Do you have, or have you, a gun/guns in your home?

[basas]

I'm not going to be hostile, but I'm not encouraging a friendship.

I would be polite and pleasant when I saw her or him outside. Beyond that, no, I would not want to be any friendlier, and I certainly would never set foot in his or her house, nor would I want them in my home. My children would not be allowed on their property ever.

Actually, I have a neighbor who is a cop. The guy is a horse's patoot, so the point is moot. But I do wave and say hello, but no, we aren't friends.

I just don't understand this logic at all. Children are far more likely to be killed attending a house with a swimming pool or being driven around by a friend's parents in the car, yet we all take these risks because we can't live in a bubble. Properly stored firearms are no more dangerous then knives, a baseball bat, or an ax.

 

[ilovecountry]

We have them in the house & I know how to use them. I grew up in a Marine family & my father taught me how to shoot as a teen. We were very well educated about them growing up. Now at 24, I'm a certified sharpshooter & I know how to handle a gun. I have no issues with it, if you decide to break into this house, you better make your peace with God first. Guns do take lives, along with bombs, knives, cars, bats, alcohol, prescription drugs, forks, glass, a pen, a pencil--- anyone who wants to take a life can use anything no matter how small or irrelevant it may seem if they want to do it. Outlawing guns would not stop crimes, it would just force criminals to use another method. I keep hearing all the time how if guns were banned, we wouldn't have school shooting... if we didn't have guns, these kids just have to turn on youtube & watch how to make a bomb. You always hear about how guns kill innocent people, yet you never hear the times it saves a life. People can hide in the closet & call the police w/ a bat if they wish and hope the police get there in time before they find your family, but I'm just gonna shoot you, sorry

 

[CowboyCO]

Again, I will state that I am NOT for total gun control.

Let's try this "I am not in favor of total birth control".

As far as I'm concerned you either support the rights as defined (not granted) in the Bill of Rights or you do not. I've never met anyone that was "sort of pregnant"

 

[Charade]

I just don't understand this logic at all. Children are far more likely to be killed attending a house with a swimming pool or being driven around by a friend's parents in the car, yet we all take these risks because we can't live in a bubble. Properly stored firearms are no more dangerous then knives, a baseball bat, or an ax.

I don't either. It's not like they've got free roaming alligators in their yard.

 

[Kath2003]

I just don't understand this logic at all. Children are far more likely to be killed attending a house with a swimming pool or being driven around by a friend's parents in the car, yet we all take these risks because we can't live in a bubble. Properly stored firearms are no more dangerous then knives, a baseball bat, or an ax.

You're right, but all those things serve a useful purpose. I don't know about the US but there are also limits to the size of knife or any other sharpe object or tool you can buy and they cannot be sold to minors. Guns serve no purpose other than to cause the death of humans or wildlife. If you're using them for sport, like clay pigeon shooting, as is common in the UK, they simply adopt a system like ours - heavily licensed and ensuring that people have the correct training (much like a driving test....?).

 

[Farmer'sWife]

DH has several - just how many and what kind I do not know.

They are locked in the gun safe.

He is a hunter, and opposed to any whispering of the government not letting people have guns so he buys a new one once a year or so.

 

[sha_lyn]

You're right, but all those things serve a useful purpose. I don't know about the US but there are also limits to the size of knife or any other sharpe object or tool you can buy and they cannot be sold to minors. Guns serve no purpose other than to cause the death of humans or wildlife. If you're using them for sport, like clay pigeon shooting, as is common in the UK, they simply adopt a system like ours - heavily licensed and ensuring that people have the correct training (much like a driving test....?).

You just contradicted yourself. Clay pigeons are not humans or wildlife.
Guns do have a purpose other than killing. No one I know that owns a gun has ever killed a human, and most I know don't even hunt. They do however target shoot for recreation. DH and several friends go to the shooting range several times a yr. They aren't shooting humans or wildlife.

 

[Charade]

Guns serve no purpose other than to cause the death of humans or wildlife. If you're using them for sport, like clay pigeon shooting, as is common in the UK, they simply adopt a system like ours - heavily licensed and ensuring that people have the correct training (much like a driving test....?).

You contradict yourself with those two statements. Target practice or just plinking soda cans at the dump is a favorite pastime for many gun owners. Many who will never hunt but MIGHT use one for self defense. Besides that, self defense is a legitimate use for a gun (any gun) even if it means death or injury to the attacker.

