Gun Ownership

[Eudaimonist]

Do you think there's anything wrong with gun ownership?

No, I don't think it is wrong for civilians to own guns. I do think that, as a matter of prudence, any gun owner should take courses in how to use their guns appropriately.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[ThatRobGuy]

Really? Or this that just what you've heard?

Just what I've personally heard when debating this.

All of the arguments I've heard are things like "we should take away guns to lower the crime rate" and "if we had stricter gun laws, there wouldn't be as much murder" and things like that. There might be other arguments for that side of the issue, but I've never heard them.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

Not necessarily. Look at countries like the Netherlands, or Austria. Tight gun control, but plenty of individual freedom.

And the point about criminals, the drug-runners, the human traffickers, the serious bad fellas, they'll get their hands on guns, but in a society where guns are more tightly controlled, not every single mugger feels the need to carry a gun. As has been said before, you can run away from a lad with a knife a lot easier than one with a gun.

Correct, but the mindset in those countries is different. From what I've read and heard from 1st & 2nd had accounts, people seem to have more of a genuine care for their fellow countrymen in those nations, so passing stricter gun control laws doesn't really impact them much...I would equate that to lowering the speed limit at the old folks home parking lot.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

No, I don't think it is wrong for civilians to own guns. I do think that, as a matter of prudence, any gun owner should take courses in how to use their guns appropriately.


eudaimonia,

Mark

Agreed. I think, just like anything else, that if you choose to use your right to carry a gun, you should also take the responsibility of making sure you have training and regular practice with it. Here in Ohio, before you can get your concealed carry permit, you have to take a class (in class and range training) and renew your permit every 5 years to make sure that you still have a good handle on the rules & practical application.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

Unfortunately, we didn't really get any posters from the other side of the issue. I notice that the tally was 18-for, 0-against.

I figured we'd at least get a few that would bring some new discussion points to the table.

 

[leftrightleftrightleft]

Unfortunately, we didn't really get any posters from the other side of the issue. I notice that the tally was 18-for, 0-against.

I figured we'd at least get a few that would bring some new discussion points to the table.

I think you're question is a little bit too extreme. I don't think many people think that it is morally wrong to own a gun. Especially if you're just using it at the shooting range.

If you phrased your question: "Is it wrong to own a gun without a license?"
or "Is it wrong to be able to carry a concealed gun in public?"

I think the whole gun culture of the United States is the public's general fear of their fellow citizens and their inability to understand statistics. The chances of dying in a car accident on the way to the bank are far more likely than you getting held up at the bank. If you're going to carry a gun on you, then be consistent with your statistics and don't drive your car either.

I can understand the need to own a gun if you are using it as a tool. I grew up on a farm and we needed guns to protect cattle from coyotes and cougars and kill the gophers that dug the holes that broke our horses legs. But my dad didn't go into town with the gun for fear of being mugged. I think he and I have a little bit more faith in humanity than that. Not everyone is out to get you.

 

[acropolis]

Gun ownership doesn't have much to do with crime rate, if statistics are to be believed. The right for every person to have whatever guns they want at a low price isn't by any means constitutionally ensured and I would argue that some kinds of guns shouldn't be allowed, since there will always be a small number of people that are going to try to kill in large numbers and some guns are much more effective at doing that while not offering much advantage for legitimate uses.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

I think you're question is a little bit too extreme. I don't think many people think that it is morally wrong to own a gun. Especially if you're just using it at the shooting range.

If you phrased your question: "Is it wrong to own a gun without a license?"
or "Is it wrong to be able to carry a concealed gun in public?"

I think the whole gun culture of the United States is the public's general fear of their fellow citizens and their inability to understand statistics. The chances of dying in a car accident on the way to the bank are far more likely than you getting held up at the bank. If you're going to carry a gun on you, then be consistent with your statistics and don't drive your car either.

I can understand the need to own a gun if you are using it as a tool. I grew up on a farm and we needed guns to protect cattle from coyotes and cougars and kill the gophers that dug the holes that broke our horses legs. But my dad didn't go into town with the gun for fear of being mugged. I think he and I have a little bit more faith in humanity than that. Not everyone is out to get you.

You are correct about the statistics, you're more likely to be killed in a car crash than being held up in the bank. Concealed carry isn't about the statistics of likeliness, it's about how to handle it in the rare cases when it does happen.

Concealed Carry -> Bank Robbery
=
Seat Belt -> Car Crash

 

[ThatRobGuy]

Gun ownership doesn't have much to do with crime rate, if statistics are to be believed. The right for every person to have whatever guns they want at a low price isn't by any means constitutionally ensured and I would argue that some kinds of guns shouldn't be allowed, since there will always be a small number of people that are going to try to kill in large numbers and some guns are much more effective at doing that while not offering much advantage for legitimate uses.

The constitution states that the right of the people to bear arms shall not be infringed. They don't make any mention about firearm types so there a couple way to interprate that.

1) Since they didn't mention anything about certain types, they made no distinctions.

2) Since it also states that anything not covered in the constitution is left up to the State Government, it should be up to the states to decide which ones are okay and not okay, they just can't ban all of them.

 

[acropolis]

The constitution states that the right of the people to bear arms shall not be infringed. They don't make any mention about firearm types so there a couple way to interprate that.

1) Since they didn't mention anything about certain types, they made no distinctions.

2) Since it also states that anything not covered in the constitution is left up to the State Government, it should be up to the states to decide which ones are okay and not okay, they just can't ban all of them.

