No, it’s typically a fairly low-pressure situation with good illumination, and yet every police range I’ve ever been to has bullet holes in the floor, walls, and / or ceiling because cops aren’t particularly adept at handling firearms.
yep. The OP asked a question, and we answered it. I’m not sps49sd’s mother, so her experience is not relevant to my answer. (But I am very, very sorry to hear that she was the victim of a crime, or attempted crime – I’m not clear what happened.)
Wait…it really looks like you’re arguing that the “average” cop or soldier is just a straight-up poorly trained and inaccurate user of a patently deadly tool. And you’re…happy with this?
I mean, these are the people who are arguably best trained to safely use a firearm in a stressful situation. We should encourage more firearm ownership and use by people who are even less trained than them?
If you can’t see the difference between swinging a baseball bat at someone or shooting them, I don’t know what to tell you. It’s the same as the difference between a sword and a baseball bat. One is a deadly weapon made for killing. The other can certainly kill, but is not designed to do so, and requires far more deliberately homicidal intent to kill.
I did not realize that your example was not hypothetical, and I apologize for that – I would not have responded with the same “tone” (for lack of a better word) nor mentioned either of you in my example. That was insensitive and I apologize.
At the same time, This doesn’t change the point. Much more harm is done by private ownership of guns than is prevented by them.
There are about 3 million burglaries a year in the US, and about 60% of those occur between 6 am and 6 pm, when people are likely to be working. Burglars tend to avoid breaking into occupied homes, and when they do, they tend to flee – because burglars are almost universally desperate amateurs looming for money, not professionals or rapists or killers. That’s not to say those don’t exist, but gun deaths are a much more serious issue.
Only about 1 in 4 burglaries occur when someone is home. Of those, only 1 in 4 actually leads to a confrontation. That still sound scary, but 65% of the time, the burglar knew the victim – it’s very rare for this to be a “home invasion gone wrong” scenario. And by far the best way to prevent burglary is to install a home alarm system. Homes with alarm systems are 300% less likely to be burglarized.
That someone broke in and attempted to assault or even rape your mother is horrible and despicable, and that person certainly deserves to rot in prison for the rest of his miserable life. If he had been shot and killed, I wouldn’t shed a tear or even an ounce of sympathy for him. But far more horrible things happen everyday because of our gun-obsessed culture, and that’s a much bigger societal problem.
If you live in an apartment that has only one exit then you are in a death trap anyway. What will you do if there is a fire that blocks your one door? Look, you can always find excuses or very vertical situations where a gun would be best, but the professionals who train people say the best bet is to start with evasion, if you can’t do that then barricade and/or hide, and only if you are forced to do you fight. Even in a low probability situation like someone trying to break in you have at least 2 options before you need to resort to fighting, so I don’t think a gun is going to be that necessary. I think that you are worse off in the situation you describe if there is a fire, since you can’t evade, according to you, and you can’t hide from that…nor fight it. Just going to die I guess.
Some other things I’m happy to take way your rights to do:
- exercise your freedom of speech by going to a preschool and teaching all the kids the word “fuck” and “shit”
- kill black men because they looked at a white woman
- drive north in the southbound freeway lanes
I must be a really horrible tyrant!
>I believe the “run/hide/fight” model of dealing with armed invaders is wisest, no matter how one is armed – flee (with family) when possible;
She couldn’t flee- the window was maybe 40 ft from her door, opening into a hall. Should she take a chance of outrunning the intruder?
>if fleeing is impossible, then hide (while preparing to fight if found);
Studio apartment. The 911 operator advised her to sit against the wall opposite the window, and to empty her revolver into the intruder ONLY IF he passed the windowsill.
>if hiding is impossible (or if one is found), then fight.
Physically fighting back was unlikely to end in her favor.
>Aside from family, there’s nothing in my home that I wouldn’t gladly trade away to avoid the chance of having to kill someone (or, obviously, being killed)
Well, they did not engage in any discussion about why he was there, there wasn’t much to trade, and why take his word for anything?
I weigh 110, and your five year old could probably fuck me up.
No, I’m not “happy” about it. I wish everyone was better trained. But there’s this myth among gun control activists that police are something like steely-eyed professionals that never miss, and therefore we can trust them to handle all of society’s violent confrontations and the rest of us just can’t be trusted to not shoot ourselves in the foot. It’s not true.
How are you measuring these two things?
I’m not sure what you mean by “anti-gun,” but since I’ve only seen that term used by gun extremists, I’ll assume you mean anyone who believes in measures to restrict gun ownership, no matter how slight or sensible.
A few problems with your scenario: If you live in a single-family home or a building/complex of 10 or more apartments, the odds of you being there during a home invasion are only .8%. Unless you’re the victim of a hit burglars don’t want to risk encountering anyone in a home invasion. They generally determine nobody’s home before entering. That’s why two-thirds of home invasions take place during daylight hours. . And most burglars (61%) are unarmed. [souce]
The few who do enter homes when someone is present do so stealthily. In the movies, the victim hears a door squeak, footsteps, etc. In real life, those cues are highly unlikely.
So my answer would also be to leave the house, if possible. If not, I’d hide or feign sleep.
So… let me get this straight. You hold that our police forces are not sufficiently well trained in the use of their guns. Ergo, civilians with NO mandated training (as opposed to these incompetent cops with INSUFFICIENT training) should all be armed?
That’s literally insane. That’s like saying, “Nuclear weapons are too dangerous. Even “respectable” nations like the United States or France cannot be trusted with them. Ergo, we should give nukes to Somalia.”
It’s like saying, “the average doctor is too incompetent to successfully perform surgery anyways, so I’m just gonna have Cousin Cletus do it.”
One thing you for sure are missing here is the point. If you see two random people, one dressed like a cop and the other not, what is the safe bet on who is better with a gun under stress?
My wife sometimes doesn’t feel safe at night when I’m gone. A home alarm system is a great Valentines Day gift! Thanks for the idea! I was grasping at straws and it was looking to be another chocolates and flowers occasion.
I know you think you are saying something with all this crap, but just wanted to point out you don’t have the right to do any of that stuff. You clearly are having some issues differentiating between what is or isn’t a right.
By reading through the very same studies that have been cited multiple times in this thread already.
Still don’t understand what you’re arguing against. I said that if one couldn’t flee, then hide; if one couldn’t hide, then fight. That doesn’t conflict with having a gun and shooting an intruder in a studio apartment if the layout renders flight and hiding impossible. My post was consistent with shooting an intruder (one form of fighting) in a studio apartment.
Seems like you’re just looking for an argument where none exists. I’m sorry if your mother was assaulted – that’s a terrible thing. Nothing I wrote would conflict with anyone taking action, including deadly force with a firearm, to protect themselves from sexual assault.
EDIT: Rereading your post, ISTM that you don’t think shooting someone counts as “fighting”. That seems crazy to me, but if that’s the source of your disagreement, then hopefully that is now cleared up.
Gun ownership is only a right because the law says it is. Once upon a time, you also had the right to own a slave. Times change, and one “right” is now something we look upon with horror and disgust.
If a fire was exactly in front of the door, she could use the window (it opened to a sort of atrium), go to the hall, and go north to the regular exit. If a fire was north of the hallway door (which happened while I was visiting and convincing her to let us help her move), taking the hallway south led to the emergency exit.
(That was freaky; smoke filled the hallway from ceiling to about halfway down; she wanted to fix her makeup first )