Police shootings at Dallas BLM protest.

[Moontanman]

Agreed this is the most likely scenario. The last thing a burglar wants to encounter in a home is a homeowner, whether they are armed or not. They don't want to be harmed every bit as much as the homeowner doesn't want to be harmed.

I doubt it, but play it out in your own mind. Given two different options being otherwise equal, are you more likely to take the option with more risk to your life or less risk?

 

 

I have often thought about it from your point of view as well, to me the idea of sneaking in someones house is unthinkable. But to someone who is committing such a crime in my mind I see them as being analytical and passing by difficult houses to pick the low hanging fruit... Quite possibly I give them too much credit but it's difficult to see it any other way..

[ajb]

 

 

 

I honestly think that my dogs have prevented me from being a victim at least twice over the years.

This is likey to be true. We know that dogs put people of breaking in - convicts have even said this themselves.

[Moontanman]

The claims that I have found are that the evidence is actually that there is no differnce here. In fact, you just take on all the risk associated with guns in the house for no real benefit.

 

http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-0804-hemenway-defensive-gun-home-20150730-story.html

 

 

It seems that by not using a gun you are actually at less risk!

 

So you are taking the stance that statistics say that having a gun is more dangerous than not having one? Do you think the type of gun and the training of the individual with the gun have no bearing?

[Danijel Gorupec]

Moon, Zapatos.... but I am sure you guys must see the spiral here. If all you can do is to have a bigger gun than your neighbor, where does that leads us? I mean, all man could have assault riffles and hand grenades at home but this does not mean that there would be no burglars - it only means that burglars will come with bazookas, IMO.

[Moontanman]

Moon, Zapatos.... but I am sure you guys must see the spiral here. If all you can do is to have a bigger gun than your neighbor, where does that leads us? I mean, all man could have assault riffles and hand grenades at home but this does not mean that there would be no burglars - it only means that burglars will come with bazookas, IMO.

 

 

You seem to be reading something into this that is not in the text. I see no reason to have a bigger gun, I have a gun that uses cheap ammo and is as safe to use as possible. My neighbors are not the problem and as I said having a bigger gun doesn't figure into it...

Edited July 8, 2016 by Moontanman

[ajb]

So you are taking the stance that statistics say that having a gun is more dangerous than not having one?

It seems clear that the evidence is pointing to this conclusion. It seems overall you are not less likely to be a victim of crime in general, but you are more likely to be a victim of homocide. You are also putting yoruself at higher risk of an gun related accident and even suicide. It looks like all risk for little real benefit - on average that is.

 

Do you think the type of gun and the training of the individual with the gun have no bearing?

Well, we should look at what the statistics say. Not that I am sure that this is really something that matters. We know that guns in general are not making the US a safer place.

[Moontanman]

We are to hell and gone from the OP, I think that what happened in Dallas was not a surprise, it has happened in the past when class warfare has gone to far and it will continue to happen as long as the 1% is allowed to shit all over the rest of us. Yes, I think it is ultimately a class warfare issue, when so much wealth is concentrated on a very few and the rest are left with nothing the torches and pitch forks are inevitable. The fact of such wide spread police brutality is simply the spark that lights the fuse. We have been heading down this road along time, pretending to be surprised doesn't look good on the powers that be. Eventually the game of playing off various demographics against each other to take away from the real problems will grow old, then the excrement will com in contact with the rotating air movement device in a huge way...

[zapatos]

The claims that I have found are that the evidence is actually that there is no differnce here. In fact, you just take on all the risk associated with guns in the house for no real benefit.

Perhaps I was not clear in what I was trying to say.

If a would-be thief is aware that there is a person and a gun in the house at the same time, that thief would be less likely to enter that home than he would be to enter a home that did not have a person and a gun in it. Your link does not seem to refute that. I believe all of the other scenarios it does address are likely true.

 

It seems that by not using a gun you are actually at less risk!

It seems the homeowner is actually at less risk. In this instance I was was looking at it from the perspective of a would-be thief. The article did not state the frequency of injury to a perpetrator when encountering a homeowner with a gun versus without a gun. The article spoke of the success or lack thereof of the victim.

 

In any case, I am not arguing that guns are any kind of panacea, only that guns are not a universally bad thing, and in the right circumstances can be a good thing.