 

[Kath2003]

You just contradicted yourself. Clay pigeons are not humans or wildlife.
Guns do have a purpose other than killing. No one I know that owns a gun has ever killed a human, and most I know don't even hunt. They do however target shoot for recreation. DH and several friends go to the shooting range several times a yr. They aren't shooting humans or wildlife.

I phrased that incorrectly, I apologise. I meant that the sole purpose of a gun is to kill or injure people or wildlife. The sole purpose of a knife is to cut hard objects - there are everyday uses for a knife. There are everyday uses of a car - a car was not designed to run down pedestrians or to get into wrecks. These are side effects of a useful product.

Clinking soda cans can be done at locations which supervise the use of these weapons. Clay pigeon shooting (which came about largely because of the restrictions on shooting) likewise. There are many, many places where you can enjoy shooting as a recreation in the UK. Letting the public have access to firearms in order to achieve this? A recipe for disaster IMO.

This argument about the 'self-defense' thing holds no water with me. Crimes are going to take place; your best bet is surely to limit criminals access to guns, rather than hoping that if you needed to defend yourself you'd be able to get to your (presumably locked) gun cabinet and load it with ammo (which many people claim they keep separately, and also presumably locked) and accurately be able to fire it, presuming you are home at the time and presuming that any intruder wakes you in the process.

The murder rate in the US is 5.4 per 100,000, compared with 1.1 per 100,000 in the UK - so I'm guessing guns as self-defense DON'T work particularly well, not least if your attacker has a loaded gun already in their hand (and is therefore several steps ahead of you given the above scenario). The US has the highest murder rate of the western world, comparable to countries such as India and China. In gun deaths alone, it has the highest rate of deaths in the world.

 

[rie'smom]

I phrased that incorrectly, I apologise. I meant that the sole purpose of a gun is to kill or injure people or wildlife. The sole purpose of a knife is to cut hard objects - there are everyday uses for a knife. There are everyday uses of a car - a car was not designed to run down pedestrians or to get into wrecks. These are side effects of a useful product.

Clinking soda cans can be done at locations which supervise the use of these weapons. Clay pigeon shooting (which came about largely because of the restrictions on shooting) likewise. There are many, many places where you can enjoy shooting as a recreation in the UK. Letting the public have access to firearms in order to achieve this? A recipe for disaster IMO.

This argument about the 'self-defense' thing holds no water with me. Crimes are going to take place; your best bet is surely to limit criminals access to guns, rather than hoping that if you needed to defend yourself you'd be able to get to your (presumably locked) gun cabinet and load it with ammo (which many people claim they keep separately, and also presumably locked) and accurately be able to fire it, presuming you are home at the time and presuming that any intruder wakes you in the process.

The murder rate in the US is 5.4 per 100,000, compared with 1.1 per 100,000 in the UK - so I'm guessing guns as self-defense DON'T work particularly well, not least if your attacker has a loaded gun already in their hand (and is therefore several steps ahead of you given the above scenario). The US has the highest murder rate of the western world, comparable to countries such as India and China. In gun deaths alone, it has the highest rate of deaths in the world.

I know people who collect guns-they don't shoot them. Many of us feel the
2nd amendment is important.

 

[ntsammy5]

Many of us feel the 2nd amendment is important.

Including the Supreme Court of the United States of America!

 

[#1hockeymom]

 

[love2travel]

I have read through almost this entire thread and I have to say some of the statements made on here really make me angry. But everyone is entitled to there opinion, right or wrong. I grew up with guns being in my home, my entire family hunts and my DH is a Police Officer and one of his passions is guns. We have an 11 year daughter and from when she was very young she was taught about guns and gun safety. She knows guns aren't toys, they are a TOOL and just like any tool you need to know how to use it and use it SAFELY!!! A lot people say guns are bad but, I can bet you if you were in the process of being robbed, your family harmed or any other kinda of crime that you would want the police to arrive and take control of the situation. Say the situation had to be controlled with the officer firing his weapon, would you then say GUNS ARE BAD. Think about it.

 

[SteveReeves]

Like it or not, guns are necessary to protect you and your family from those who want to do you harm, and ensure an important check/balance from the govt.