Yes, the ambiguity leaves room for interpretation. There is also the matter of what constitutes a 'militia' which can be interpreted to restrict gun ownership. It's likely that ambiguity was purposeful to allow the judicial branch to interpret it as they felt suitable.

 

[leftrightleftrightleft]

You are correct about the statistics, you're more likely to be killed in a car crash than being held up in the bank. Concealed carry isn't about the statistics of likeliness, it's about how to handle it in the rare cases when it does happen.

Concealed Carry -> Bank Robbery
=
Seat Belt -> Car Crash

But that's the point of the stats: you don't need the gun because the chances are so incredibly, incredibly small. Its fear-based and its a cultural thing propagated by the media and the movies. Do you have no concept of statistics?

For every million people, 14,900 people die in a car accident.
For every million people, 42 are murdered.

For every million people, 4,065 die from falling down. So your chances are ten times greater that you will die by falling down on the way to the bank and dying than being murdered.

Like I said, I think having faith in your fellow man goes a long way in leading to a more trustworthy, healthy society. There's no reason to carry the gun because its so, so, so much more likely you will die some other way and keeping the gun because you think it will happen is profoundly irrational if you have any concept of statistics. Its the same as being afraid of being eaten by a shark when you go to the beach, or getting hit by an asteroid. These are all irrational fears.

I also find it ironic that Americans are so concerned about murder while they are also the fast-food and obesity capital of the developed world. For every million people, 200,000 will die of heart disease...

Also, we don't conceal our seat belts, so why do you conceal the gun? If they're actually equivalent, there should be no reason for you to conceal the mechanism you are using to protect yourself. Why does it have to be hidden?

Methinks its because there's a big difference between a gun and a seat belt.

Sources: National Center for Health Statistics, International Statistics on Crime and Justice (2011), National Safety Council

 

[acropolis]

Murder doesn't happen often, but does that mean it should be legal? Not that I disagree with the conclusion that guns should be legal, but it's flawed logic to say that simply because there are other more common ways to die that others means of death shouldn't be a concern legally.

 

[Darkhorse]

Also, we don't conceal our seat belts, so why do you conceal the gun? If they're actually equivalent, there should be no reason for you to conceal the mechanism you are using to protect yourself. Why does it have to be hidden?

Methinks its because there's a big difference between a gun and a seat belt.

A gun usually doesn't have to be concealed; most U. S. states allow carrying a loaded gun openly in a belt holster.

However, I prefer to conceal mine for two reasons:

(1) Some people become alarmed when they see someone with a gun (not much of a problem in my state);

(2) If criminals are aware that I'm armed, they may attack me more directly and aggressively than they would otherwise; "surprising" them would work to my advantage.

An auto accident doesn't percieve the presence of a seat belt and increase the ferocity of the accident in order to kill the wearer.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Here in Wisconsin 70 per cent of the concealed carry applications are by women. (That little fact should change the conversation. ).

 

[Crusader05]

As a red-blooded American I understand and appreciate our nation's fascination with guns. There is something wrapped up in the American spirit with names like Colt, Smith & Wesson, Springfield and Winchester. I recently became a gun owner when I purchased my first handgun. I didn't get it because I'm afraid of being murdered, I got it because I enjoy shooting and guns are cool.

Owning a gun is an amoral exercise, what you do with it can either be moral or immoral.

I do not recognize gun ownership as an unlimited right as some do. Just as with other rights there are limits and rules. I grew up in New York, which has very tight gun laws, especially for handguns. It can take up to 6 months just to get a permit and very few people get concealed carry permits. Now I am living in Arizona, which has the loosest gun laws in the nations. There are no extra permits for handgun purchases, zero requirements for concealed carry (i.e. no classes, no background check etc).

Personally, I think we need to meet in the middle. We need a robust federal background check system that includes felons, people with drug convictions, people receiving psychiatric treatment. Plus there need to be training requirements for concealed carry. It makes no sense to me that I go through more work to get a driver's license than to carry a deadly weapon concealed on my body.

 

[BeOfGoodCheer]

Concealed Carry -> Determent of crime if confronted

Seat Belts -> Determent of fatality if accident

 

[quatona]

Unfortunately, we didn't really get any posters from the other side of the issue. I notice that the tally was 18-for, 0-against.

I figured we'd at least get a few that would bring some new discussion points to the table.

Maybe it´s the way you worded your question?

 

[ThatRobGuy]

A gun usually doesn't have to be concealed; most U. S. states allow carrying a loaded gun openly in a belt holster.

However, I prefer to conceal mine for two reasons:

(1) Some people become alarmed when they see someone with a gun (not much of a problem in my state);

(2) If criminals are aware that I'm armed, they may attack me more directly and aggressively than they would otherwise; "surprising" them would work to my advantage.

An auto accident doesn't percieve the presence of a seat belt and increase the ferocity of the accident in order to kill the wearer.

I agree, if a burglar sees you have a gun on your hip, they might just try to shoot you right out of the gate. The element of surprise is always a good thing

 

[ThatRobGuy]

Here in Wisconsin 70 per cent of the concealed carry applications are by women. (That little fact should change the conversation. ).

Actually, I'm not surprised.

Since women are more vulnerable to attack (due to physical reasons), I would expect that.

 

[Paradoxum]

I said no to the poll because I don't think owning a gun is intrinsically wrong no matter what. In the UK however I would suggest it would be better not to own one.

I've never had an accidental discharge of any kind.

If this made me giggle would it make me immature?