

That's because what you are saying is not relevant. A person who uses a gun to commit suicide is GOING TO COMMIT SUICIDE. Taking the gun away from him won't alter the result.

And that's where you're wrong. Take a gun out of the scenario and the odds of suicide drop by HALF. Access to guns doubles the odds of suicide. Even taking into account all other means available. The methods available for suicide dramatically impacts the odds of committing suicide. With guns DOUBLING those odds.

That's what you don't seem to be getting.

Even go state by state and you can see the difference. With the states with highest gun ownership rates having significantly higher suicide rates. While the states with the lowest gun ownership rates have significantly lower suicide rates.

Accidental shootings are more than TWICE as likely you shooting an intruder. You or your family using the gun for suicide is 80 times more likely. And guns in the home double the rates of suicide.

Why would you subject your family to this? For the literal 1 in 1,000,000 chance that you're going to shoot an intruder instead? That's shit. Absolute shit odds.

Having a gun doesn't make you safer. As gun ownership doesn't reduce the odds of ANY major crime, including burglury, home invasion, or robbery. Women in households with guns are 3 times more likely to be murdered even without domestic violence. Include domestic violence and they are 5 times more likely to be murdered. With 3/4 of women who are killed in their homes, most of them by guns.

Having a gun in your home for self defense does NOT make your family safer. Having a gun in your home for self defense increases the odds of a whole bunch of horrible outcomes. Which is why I don't keep a loaded weapon in my home.

Pull the firing pin out of your weapon and keep it unloaded. Its far more likely to protect you and your family than if you left it in. As you get all the benefit of 'intimidation' but none of the risk to your family.

It is true that a gun is a more effective means of suicide.

Removing guns would lead to more FAILED suicide attempts, and thus fewer deaths.

We're in agreement. Save you don't even need the failed suicide attempts. Impulsiveness is strongly associated with suicide. You can make the impulsive decision to kill yourself with a gun and do it in a hand full of seconds. Most other methods of suicide take longer. And give you more time to come to your senses before you even attempt them.

There's also accidental shootings. Which are more than double the odds of shooting an intruder. I'm not counting all the injuries due to accidental shootings. Only the deaths.

It is also true that counting ONLY shot intruders and excluding intruders who fled when confronted by a firearm is a dishonest tactic designed to mislead about how many times guns are used in self defense.

Christ, you guys are on autopilot. Read the post you're actually replying to rather than reciting from a script;

Pull the firing pin out of your weapon and keep it unloaded. Its far more likely to protect you and your family than if you left it in. As you get all the benefit of 'intimidation' but none of the risk to your family.

Skylar

Did you just miss that part? Or did you 'dishonestly' omit it?

Per posters in this thread, pulling a gun by NOT firing it is the overwhelming majority of defensive uses of a fire arm. And you get all of those advantages with a gun with no firing pin and no ammo....with none of risk to your family. None of the suicides with a fire arm. None of the doubling of rates of suicide. None of the increases in the rates of murder to women. None of the increased rates of murder to women in DV situations. None of the accidental shootings.

None of it.

That's the solution I use, sans removing the firing pin. It works great. And no one in my home has ever shot themselves.

Actually, you are wrong...on all counts....Japan and South Korea have 2 times the suicide rate we do and other countries with stricter gun control also have higher suicide rates...so they still have suicide with impulsiveness...they just jump off buildings use poison, hang themselves or jump in front of trains....

Accidental shootings in 2013....505 down from 2010......and saying that 230 killings of criminals means you are 2 times more likely to kill a relative is stupid......considering most defensive used never involve shooting the weapon or just injure the attacker...so guns are used far more times to stop violent criminals than they are to kill them or when compared to gun accidents....

And the accidental injuries from cars......2.31 million...guns....according to brain...17,000.....and many homes have both a car and a gun...sell the car, take the bus......

And the bigger determinent to deaths in a family...drugs, alcohol and criminal behavior......if women didn't date abusers, they wouldn't have to worry about guns killing them......

And you can explain that to the woman killed by her exhusband with a hatchet....or the woman in New Jersey, with alarms, cameras and a restraining order who was stabbed to death by her ex-boy friend...while she was waiting to get her gun permit........

 

[Dragonlady]

The Japanese had a long standing tradition of ritual suicide. Comparing suicide rates in Japan to any other country is dumb. You should be comparing US suicide rates to countries with similar cultures. The U.S. Suicide rate is much higher than Canada, Great Britain, Australia but if you take guns out of the equation, rates in all of these countries are almost identical.

Gun ownership drives the higher rate of US murder, suicide, and accidental shootings.

 

[2aguy]

It's all irrelevant since we each have a right to buy firearms if we choose. I'd like more disposable income for more guns, personally. Colt's defunct, and the darn gun grabbers got them to stop making the King Cobra two decades ago.

Sadly, it isn't irrelevant......we are one Supreme Court Justice away from losing gun rights left and right.....and if hilary, the woman who protected her sexual predator husband gets in, she will appoint more than one supreme court justice....stacking the deck against freedom.....

 

[2aguy]

The Japanese had a long standing tradition of ritual suicide. Comparing suicide rates in Japan to any other country is dumb. You should be comparing US suicide rates to countries with similar cultures. The U.S. Suicide rate is much higher than Canada, Great Britain, Australia but if you take guns out of the equation, rates in all of these countries are almost identical.

