Stranger, from what I have seen of your postings, you are a strong believer in empirical fact and of grounded opinions based on realistic science and engineering. Do you believe that, in our every day lives, the chance of encountering a homicidal criminal, whether out in public or at home, is significant enough to be worth the hassle of carrying (or owning) a firearm? I am assuming here, from reading your previous posts, but I am guessing you live in a home in a nice suburban neighborhood where such violent home invasions are rare. (but yes, they have happened in the past. People have also been struck by meteors out of the blue sky, but I bet you don’t live in a bunker as a precaution)
If you do feel the chance of encountering someone you need to shoot, or die yourself, is high, how do you explain how most studies show that owning a firearm is not beneficial and that there is no meaningful deterrent effect? Do you feel the diminishing crime rate over the last 30 years has just not lowered crime enough? Do you think that you, and all your family members, are so mentally stable that the chance of one of you ever committing suicide with your firearms can be assumed to be precisely zero?
I’m genuinely curious. I’m sorry if I seem argumentative, but I have never personally encountered an armed criminal in a situation where shooting would be justified. I can only judge the risk by statistics compiled by other people, and the credible numbers I have seen quoted in this eternal debate show that the risk is really low.
I have lived in both crime-ridden neighborhoods (literally with a crack den at opposite corners of the street) and in virtually crime-free suburbs. I do not believe that a firearm which is safely stored and only accessible to trained, responsible, mentally well adults represents some kind of extraordinary hazard, but nor do I think that the probability of home invasion is likely, hence my repeated parenthetical statements to the improbability. Nonetheless, home invasions do occasionally occur even in “nice” neighborhoods, and of course domestic disputes and other conflicts which can only be resolved by the unfortunately use of lethal force can happen even if you live the most charmed of lives. I have personally taken a .380 round to the mid-thorax region which, had I not taken precautionary preparation, would likely have been lethal or at least extremely debilitating, as well as having experienced having other, less serious acts of violence visited upon me. I do not worry excessively today about being threatened in public, and as it is neither legal nor convenient to carry a concealed weapon where I live I do not deign to do so, but I also have no irrational fear of a mechanical device that has no volition to jump out of its secure container and attack me.
I’ve also been around firearms all my life, trained to shoot by a former Force Recon sniper and an Army Ranger designated marksman, and subsequently trained dozens of other people on the aspects of firearm safety and marksmanship with no accidents or ill effects. I think most people are more dangerous with an automobile that they are poorly trained to operate at high speeds and kinetic energies that dwarf the most powerful firearm than they are with any handgun or rifle, and I’m more concerned that our current commander in chief is going to start a destructive nuclear war than I am that my neighbor is going to lose his senses and start shooting through the wall.
If someone is brazen enough to enter my occupied domicile and pose a threat to me despite being warned away it is clear evidence that they intend no good health to me, and I’ll be fucked by a skunk before I climb out a window and run away, especially as that would put me in a more vulnerable tactical position should they intend actual harm, notwithstanding the need to protect others in the household. The decision to pursue such an inexcusable course of action on the part of an invader is not a mark on my conscience, and should I be pressed to make the decision between the well-being of a determined perpetrator or my own, the choice is pretty simple and, to a rational person, indubitable.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m not a gun guy, I certainly can’t rattle off everything thing there is to be known about guns, but I do know a few things here and there about them.
How is a (non revolver) pistol with ‘one in the pipe’ any different than a revolver? They’re both semi-automatic, they’ll both fire by doing nothing more than picking them up and pulling the trigger*, they can both be reloaded just as quickly.
Personally, I think that people think shotguns are the way to go because they think that the sound of the pump will scare anyone off, and it might…or it might give him a chance to get his gun out while I fill my walls with buckshot. I’m sure there’s more posts, those are just the first three I found. And, yes, I’m aware that you pump it after you shoot it, not before. Keeping in mind if a burglar is sneaking around a quiet house, they may hear the homeowner racking the slide on a regular handgun anyways. OTOH, I suppose they could pump the shotgun before they put the shells in. But ISTM, if you got a shotgun for the sound you probably haven’t practiced with it yet, even so much as loading/pumping it, or you’d do this. As I said before, you need to practice doing this (and not keeping a loaded, safety off, gun within an arms reach of where you sleep).
