Mandatory Gun Ownership

[lordlundar]

Tried to look at it (even backed up to the URL for the base website), and got a "403 Forbidden" error.

Odd. Try this one instead.

[AmbrosiaWriter]

There have been *several* home invasions in and around the Pittsburgh area lately. Pretty nasty ones too--even if the victims do cooperate, they usually get seriously injured. I don't know about the rest of you...but if someone tries to break into my place, I'll do what I have to while defending myself. If that means some asshole gets a Crescent wrench upside the head, so be it.

If someone tries to break into my place I'd probably be out my window and in my car before they're done jimmying the lock open, or - if they kicked the door in - before they realized where I was in the house.

I'd immediately be on my way to the nearest police station to get some dudes to come with me when I go back to my house to make sure the invader is either gone or caught.

That's what I - personally - would do, as for me, it is the highest % chance of me not getting hurt in any manner other than some of my stuff might get broken or stolen. My house does not have wide open enough spaces for my particular combat style to really be efficient enough to keep myself safe.

[Andara Bledin]

One thing to remember is that while a single person in a typical home could escape a single invader, someone who has a loved one, or a situation with multiple invaders is not going to be nearly so easy to slip away from.

Hell, the last place I lived, I'm not even sure I could have safely escaped a fire, much less a home invader. It was a drop from the second floor straight down to the concrete with zero handholds.

^-.-^

[protege]

Hell, the last place I lived, I'm not even sure I could have safely escaped a fire, much less a home invader. It was a drop from the second floor straight down to the concrete with zero handholds.

Where I live, if something would happen--fire, home invasion--I'd be truly fucked. My home has older 'casement' windows. You know, the kind that crank open a small opening instead of the entire thing. Bashing out a space large enough to jump through would not only take time...but alert an invader to my presence. Plus, if I'm in the *front* of the house...it's about a 10 foot drop to the ground. Not much distance, but if I time it wrong, I'll get a faceful of Toyota.

[lordlundar]

Not much distance, but if I time it wrong, I'll get a faceful of Toyota.

At lest you can rely partially on the suspension to break your fall.

[HYHYBT]

My windows, though they are standard, mid-90's era double-hung windows designed to open easily and even fold out to clean the other side, don't do any such thing. They won't budge at all, short of using enough force to separate the glass from its frame, as I found out when the AC quit working. And with an 11-foot-high-at-the-downhill-end "crawlspace," like Protege they're too high up to jump out of anyway unless it gets to the point where the risk of a broken leg or other part, including not being able to get any further away from the building, is better than staying inside.

Fortunately, there's a back door

[PepperElf]

http://gunowners.wordpress.com/2012/...ing-a-firearm/

I think this is a bit silly, but I figure that people here will have stronger feelings than me.

The one thing I'd object to is "Why should gun owners pay for police protection for those who chose not to protect themselves?"

Don't police protect gun owners as well as those without guns?

I agree that it's a bit silly. Although I feel having more armed citizens is a good idea, forcing it is going to have a backlash. To me it's like requiring that everyone keeps a chainsaw... just because you're forced to own one doesn't mean you'll know what you're doing with it.

I would rather NOT force arms on someone who doesn't want one, quite simply because... they may not be ready to handle the responsibility of having it. To me that's actually *more* dangerous.


But I disagree about police protection. The supreme court has already ruled that the police are under NO requirements to protect citizens. Justices Rule Police Do Not Have a Constitutional Duty to Protect Someone
(and edit - i'm glad to see others here know about this too!)

That's assuming the home invader can find you. If she doesn't care about her stuff, then she'll probably just get out of the house - since she knows her house better than said invader, she'll probably be able to get out before the invader can find her.

I don't know about you, but where I am sitting at my computer right now I have several different exit points that I can be at and out of before the home invader can get to where I am. Assuming he knows exactly where I am in the house when he or she breaks in.

Guns are fine for people who want them. They should not be forced onto people who do not want them. Not everyone has it in them to pull that trigger.

That may depend on the invader. If you're serious about home-invasion security I'd recommend checking out Make Ready with Massad Ayoob: Home Defense. Although the video DOES specify ARMED home defense, it contains information that's good for unarmed defense too.


Oh and yes, not everyone has it in them to pull the trigger. If anything they may end up doing more damage if they're not ready to accept the responsibility of having a firearm.

[Nekojin]

Even if you're armed, and even if you are assaulted in your home, that doesn't necessarily mean that you have to shoot someone. A gun doesn't fire on its own; every responsible gun owner knows that a situation that is resolved without gunfire is better for everyone. Firing the weapon at someone is a last resort... but if you aren't prepared to do so if necessary, you're better off not having it at all.

[PepperElf]

Even if you're armed, and even if you are assaulted in your home, that doesn't necessarily mean that you have to shoot someone. A gun doesn't fire on its own; every responsible gun owner knows that a situation that is resolved without gunfire is better for everyone. Firing the weapon at someone is a last resort... but if you aren't prepared to do so if necessary, you're better off not having it at all.

Indeed.

The phrase I prefer is "Neutralize the threat." It kinda covers all the bases really.