Gun ownership drives the higher rate of US murder, suicide, and accidental shootings.

No....sorry....you anti gun extremists have tried that dodge before.......you try moving the goal post and you can't......you anti gun extremists say that the mere presence of guns increases the risk of suicide....civilians in Japan and South Korea, and many other countries with stricter gun control than we have, have no access to guns........and they kill themselves at higher levels than we do...

And the favorite method of suicide around the world...hanging.........

Sorry again...suicide rates stayed the same after those countries banned guns.......

 

[2aguy]

Totally ignored the pilot who murdered all those people didn't you.

That's anecdotal evidence. And argument by anecdote is a classic fallacy of logic. Why would I ignore the CDC yearly totals for the entire nation....in favor of one cherry picked anecdotal example when we're discussing probability?

Intellectual dishonesty is a trait prevalent in almost every anti gun person I have ever seen.

Or....you can't refute or even address what is actually being said. So you refute arguments that aren't being made,and recite a predigested script. I'm not even antigun. I own two. I'm simply aware that trying to use one for self defense is far more likely to result in harm to me and my family than it is an intruder.

Again, its 80 times more likely that you or a member of your family will kill themselves with a fire arm than kill an intruder. And having a gun in the house increases the likelihood of suicide by about double. The odds of an accidental shooting is about double that of shooting an intruder.

Why would you subject your family to this? For the literal 1 in a million odds that you'll shoot some intruder?

Again, those are absolute shit odds. You'd laugh in a bookie's face if he offered you those numbers. Yet you double down on them with your own family?

No thank you.

You do not fail to follow up the tradition.

You're going through the motions in some predigested script titled 'anti-gun debate' in your head. But you're not actually addressing anything I've said. You're refuting studies I've never cited, debunking points I've never made...

.....and failing spectacularly to even address the points I've made. Let alone refute them with anything more than naked denial.

Again, no thank you.

That's because what you are saying is not relevant. A person who uses a gun to commit suicide is GOING TO COMMIT SUICIDE. Taking the gun away from him won't alter the result.

And that's where you're wrong. Take a gun out of the scenario and the odds of suicide drop by HALF. Access to guns doubles the odds of suicide. Even taking into account all other means available. The methods available for suicide dramatically impacts the odds of committing suicide. With guns DOUBLING those odds.

That's what you don't seem to be getting.

Even go state by state and you can see the difference. With the states with highest gun ownership rates having significantly higher suicide rates. While the states with the lowest gun ownership rates have significantly lower suicide rates.

Accidental shootings are more than TWICE as likely you shooting an intruder. You or your family using the gun for suicide is 80 times more likely. And guns in the home double the rates of suicide.

Why would you subject your family to this? For the literal 1 in 1,000,000 chance that you're going to shoot an intruder instead? That's shit. Absolute shit odds.

Having a gun doesn't make you safer. As gun ownership doesn't reduce the odds of ANY major crime, including burglury, home invasion, or robbery. Women in households with guns are 3 times more likely to be murdered even without domestic violence. Include domestic violence and they are 5 times more likely to be murdered. With 3/4 of women who are killed in their homes, most of them by guns.

Having a gun in your home for self defense does NOT make your family safer. Having a gun in your home for self defense increases the odds of a whole bunch of horrible outcomes. Which is why I don't keep a loaded weapon in my home.

Pull the firing pin out of your weapon and keep it unloaded. Its far more likely to protect you and your family than if you left it in. As you get all the benefit of 'intimidation' but none of the risk to your family.

It is true that a gun is a more effective means of suicide.

Removing guns would lead to more FAILED suicide attempts, and thus fewer deaths.

We're in agreement. Save you don't even need the failed suicide attempts. Impulsiveness is strongly associated with suicide. You can make the impulsive decision to kill yourself with a gun and do it in a hand full of seconds. Most other methods of suicide take longer. And give you more time to come to your senses before you even attempt them.

There's also accidental shootings. Which are more than double the odds of shooting an intruder. I'm not counting all the injuries due to accidental shootings. Only the deaths.

It is also true that counting ONLY shot intruders and excluding intruders who fled when confronted by a firearm is a dishonest tactic designed to mislead about how many times guns are used in self defense.

Christ, you guys are on autopilot. Read the post you're actually replying to rather than reciting from a script;

Pull the firing pin out of your weapon and keep it unloaded. Its far more likely to protect you and your family than if you left it in. As you get all the benefit of 'intimidation' but none of the risk to your family.

Skylar

Did you just miss that part? Or did you 'dishonestly' omit it?

Per posters in this thread, pulling a gun by NOT firing it is the overwhelming majority of defensive uses of a fire arm. And you get all of those advantages with a gun with no firing pin and no ammo....with none of risk to your family. None of the suicides with a fire arm. None of the doubling of rates of suicide. None of the increases in the rates of murder to women. None of the increased rates of murder to women in DV situations. None of the accidental shootings.

None of it.

That's the solution I use, sans removing the firing pin. It works great. And no one in my home has ever shot themselves.

And you get all of those advantages with a gun with no firing pin and no ammo....with none of risk to your family.

Until you get a violent criminal who also has a gun.....or decides to challenge you anyway and attacks you regardless of your gun......then you have nothing.......