This is why people have guns and be able to use them (Spring Hill: 2014, school)

[Beach Sportsfan]

Originally Posted by Spring Hillian

Do a Google search for "homeowner shoots intruder" and do one on "homeowner shoots family member by mistake". You will learn how often each event happens. The fact of the matter is that the latter is rare.

It's simply a matter of you and your family living and/or not suffering harm versus stopping a criminal who's intent is to cause suffering and/or death of victims.

Once again. It should be left of to each individual to choose and not be critized for their choice. What might work for you might not work for others.

[KPB]

Originally Posted by Spring Hillian

I would rather have the sense of empowerment on my side rather than allowing an attacker have it on his.

100% agree

[Spring Hillian]

Originally Posted by Beach Sportsfan

Once again. It should be left of to each individual to choose and not be critized for their choice. What might work for you might not work for others.

I totally agree with you. However, I cant rationalize allowing a criminal do whatever they want to me or my family versus stopping the criminal.

[Beach Sportsfan]

Originally Posted by Spring Hillian

I totally agree with you. However, I cant rationalize allowing a criminal do whatever they want to me or my family versus stopping the criminal.

And that's your choice. But here it's a question for you. Had you had to use it for self defense yet? With the number of guns in this country we should be reading about thousands of criminals being shot and killed by armed homeowners.

As I said before everyone should have a choice on wether they do or not and not be ridiculed by their choice as being wrong. What works for you under your situation might not apply for someoneelse

[Travelassie]

Originally Posted by KPB

I think the stats say 4-5 times more likely and it may be that guns give a sense of empowerment that causes "some" carriers to overreact in tense situations, or encourages them to visit neighbourhoods they probably shouldn’t.
(lack of common sense).


I prefer dangerous freedom over peaceful slavery. Thomas Jefferson

Surely you have some credible documentation to back up those claims.

Seems it's pure conjecture on the part of yet another anti-gun advocate, assuming that any ownership of a gun means the owner is chomping at the bit for opportunities to use it, will use it to settle disputes, or deliberately endanger himself assuming he can use the gun to get himself out of trouble.And that is just not true.

[LarsMac]

Originally Posted by HWTechGuy

If you're irresponsible and untrained, yes.

Rule #1 is know what you are shooting at and what's behind your target.

So, are you suggesting that because of one person's irresponsible behavior that the rest of us shouldn't be able to defend themselves?

If it was just the one person who was irresponsible and untrained, it could be taken as an anomaly and we could just move on.

However, there are so many untrained and irresponsible people who own and possess firearms, and so many people - many of then children - have suffered the damages done by those people.

If we could just come up with a way to fix THAT problem, that would be a good thing.

[Beach Sportsfan]

According to the CDC data
FastStats - Accidents or Unintentional Injuries

More Americans commit suicide with guns than die of gun homicide

[Travelassie]

Originally Posted by Beach Sportsfan

And that's your choice. But here it's a question for you. Had you had to use it for self defense yet? With the number of guns in this country we should be reading about thousands of criminals being shot and killed by armed homeowners.

As I said before everyone should have a choice on wether they do or not and not be ridiculed by their choice as being wrong. What works for you under your situation might not apply for someoneelse

Has it occured to you that gun ownership on the part of homeowners where the laws allow it might actually be a deterrant to home invasions? And that most gun owners have their weapons for self-defense, and hope they never have to use them.

What's mind boggling to me are the assumptions on the part of the anti-gun advocates that gun ownership means that any owner is itching to use that gun and will find opportunities to do so. I'd venture to say that the overwhelming majority of gun owners would say they would be happy never to have the occasion to use them.

[MAniacTHW]

Originally Posted by Spring Hillian

Someone committing a home invasion, and there is usually more than one, would have no qualms in ending your life or leave indelible memories of the event on you.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

[Beach Sportsfan]

Originally Posted by Travelassie

Has it occured to you that gun ownership on the part of homeowners where the laws allow it might actually be a deterrant to home invasions? And that most gun owners have their weapons for self-defense, and hope they never have to use them.

What's mind boggling to me are the assumptions on the part of the anti-gun advocates that gun ownership means that any owner is itching to use that gun and will find opportunities to do so. I'd venture to say that the overwhelming majority of gun owners would say they would be happy never to have the occasion to use them.

And I never said any of the things you just stated. My question to the poster was because if I had experienced a home invasion or lived in an area where this is prevalent , then I might be more likely to have guns for protection.

It goes back to what I originally say that what works for someone might not be best for others. If it makes you feel safer to have a gun for protection, then more power to you but just like you shouldn't be criticized for that choice, those that choose not to have one shouldn't be critized.

As I posted more people died in the US by gun suicides than by gun homicides.