I’m wondering if they live somewhere really dangerous.
Where I live, it is pretty safe. But crimes still occur.
According to this risk website, in the next year;
My risk of dying due to assault is: 1 in 16,325
My risk of dying in a car accident is: 1 in 17,625
My risk of dying in a fire is: 1 in 91,149
Unless I’m misreading it, crashes and assaults have roughly the same risk. Apparently the fire extinguisher is the least likely to be needed here.
I regard limitations on my gun exactly as I would regard a refusal to allow me a fire extinguisher or a seat belt. Although my perception of risk is probably as unscientific as most, I insist on being allowed the tools to mitigate it. (And I’m reluctant to travel in places that limit my ability to counter these risks)
In my house, there are two fire extinguishers near the kitchen and one upstairs, a large first aid kit, spare phone batteries, 25 gallons of spare water, two (small and large) backup generators w wiring and 50 gallons of spare fuel.
On my boat, there is a fire extinguisher under each seat in the cockpit, one in the cabin, and an automatic halon system in the engine compartment, along with extra water, food, emergency battery system, sunscreen, a variety of life vests, and a first aid kit.
In my RV, there is a fire extinguisher in the bedroom, and one in the kitchen along with a first aid kit, backup batteries, and spare water (in addition to the tanks).
In my truck, there is a fire extinguisher, spare water and food, chains, tools, a starting powerpack, a tire inflator and a first aid kit, along with seat belts and airbags.
… and on my hip, in a draw bag in the closet, in the console of my truck, and in a storage cubby on my boat, there are guns. Why they are considered irrational is a mystery to me.
So you are suggesting that’s its rational to feel “terrified” living life in public without being armed? That at any moment soothing awful will happen if you are not armed and living thusly is “nerve-wracking”?
I own handguns. I shoot hand guns. I have nothing against CC but hating to go unarmed every second in public because lethal danger is just a heartbeat away is paranoid. Life in America, in general, is just not that dangerous.
I’m suggesting that anybody who diagnoses paranoia in another based on internet discussion board posts is talking out of his ass.
This has been a fascinating thread. I’m just blown away by the perceived need to be armed every waking moment. I’ve never so much as touched a firearm in my life and I never will. I’ve never felt afraid in my daily life. I think it’s true that most of us do a lousy job in assessing risk, realistically most of us get along just fine unarmed. I don’t think it’s paranoia on those that feel the need to carry, I think it’s more of a phobia, like people who are afraid to touch bugs or snakes or whatever. You don’t like being unarmed, I don’t like spiders. Whatever floats your boat.
You need to re-read his post if you think his primary issue was whether or not a gun would fire when wet.
That’s interesting. See, I rationally understand that driving is risky, which is why I also practice defensive driving, drive cars with ample modern safety features, and always use said safety features. But I drive 10,000+ miles a year, mostly without incident. I can’t imagine doing that while constantly being terrified, which seems to be what you’re suggesting. Mostly it’s just dull. Same as walking around unarmed in public, which I’ve done my entire life (save once, when I had to get lunch with a loaded M16 on my shoulder. Seems a couple people in this thread would have done that hundreds of times, for me it was a novelty). I can’t imagine feeling terrified during normal, everyday driving or normal walking around in public (without a gun). I’d need a xanax prescription if I felt that way.
It’s unclear to me if those numbers are broken down by demographic. Age and race are huge factors in your likelihood of dying due to homicide, because those stats are heavily skewed by drug and gang violence.
I don’t think anyone’s calling your guns irrational by themselves. If you understand how unlikely they are to ever be useful in your personal protection but you want them around anyway because, hey, why not, then whatever. If you place undue importance on them as personal protective devices, especially at the expense of other, statistically more beneficial practices, and/or if you feel terrified without your guns around like at least one poster in this thread, then you may have a problem.
I get that. I was like that too. Back in 1990 when I was in the Marines and before I owned a gun I had a temporary assignment in Fort Sill, Oklahoma. I’d be there for four months. I decided to ride my motorcycle from San Francisco to Fort Sill (instead of flying) so that I’d have some wheels while there. To save money I travelled on the cheap, brought a sleeping bag and crashed in rest areas and wherever along the way, going there and coming back.
I didn’t have a gun and felt safe traveling this way. At Fort Sill a gun-owning friend of mine said he couldn’t believe I made that trip without being armed. I couldn’t understand his point of view - why be armed? What’s the need? I felt safe enough.
I get that, I really do. Even today I would do the same kind of trip without being armed. Generally speaking we live in a safe society. I’m grateful for that.