While police do an incredible job in helping protect society from the criminal element, police generally are there after the crime is committed to investigate, not prevent the crime from occurring.

The DC gun ban was an utter failure-- in the 30 years it was in place crime has skyrocketed. Same with the now defunct federal assault weapons ban. Same thing with the UK - if their gun ban was so successful why are Britain's police now being armed?

History dictates an armed society is better off than an unarmed one - Hitler disarmed the Jews for their own "good" before he killed 5-6 million of them who were left defenseless.

Anti-gunners can exercise their freedom of speech and say what they want about me while I exercise my right to bear arms.

 

[tonilea]

I phrased that incorrectly, I apologise. I meant that the sole purpose of a gun is to kill or injure people or wildlife. The sole purpose of a knife is to cut hard objects - there are everyday uses for a knife. There are everyday uses of a car - a car was not designed to run down pedestrians or to get into wrecks. These are side effects of a useful product.

Clinking soda cans can be done at locations which supervise the use of these weapons. Clay pigeon shooting (which came about largely because of the restrictions on shooting) likewise. There are many, many places where you can enjoy shooting as a recreation in the UK. Letting the public have access to firearms in order to achieve this? A recipe for disaster IMO.

This argument about the 'self-defense' thing holds no water with me. Crimes are going to take place; your best bet is surely to limit criminals access to guns, rather than hoping that if you needed to defend yourself you'd be able to get to your (presumably locked) gun cabinet and load it with ammo (which many people claim they keep separately, and also presumably locked) and accurately be able to fire it, presuming you are home at the time and presuming that any intruder wakes you in the process.

The murder rate in the US is 5.4 per 100,000, compared with 1.1 per 100,000 in the UK - so I'm guessing guns as self-defense DON'T work particularly well, not least if your attacker has a loaded gun already in their hand (and is therefore several steps ahead of you given the above scenario). The US has the highest murder rate of the western world, comparable to countries such as India and China. In gun deaths alone, it has the highest rate of deaths in the world.

I promise to stay on my side of the pond with my gun, if the Brits (general) won't try to push their anti-gun propaganda on us.

 

[Charade]

I promise to stay on my side of the pond with my gun, if the Brits (general) won't try to push their anti-gun propaganda on us.

Too late. This woman http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rebecca_Peters

(while not British, she's from Australia) is trying to get a WORLD ban (via UN treaties) on firearms.

 

[Cool-Beans]

I'll say this. If a guy who is bigger and stronger than you are is in the house during the day, while you're awake and you didn't know it until you happened upon him and have a few seconds to run, a gun would come in much handier than a cordless phone handset.

But, of course, that only happens to other people and could never, ever happen to you. Big, strong, crazy people only break into other people's houses.

My guns are not locked up and they are loaded. Sometimes when you need to kill someone you need to have the item with which to kill them kind of handy, ready-to-go.

The first guy that came into the house got to live. He got to live in jail, but he got to live. The next one won't be so lucky. I'll kill the next one twice. The odds of having two different people come into the house have got to be pretty low, but I'm ready. Go ahead, punk. Make my day.

 

[#1hockeymom]

I'll say this. If a guy who is bigger and stronger than you are is in the house during the day, while you're awake and you didn't know it until you happened upon him and have a few seconds to run, a gun would come in much handier than a cordless phone handset.

But, of course, that only happens to other people and could never, ever happen to you. Big, strong, crazy people only break into other people's houses.

My guns are not locked up and they are loaded. Sometimes when you need to kill someone you need to have the item with which to kill them kind of handy, ready-to-go.

The first guy that came into the house got to live. He got to live in jail, but he got to live. The next one won't be so lucky. I'll kill the next one twice. The odds of having two different people come into the house have got to be pretty low, but I'm ready. Go ahead, punk. Make my day.

I'm glad you have the gun because according to the other thread, you and I both can't find our phones!

 

[Cool-Beans]

I'm glad you have the gun because according to the other thread, you and I both can't find our phones!

Don't tempt me. I may start yanking that thing out and DEMANDING that someone admit when it is he who did not turn the phone off, Jack Bauer style.

What do you say NOW? Did you turn off the phone?! Huh?! Whose fault is it that the phone is off the hook and missing?! That'd get the truth outta him.

 

[#1hockeymom]

*laughing*
I woke up DH I was laughing so hard. The only thing that saved me is I told him it was from the gun thread!