Elementary School Shooting, Newtown CT - 26 innocent dead, 20 children

[Malphas]

Ugh. Firstly no, we weren't discussing just your situation obviously, my usage of "you" is a thing called rhetoric, not talking about your specific situation, this should have been fairly obvious as you were making a case for owning firearms for home defense which is what I was rebutting.

Secondly, if we are talking about your specific situation - as an aside - then sorry, but I have no faith in your abilities in that kind of situation whatsoever, frankly. Admittedly, just from what I've read from you here, which isn't much, but from what I've read so far you just fit the archetype someone overcompensating for physical/emotional weakness (those are usually the kind of guys that jerk off over firearms and fantasise about vigilante type situations).

But none of that matters, because statistically/logically owning a firearm for home defence makes very little sense, except in very narrow circumstances. In order to be useful in a home invasion situation both the firearm and ammunition need to be somewhere closeby, probably in the same place, most likely insecure (as opposed to in a locked safe), and possibly even loaded. This is one the most irresponsible things a firearm owner can possibly do and the odds of a situation occuring where the firearm saves your life/property are massively outweighed by the chances of:

* Your kid(s) finding the firearm and injuring/killing themselves/you/someone else.

* Another member of your family or an acquaintance finding and taking the firearm, and selling/lending it into the black market (which is where most firearms circulating the USA come from, rather than from across the border or whatever).

* An intruder stealing it, either through burglary while you're not there/asleep, or taking it from you by force. Then either  using it against you/your family, committing another crime with it, or it finding it's way into the black market as per above.

Case 3: Bad guy comes into my house, I have guns, and I know how to use them.

If you think "knowing how to use them" means you're immune to being forcibly disarmed then you're utterly naive and hopelessly delusional in your own abilities. There's only so much anyone can do in a given circumstances - good luck if you end up pointing your pistol at one intruder and then another one whom you didn't even know was there comes up behind you and swings a bat into your head.

[swagpiratex]

It actually does matter, since from what you've written, I'm not entirely sure you know how to use a safe. You probably do, but in the case that you're assuming that I have no clue what a safe is for, allow me clarify. From what I understand a safe is to be utilized when a person is leaving their house and aren't allowed to bring your guns. The safe is to be stored in a secure location, bolted down, so it can't be lifted the casual burglar with no specialized tools in the event of a home invasion. When its time to sleep, you keep the weapon of choice, loaded, near yourself in the event you do need to use it. All other times when the person is not in the house, firearms are to be secured in the safe. This person is not going to let anyone but people that might need to protect themselves in the home to know the combination.

Regarding your response to my case. I wrote those cases down, because out of the three, Case 3 is the most desired situation. This, I'm pretty sure, is what everyone will choose, regardless about how they feel about firearms. I also did not imply "immunity" from disarmament. You also haven't responded to how the risk of disarmament by multiple attackers supercedes the right for anyone to purchase firearms to defend their family.  I really don't see where you're going with this other than trying to make me look bad, when I'm trying to have a rational discussion with you. Let's stop talking about me, and start looking at why you started attacking me personally when I acknowledged that the point you made about the risk of disarmament is true, but hasn't stopped you from owning a gun either.

[Malphas]

It actually does matter, since from what you've written, I'm not entirely sure you know how to use a safe. You probably do, but in the case that you're assuming that I have no clue what a safe is for, allow me clarify. From what I understand a safe is to be utilized when a person is leaving their house and aren't allowed to bring your guns. The safe is to be stored in a secure location, bolted down, so it can't be lifted the casual burglar with no specialized tools in the event of a home invasion. When its time to sleep, you keep the weapon of choice, loaded, near yourself in the event you do need to use it. All other times when the person is not in the house, firearms are to be secured in the safe. This person is not going to let anyone but people that might need to protect themselves in the home to know the combination.

This is much more acceptable that what your posts originally implied. I still think sleeping with a loaded firearm or a firearm with accessible ammunition nearby is absolutely idiotic and irresponsible though.

Regarding your response to my case. I wrote those cases down, because out of the three, Case 3 is the most desired situation. This, I'm pretty sure, is what everyone will choose, regardless about how they feel about firearms.

Not at all, for the reasons I already said and the actual example I gave, maybe you didn't pay attention. If you take a firearm into that scenario you're escalating that situation and potentially providing the intruder with a deadly weapon as well as making them much more likely to use deadly force against you. The upside is you might manage to use the firearm to protect yourself and your property, and in some cases that will happen but statistically having a firearm greatly increases your odds of coming to harm, which is why the advice of almost all police forces and the majority of security specialists is not to attempt to resist that type of situation, where someone is most likely only interested in your property (which is much less valuable than your life) and to simply keep calm, comply within reason and remember as much detail as possible about the offenders to enable the police to find them later.

I also did not imply "immunity" from disarmament.

Actually, yes you did precisely that here (emphasis mine):

That's a valid argument. But since you're going into a specific scenario and also using me as a variable, I'm telling you now it wouldn't go down that way if it were me, knowing what I know. Maybe that's how it'd play out if you were in that case but not me. Try again?

Incredible misplaced arrogance.

You also haven't responded to how the risk of disarmament by multiple attackers supercedes the right for anyone to purchase firearms to defend their family.

No, I didn't because I'm not pro-gun-control, I'm just anti-irresponsible idiots.

[swagpiratex]

Cool. I wasn't sure why you were going after me and I'm glad we established that I just rubbed you the wrong way.

I hope you guys already put in your taco order.

http://tacosfornoah.com/