 

I also have a shotgun in my home that will only do me any good if I have enough warning, as I keep it locked in a safe. I bought it right after hurricane Katrina in New Orleans as I could potentially find myself in a situation where lawlessness is widespread. In that case I would keep my gun readily available. If possible, my plan would be to hide upstairs in the dark if someone entered my home and simply rack a shell into the chamber. I purposely bought a pump shotgun as I wanted to be able to make that sound. My guess is that it will make most people think twice about coming upstairs.

[CharonY]

If a burglar believes that you have a gun in your home, he will go to a different home.

 

There is a body of evidence that criminal behaviour is not based on rational decision making. For example, many studies have shown that stronger punishments do not work well as stronger deterrents.

In case of burglaries there is actually data available (though not much). But it appears that there is no real evidence that shows that it works as a deterrent, either (actually, one of the effects is that guns are getting stolen...). Example

[Moontanman]

Perhaps I was not clear in what I was trying to say.

If a would-be thief is aware that there is a person and a gun in the house at the same time, that thief would be less likely to enter that home than he would be to enter a home that did not have a person and a gun in it. Your link does not seem to refute that. I believe all of the other scenarios it does address are likely true.

 

It seems the homeowner is actually at less risk. In this instance I was was looking at it from the perspective of a would-be thief. The article did not state the frequency of injury to a perpetrator when encountering a homeowner with a gun versus without a gun. The article spoke of the success or lack thereof of the victim.

 

In any case, I am not arguing that guns are any kind of panacea, only that guns are not a universally bad thing, and in the right circumstances can be a good thing.

 

I also have a shotgun in my home that will only do me any good if I have enough warning, as I keep it locked in a safe. I bought it right after hurricane Katrina in New Orleans as I could potentially find myself in a situation where lawlessness is widespread. In that case I would keep my gun readily available. If possible, my plan would be to hide upstairs in the dark if someone entered my home and simply rack a shell into the chamber. I purposely bought a pump shotgun as I wanted to be able to make that sound. My guess is that it will make most people think twice about coming upstairs.

 

 

Nothing quite gets attention like the sound of a shell being chambered in a pump shot gun... In fact I would assert that a shotgun is the best weapon to have for home defense, easy to use, intimidating to law breakers with three brain cells to rub together, and less likely to kill someone several blocks away if you miss.. .

Edited July 8, 2016 by Moontanman

[iNow]

There is a body of evidence that criminal behaviour is not based on rational decision making. For example, many studies have shown that stronger punishments do not work well as stronger deterrents.

In case of burglaries there is actually data available (though not much). But it appears that there is no real evidence that shows that it works as a deterrent, either (actually, one of the effects is that guns are getting stolen...). Example

This is especially true when drugs are involved and rational thinking is absent. Knowing the gun is there is not a deterrent. It's an attraction as they know they could easily and quickly sell it for quick cash if they found it before the owner (or if the owner wasn't home and didn't have it properly stored).

[Moontanman]

This is especially true when drugs are involved and rational thinking is absent. Knowing the gun is there is not a deterrent. It's an attraction as they know they could easily and quickly sell it for quick cash if they found it before the owner (or if the owner wasn't home and didn't have it properly stored).

 

 

Well I am not one of those fucktards that put a sign in the yard proclaiming a gun lives here..

[CharonY]

I would have to dig a bit, but IIRC there is the often-assumed rational choice model of criminal action, which is a simplified model assuming that crimes are conducted as the result of a rational decision process. However, studies coming from the cognitive science side call this model into question (see Wortley R. (2013). “Rational choice and offender decision making: lessons from the cognitive sciences,” in Cognition and Crime: Offender Decision Making and Script Analysis, eds Leclerc B., Wortley R., editors. (London: Routledge; ), 237–251).

 

And this does not only apply to drugs because in truth, much of our everyday decision making (criminal or not) does not follow rational roles, which has been evidenced in numerous experiments.

[iNow]

A nice addition. I was thinking of meth and heroin addicts, but your point clearly expands the one I was making so I appreciate it.

 

[mp][/mp]

 

Well I am not one of those fucktards that put a sign in the yard proclaiming a gun lives here..

That's the argument that waitforufo put forth, and which zapatos reinforced, though...

[zapatos]

 

That's the argument that waitforufo put forth, and which zapatos reinforced, though...

 

And I readily admit I could be wrong. I'm making that statement assuming the criminal to be a reasonable person, which they very well might not be.

