Gun poll

[rubato]

So what is a "damn good reason for wanting to own nitroglycerin"?

If defending oneself, one's loved ones, and one's home is not a "damn good reason for wanting to own nitroglycerin," what is?

(quote edited)

Better now.

yrs,
rubato

[Andrew D]

There are reasons for prohibiting me from possessing nitroglycerin which dizzyingly obviously do not apply to my possessing a revolver.

(Newsflash, rubato: My possessing a revolver does not entail any risk of my blowing up the neighborhood.)

[Andrew D]

Empirical evidence does not show that having a gun protects you against crime. You can just as well claim that having dynamite, or JuJu beads will protect you against crime.

Can you at least pretend to be at all serious, rubato?

Let me help you: The empirical evidence, undisputed by anyone who is not completely deranged, is that there are times when people successfully defend themselves, by means of firearms, against criminals.

You may not like that fact. You may think that it is outweighed by other facts (accidental shootings, suicides, etc.).

But merely denying that fact does nothing more than reinforce the widespread opinion -- which I have done my best not to share; I have given you the benefit of the doubt (and defended your assertions) whenever I have thought it proper -- that when it comes to rational argument vs. your personal preferences, you throw rational argument overboard.

[Sue U]

I was typing as you were posting:

There are reasons for prohibiting me from possessing nitroglycerin which dizzyingly obviously do not apply to my possessing a revolver.

(Newsflash, rubato: My possessing a revolver does not entail any risk of my blowing up the neighborhood.)

However, it does entail a substantially increased risk that the revolver will be used to injure or kill a member of, or a visitor to, your household (both intentionally and unintentionally). How does that risk compare with the likelihood that the revolver will ever actually be used successfully for self defense?

[Lord Jim]

Empirical evidence does not show that having a gun protects you against crime.

I guess there is absolutely nothing that is going to stop rube from shamelessly and repeatedly misstating the facts about this....

But then why should this be any different from anything else...The man is completely bereft of even a single scintilla of intellectual honesty...he's proven that for years...

[Joe Guy]

Empirical evidence shows that vaccines prevent disease. Empirical evidence does not show that having a gun protects you against crime. You can just as well claim that having dynamite, or JuJu beads will protect you against crime.

Empirical evidence shows that vaccines lessen your risk of being infected with a certain virus or bacteria, just as having a firearm in your home can lessen your risk of being a victim of an assault.

[Sue U]

Empirical evidence shows that vaccines lessen your risk of being infected with a certain virus or bacteria, just as having a firearm in your home can lessen your risk of being a victim of an assault.

Really? What empirical evidence (concerning firearm possession) is that?

[Econoline]

Personally, I have lived for over 66 years in the Chicago area (most of that on The South Side of Chicago, the Baddest Part of Town) and have never owned a gun, never fired a gun, never wished that I owned a gun, and never been in a situation where I thought (either at the time or in hindsight) that having a gun in my possession would have been necessary, desirable, or useful.

[Lord Jim]

Really? What empirical evidence (concerning firearm possession) is that?

It's been posted several times before Sue, but I'll look it up for you again when I have more time.

[Joe Guy]

Empirical evidence shows that vaccines lessen your risk of being infected with a certain virus or bacteria, just as having a firearm in your home can lessen your risk of being a victim of an assault.

Really? What empirical evidence (concerning firearm possession) is that?

I'm not claiming to have empirical evidence regarding firearm possession and protection. I am comparing the idea of protecting one's self from disease with a vaccine and protecting one's self from assault with a firearm.

Getting vaccinated or owning a firearm is a choice people make based on risk vs benefit.

[oldr_n_wsr]

Here in NY "protecting ones life and family and possesions" is not enough reason to get a hand gun. You must proove either multiple life threats, multiple burglaries or business reasons (dealing in a lot of cash is a big one).

[oldr_n_wsr]

In Pa. my ssiter just went and purchased a 9mm hand gun. Background check and take it home. She cannont concealed carry but can wear it strapped to her waist in plain view. No permit required.

My father is talking about getting a gun also and he was never a gun person. I think he just wants to get one because of all the "anti-gun" talk/manuvering going on.

[Sue U]

Getting vaccinated or owning a firearm is a choice people make based on risk vs benefit.

And wouldn't you have to know the risks and benefits of each?

[Joe Guy]

Getting vaccinated or owning a firearm is a choice people make based on risk vs benefit.

And wouldn't you have to know the risks and benefits of each?

People make choices based on their knowledge and experience.

[Sue U]

People make choices based on their knowledge and experience.

Wait, didn't you just say that people choose to own a firearm based on risk v. benefit?

owning a firearm is a choice people make based on risk vs benefit.

Why yes, yes you did.

But people are notoriously terrible at estimating risk. And their individual "knowledge and experience" doesn't actually help.

Don't you think public policy concerning firearms should at least have some basis in actual risk-benefit data? It's what you'd apply to vaccination, isn't it?

[Joe Guy]

People make choices based on their knowledge and experience.

Wait, didn't you just say that people choose to own a firearm based on risk v. benefit?

owning a firearm is a choice people make based on risk vs benefit.

Why yes, yes you did.

Why... yes, you are correct... and I said (wrote) what I meant. Are you saying that risk vs benefit can't be determined by someone who also uses knowledge and experience to make a choice?

But people are notoriously terrible at estimating risk. And their individual "knowledge and experience" doesn't actually help.

That may or may not be true for the majority but I'm sure that's how most people make choices.

Don't you think public policy concerning firearms should at least have some basis in actual risk-benefit data? It's what you'd apply to vaccination, isn't it?

Public policy concerning firearms is different than the 2nd amendment right to own firearms. It depends on which "Public" you are talking about. Public policy in one place is 'No guns allowed' and 'You can wear a gun on your belt' in another place.

But I'm getting confused as to what point you're trying to make. Are you arguing that the idea of choosing to be vaccinated is not similar to choosing to own firearms or are you reiterating that the 2nd amendment is outdated?

Or something else?

[Sue U]

I am talking about public policy in the sense of articulating a society's desired goal and implementing the rules to achieve it. And this thread is not about so-called Second Amendment rights. I started this thread in an effort to illuminate what people think about owning guns and what kinds of restrictions, if any, there should be regarding them. My point in addressing your comments was that individuals consistently make bad choices because they are terrible at estimating risk. Don't you think that any meaningful and effective public policy should be based on actual risk-benefit data, rather than what people feel about their (usually terrible) choices?

[Gob]

Nothing better than a good gun ownership thread to get the brain cells fizzling....

Personally, I have lived for over 66 years in the Chicago area (most of that on The South Side of Chicago, the Baddest Part of Town) and have never owned a gun, never fired a gun, never wished that I owned a gun, and never been in a situation where I thought (either at the time or in hindsight) that having a gun in my possession would have been necessary, desirable, or useful.

One of the most interesting things I have ever read on Plan B. Thanks for sharing it, it (almost) restores my faith in the American people.

[Sue U]

My personal experience is the same as Econoline's, although set in the Camden-Philadelphia locale. (But I have fired guns on a couple of occasions.)

[Andrew D]

Here in NY "protecting ones life and family and possesions" is not enough reason to get a hand gun. You must proove either multiple life threats, multiple burglaries or business reasons (dealing in a lot of cash is a big one).

I would like to see how that would survive the Supreme Court's recent Second-Amendment rulings. I doubt that it would.