In the end, the shotgun thing (as you’ll see if you read the rest of those threads) is mostly a trope. It’s a woman (IME Southern, mobbed up or meant not to seem tough in the first few episodes of a new show, I think I’ve seen it on Sopranos, Desperate Housewives and maybe GCB), she hears what she thinks is a B&E, grabs the shot gun, pumps it, usually with one hand, it turns out to be nothing and the other characters are super impressed with her ‘no fear’ attitude. Which makes viewers want to get a shotgun on the premise that the sound will scare people off. But as has been said a million times before, it’s not just the gun, you also have to be ready to pull the trigger. If that’s too much, but you still want some (intimidate) protection, maybe look into some pepper spray, it at least buys you some time.
*Not having one in the pipe is akin to loading one less than the barrel on a revolver holds (so you need to pull the trigger twice to shoot it), but then the confusion (especially WRT an amateur) is which one don’t you load? The one to the left, the one to the right or the one in the center? Also, this is of course assuming all double action weapons, no safety/lock (for argument’s sake)).
Guns or pistols aren’t free, either. If you want them not as Talisman, but to work, you have to spend Money (and time) on ammunition so you can Train, and Keep in Training. Without Training, a pistol/ gun is not useful.
If the OP is able to take care of a dog, a dog offers an additional benefit (as compared to the possible dangers of a firearm) apart from security, esp. for elderly People:
Walking with the dog 5 times a day improves your physical health.
Having a pet as companion improves psychological health.
If you want a car to drive places, you Need to know how to drive, so you practise.
If you want a gun to defend yourself, you Need to learn how to shoot correctly.
And many People who speak up every time there’s a discussion about guns talk about guns as if they are Talismans or Magic wands.
The simple fact of having a gun doesn’t make you safe. Even knowing how to shoot doesn’t make you safe. Even being able to shoot and potentially kill another human being doesn’t make you safe.
As Tranquilis very nicely explained, safety is a mindset that Looks at possible dangers. If you don’t have secure doors and Windows (and Change your locks), and a dog or Alarm System to wake you up, then a gun doesn’t make you safe. (The typical Scenario of a break-in during the night never talks about “how deep do you sleep, how do you wake up?”)
And how many of the gun enthusiasts have a smoke detector that costs 30$, less than a handgun, and protects against a much more likely danger than Mad Max breaking into your house while it’s occupied?
Have you not heard any of the News stories where Kids found a firearm when playing and brought it to School or back home, and then it got fired?
A lot of gun violence in the “ghettoes” also Comes from break-ins where guns are robbed (because poor People don’t have the Money to legally buy guns). So unless you gun is safely looked in a safe (which means no quick Access during “home invasions”), somebody can break in during the day, steal your gun and shoot somebody else somewhere.
That sounds a bit unrealistic to me, given reports of how trained Police officers, who do regularly spend time on the range, still manage to miss the broad side of yarn during actual situations, because adrenaline causing tunnel Vision.
Shooting at a range for practice is a bit different than waking up in the middle of the night (groggy from sleep) and being afraid for your life from Mad Max gang breaking down your door.*
Yes, numbers are cited that a lot of Police officers have only one violent confrontation during 10 years. However, a lot of times when cops shoot at People, it turns out very badly for civilians.
It’s like saying “I know how to drive a car on a dry flat straight road during sunshine, so why should I get in Trouble driving at night with 5 inches of snow on a steep, narrow, winding mountain road?”
Since this is the Scenario everybody is talking about, although nobody has any numbers on how many gangs are actually breaking down doors of occupied houses in the middle of the night, instead of breaking and stealing during midday, when most People are at work or fun.
Hunting, mostly, and target shooting. Which gave me no preparation or training at all for confrontational shooting at human targets when taken by surprise in a closed domestic space. Which Stranger calls deficiencies for which I “should” get professional counseling.
Which was exactly the point for which I was derided… A person who wants a handgun for personal safety needs to overcome the deficienty of experience or training for that, and needs to commit to getting that training.
I’ve been shooting for a few decades now and own dozens of handguns, rifles, and shotguns. I have about 50K rounds of ammo. I read a lot on guns and self defense. My son and I do a lot of shooting in my backyard during the summer. (I occasionally get my .50 BMG out, which the neighbors love.) Yet I have received no formal training in the use of guns for self defense. The only formal training I’ve ever received was when I went to classes to become an NRA certified rifle instructor, and when I got my Concealed Handgun License.
Should I receive formal training in the use of guns for self defense? Yes. But I keep putting it off. Does this mean I shouldn’t have a gun in my house for self defense? Are you saying I should not carry my concealed handgun when I go to Walmart?