[Moontanman]

I think the assertion that a criminal who is willing to break into a house is unlikely to be rational is well supported..

[iNow]

And I readily admit I could be wrong. I'm making that statement assuming the criminal to be a reasonable person, which they very well might not be.

I anticipated as much, and tried to reflect that with my choice of the word "reinforced." Appreciate you ensuring clarity, though.

[Phi for All]

Imo, this isn't a single issue fix. Guns play a heavy part and we need some progress in this area, but the reasons Americans don't want to give them up are part of the whole tapestry too.

 

We have a ruling class that doesn't understand or represent the majority, we've allowed extremist capitalist policies to undermine the middle class, we lag behind many first world countries in the kinds of programs that build strength in economic infrastructures, we excel in destruction and imprisonment, and it's become status quo to spend a couple billion dollars on elections that divide the country along artificially drawn lines that only benefit the people who have the billions to spend.

 

I think we'd have to take care of all these other problems before enough Americans would see the sense in giving up their own guns so there eventually won't be a gun problem. Sometimes I think the real need for a well-regulated militia is not to protect us from the government, but from wealthy people manipulating the government.

[swansont]

If a burglar believes that you have a gun in your home, he will go to a different home.

What if he knows you aren't home, and wants a gun?

[Moontanman]

What if he knows you aren't home, and wants a gun?

 

 

What if you keep them guessing?

[ajb]

But it appears that there is no real evidence that shows that it works as a deterrent

All the crime stats and analysis thereof that I have seen all point to no deterrent across all crimes. In fact I read that gun are actually not used for self-defence very often - something like 1% of self-defence actions in the US are with a gun. And in doing so you just up the risk of yourself getting hurt.

 

Sure we can invent some situations where guns have be effective, but overall the statistics are pointing to more harm than good. It is as simple as that.

 

 

In any case, I am not arguing that guns are any kind of panacea, only that guns are not a universally bad thing, and in the right circumstances can be a good thing.

Maybe so, but the point is that overall the effect of having guns in your country so easily at hand has created a public health issue and has not produced a safter environment for people.

Edited July 9, 2016 by ajb

[swansont]

What if you keep them guessing?

 

 

Unless you have a hologram device like in Total Recall, guessing need not be involved.

[Ten oz]

Virginia Tech shooter was Asian, Sandy Hook shooter White, Orlando shooter Arab, Dallas shooter Black, and etc, etc, etc. Abortion clinics has been attacked by radical Christians and Radical Muslims shot up San Bernardino. We have had militia standoffs with law enforcement in Neveda and Oregon that have led to fatalities and on and on and on. What is the common denominator? When it is an Arab shooter we debate Islam and ISIS, when it is a White shooter we debate mental health, Black shooter we debate class warfare, are those things truly the common denominator???

 

Canada, UK, France, and etc have Arabs, Blacks, rich people, poor people, mentally ill people, but they don't have mass shooting after mass shooting after mass shooting. Their police don't kill thousands of their citizens. I think debating econimcs, religion, and etc is failing to see the forrest threw the trees. We (USA) are violent and awash in guns. As a society we have a bllod lust. Execution is legal here and popular amongst the general population. We invest more more into our military than anything else: education, healthcare, welfare, etc. We invade other countries, openly discuss over throwing Gov't we don't like, and have to debate the ethics of torture as if we honestly don't understand it is wrong to torture.

 

Violence is part of the national consciousness. We must reject violence at all levels to change that national consciousness rather than continuing to compartmentalize it. That means we acknowledge that it is wrong to drone bomb, wrong to execute, wrong to torture, wrong to for police to beat and kill people, and etc. We must start with an open public acknowledgement that killing is wrong and violence only leads to more violence. That should always be the baseline. Stop arguing that violence and killing people is often a needed evil. Micah Johnson thought killing cops was a needed evil and he was wrong!!

[imatfaal]

Great Post TenOz

To be honest I worry now that the UK is veering towards your depiction of the United States. I think also the industrialisation of the penitentiary and the unhealthy percentage of your population who are incarcerated are both a driving cause and a terrible effect of the points you make

[Moontanman]

 

 

Unless you have a hologram device like in Total Recall, guessing need not be involved.

 

My point was that no one knows what I have in my house other than two barking dogs, if I posted a sign in my yard telling everyone a gun lives here then criminals would know for sure. As it stands now they do not know..