It’s not that at all, not for me. I’m not living constantly terrified. I don’t have my gun with me 24/7, but when I do I feel a little safer and much more capable in my ability to defend myself if I need to.
Again, I’m not talking terror but more a realization that my life is at stake during the act just as it is in certain other situations life may throw at me - victimization being one of those situations. To paraphrase you I understand that living some of the places I have is risky (put me statistically at a higher risk of being a victim) so again, I practice defensive living. Were vests or force fields an option I would probably consider them. They aren’t really so I chose a pistol and a lot of training.
Now back to driving a moment; you’re a fairly reasonable person. When driving in a statistically safe situation or area, do you disconnect your airbag, unhook your seatbelt, and ignore the steps you usually take when driving? Probably not. That is sort of like some of the folks packing. Do I feel at risk walking around Fox Chapel or Upper St Clair? Not really - statistically I’m pretty safe there. But I still take the normal steps I do not to be a target and sometimes (not always in my case) make sure I’m prepared should I become a target. Its dull, yes - almost all of my life has been dull. But there could be that moment, like in a crash or close call, when I thank God I was/am prepared just as we are when we drive.
I’ve logged most of my miles in pre-85 cars which had basically nothing. What little they had in restraints were as bad as not having any at all. It’s not always my first choice (I replaced a lapbelt with a 4 point harness once) but it doesn’t bother me either. But some people feel uncomfortable when they have to be in a car and not protected - drive an older car without seatbelts or one without much in the way of “crash cautions”. Ride with people who think of seatbelts as an option and not something required. We both probably know people who would refuse to back out of their driveway without buckling up first since “most accidents happen within “X” miles of home”. And for the most part we would have a certain respect for them because who knows - they may be right.
For me its the same with the “I don’t leave home without it” CCW crowd. I don’t fully understand it and I just don’t practice it - never will. But I have a certain respect for them. Again because it may just be possible they are right.
I appreciate the discussion, and yours is obviously a more reasonable stance, but I piped up specifically because Crafter_Man likened walking around unarmed to being terrified (his word and italics) while driving unbelted, so I AM talking about terror. To me, there’s a clear difference between making a calm, rational, statistically-supported decision to carry a weapon in situation X (the statistics being open for a different debate), and a general *feeling *of terror while doing things that most people consider mundane. Maybe he was exaggerating, I dunno, but considering that anti-gun types often use the inflammatory stereotype that gun owners are afraid of their own shadows, it’s odd to see someone basically admit to it.
I think you and Bullit and Lumpy and possibly pullin probably aren’t the sort of people who would describe the sense of walking around unarmed as “terrifying” and/or go so far as to throw a .38 special in your swim trunks, but your reasonable defenses of carrying a weapon as a simple precaution aren’t nearly as interesting.
Well, I have a large and well equipped earthquake survival kit, with water for two for two weeks, food, batteries, etc . I drive a Volvo with many safety features. I keep a large first aid kit in the home, with Quikclot etc.
When I go out hiking, even a day hike, I take a number of survival items- a swiss army knife, whistle, flashlite, firestarter, a tiny first aid kit. Longer trips i add a extra layer, extra days food and water, extra pair of socks, etc.
I consider those 'reasonable precautions". Is it likely we’ll need that earthquake kit? Two weeks is very likely overkill, if you figure the odds. But I still consider it a “reasonable precaution”.
When I did carry, what with several death threats due to my job, I considered that to be just another “reasonable precaution”.
I’m also intrigued by this thread, and especially at the fears expressed. Some Dopers refuse to travel abroad because they can’t take their gun with them? 
My life is tame enough that I can bring to mind only a handful of very fearful situations where a gun might have been reassuring, but I still never wanted one. (If simply walking alone at night in a high-crime neighborhood is sufficiently “fearful” to need a gun, maybe I just have higher fear tolerance than some here.) Do others (excepting LEOs or criminals) live much more dangerous lives?
I have acquaintances who lead much more dangerous lives than mine. One of them is a rather hot-tempered daredevil; he’s angrily confronted armed men, but has never armed himself with more than a knife.
Note that carrying a gun may well increase, not decrease, the chance you suffer a gun wound. (Not to mention increasing the chance another human might suffer a gun wound.)
ETA: I’ll stipulate that my hot-tempered daredevil friend has stupid behavior. I mention him to contrast with overly fearful which, like stupid, is not a trait to be admired.
I was indeed terrified when I was unbelted in the vehicle. But I do not feel “terrified” when I am unarmed in public. I was only using that as an analogy of sorts. It is certainly a *similar *feeling (as I noted), but perhaps “very uncomfortable” would more accurately describe how I feel when I am unarmed in public.