How is this a response to my question? Are you saying if you want to keep a gun in the home for self defense purposes hundreds or thousands of hours of training is necessary?
I understood your question as to doubt that any Training is necessary. If however you meant that “Training is necessary, but no x hours, only y hours”, then I misunderstood you.
Put me in the column for a shotgun (or rifle) over a handgun. A handgun requires a lot more proficiency than a shotgun and (in my case) is more practical for my wife to use.
Yes, shotguns are longer and a bit more unwieldy than a handgun, but you can easily add a flashlight to a shotgun and install an adjustable stock with pistol grip. The pistol grip makes it much easier to handle the shotgun with your strong hand as you open a door or turn on a light. Believe me, it takes a lot of practice to hold a flashlight in your weak hand, a handgun in your strong hand, and safely perform these actions. LEO spend a lot of time practicing this and it can still be tricky.
A 20 GA shotgun, flashlight/clamp, and adjustable pistol grip stock (NOT a pistol grip that replaces the stock) will cost about $250. Practice every other month firing 20 rounds and you’ll be fairly proficient. Not so with a handgun, which is also likely to be more expensive.
Add to this that purchasing and owning a shotgun is much easier in many areas of the US…less paperwork, no waiting period, etc.
But if you don’t feel comfortable with the whole idea of using a handgun or a long gun, you shouldn’t have either.
Yes, it means you should think twice about acquiring a self-defense handgun unless you are prepared to make the commitment to preparing yourself to be a competent and knowledgeable user of it for the purpose intended. You don’t buy an airplane without a commitment to training yourself as a pilot.
Do you live in the bush and run the reasonable risk* of encountering wild wolves/ bear during your trip to Walmart?
Do you live in post-apocalyptic Australia, that you run the reasonable risk * of encountering Mad Max gangs during your trip to Walmart?
If no, why would you carry a handgun to Walmart? Do you want to rob it?
reasonable risk as: a neutral observer, looking at the Facts of what happened in the past years in your area, would think it likelier than being hit by a Meteorite while driving your car (which happend to some People in Russia a while ago…)
But I have taught dozens of people in tactical shooting classes, and every single one of them who completely the class (which included stress conditioning and low light shooting) was able to successful demonstrate the requisite skills in a total of about 12 to 16 hours of range time. Shooting a firearm is not some enormously complex motor skill; it is much harder to learn how to hit a baseball or play golf. And yes, the differences between shooting at a harmless paper silhouette target at a well-lit indoor range and dealing with a home intruder are very different levels of challenge, hence why we do simulated training and have an extended discussion about the liabilities and responsibilities of defensive shooting, and the need for regular practice and review.
By the way, when you wake up from hearing someone breaking a window or prying open a door, you are anything but groggy. I can attest to this personal as well as from the anecdotal but voluminous experience relayed to me by people who have experienced this. As for “tunnel vision”, or as we refer to it, hyperfocus, it most certainly does occur and is a physiological adaptation to stress which actually improves the ability of a shooter to aim quickly; people who experience it often describe later in incredibly descriptive detail the exaggerated size and sharpness of the sights. When “trained Police officers, who do regularly spend time on the range, still manage to miss the broad side of yarn [sic]” it is what is referred to as “panic fire” and comes from confusion and indecision, or a lack of adequate trigger discipline and conditioning. Despite your statement, most police officers are not especially well trained in combat marksmanship. I know of only one municipal law enforcement agency which requires monthly qualification with a duty sidearm of patrol and investigative officers, and most have the very minimal requirement of annual qualification to a pretty low standard of accuracy. Avoiding panic fire is a matter of training, conditioning, and having a clear set of criterion for when lethal force is justified, which is much cleaner for a private citizen in his or her own home than it is a peace officer dealing with an angry or violent person who may or may not be carrying a weapon.
So, anecdotes. I have anecdotes that different People sleep differently, some deep some light, that there are different stages of sleep cycles where it’s comparitvly easier or harder to be woken up.
Also, where you live that you have voluminous experience of People having their window being broken / door pried open while they were inside?
And how big of a house/ flat did These People live in? If the bedroom is on first floor, to the back, and the intruder pries open the front door, People can hear that? Elderly People like the OP? (On one Hand, elderly People don’t sleep 8 hrs straight, but often in smaller portions and wake more easily. On the other Hand, they also hear less good than a Young Person).
