I’m sorry you felt you had to arm yourself when you never wanted to, but good for you. The worst-case situation is when only some people have (and are prepared to use) guns and others don’t. Yahoos and bullies suddenly get a lot less arrogant when their intended victims can shoot back.
It’s like you guys are drinking your own Kool-aide and believing your own lies about “Republicans.”
It’s really funny how nuts your guys are. You’re so scared of the lies you’ve told yourself you had to buy a gun to defend yourself. That’s like someone in Al Qaida murdering someone for saying that Islam promotes violence. Fucking nuts.
Dude, someone directly told OP that once word came down, people like him would face “lead poisoning” within the hour. That is a threat.
But I can only assume you are accusing OP and everyone else on the thread of lying. You do you.
It is manufactured and engendered by corporations and people who benefit from it. It is entirely artificial.
What lies? Republicans are showing up to ballet drop off boxes armed and hiding their identity. Even covering up the license plates on their cars (which I suspect is illegal)
We are scared that the MAGA’s believe the lies. And the DO. As is evident by the insurrection.
Seduction is a very individual thing. You’ll have to make your own decisions on how to go on.
Keep in mind that the new will wear off, and the maintenance and practice required to be a responsible gun owner may (or may not) eventually become more of a chore than a joy.
By way of example, I have quite a few guns. I haven’t shot any of them in over a decade.
Given the prevalence toward domestic terrorism among Republicans, inspired by crazed conspiracy theories. I find this statement rather ironic. Any party that accepts a member that openly threatens to harm political opponents (MTG) and rallies around a former president who tried to start an armed insurrection should absolutely be feared.
These aren’t lies. They are documented, recorded facts. Facts that I’m sure are very inconvenient for you.
The OP is someone who is obviously enjoying handling guns, shopping for accessories, getting training, etc. As a good liberal he’s having trouble processing the fact that he’s finding enjoyment in something that he’s supposed to be politically against. Instead of updating his viewpoints and finding some nuance that maybe all guns and gun owners aren’t always universally bad, what does he do? “Wah wah the dirty Republicans made me pick up this dirty hobby that I’m very obviously enjoying.”
This is the kind of person who in 5 years will be saying “The Democrats criticized me for being a gun owner, so I was forced to become a Republican.”
You can like a sports car, without having any desire to own one. It maybe even fun to drive once in a while but is not you.
That is true.
One time I made a business trip to Arlington, VA. (I was sent across country to officially do troubleshooting for the software of a customer - a large hospital - but in reality I was there to kiss their butts and make them feel better about us.) I had rented a compact car, but they were totally out of those vehicles and offered a Ford Mustang instead (no price difference). It was very similar to this (stripes included):
After driving that thing for a week, I finally understood why people loved to drive sports cars. I very much enjoyed it. I still can never see myself actually purchasing one though (even if I could afford it). Far too impractical.
A brother in law had a pick up and a Corvette. He regularly drove his pick up on loonnnnggg road trips to his brothers house. I asked him why he didn’t take the 'Vette. He looked at me like I had just grown another head. Then he took me for a ride in it to answer my question.
My brother the Army vet had a pick up and a Porsche. Until he needed back surgery and couldn’t get low enough to sit in the Porsche.
For long trips, he took his Honda Gold Wing. When his back allowed him to ride again, he discovered that the motor had froze up.
It’s ironic that my last post was commenting on the civility of the discussion so far, and here comes the first hostility. Also ironically, from a fellow Canuck, and apparently one with reading comprehension problems.
If you read more carefully, you will see that I was explicitly non-judgmental about the OP’s decision to buy a gun, and explicitly declined to be critical of it. What I was lamenting was the way the gun culture feeds on itself and promotes the proliferation of guns. When I said that statistically the presence of a gun makes you less safe, I included the word “statistically” for good reason because it’s important.
As for not putting any thought into the matter, you’re wrong. I have. I mentioned earlier that when I was young and stupid I thought it would be cool to have a pistol, and I regretted the regulations that made it so prohibitively difficult in Canada that I never did. I also mentioned that in my long life, there have been circumstances where the presence of a gun in the house could have had tragic consequences. This despite the fact that I would definitely be in the category of a law-abiding responsible gun owner, the same way that I’ve always been a law-abiding responsible driver.
And speaking of which, in about half a century of driving, I have never had an accident, and have the lowest possible insurance rates. Yet just last week, driving through a parking lot to pick up Chinese food, I nearly ran over a kid on a scooter. The idiot just popped out without looking from between a row of cars. It would not have been my fault, but I still might have killed him. The moral of the story is that statistics and some of their terrifying probabilities apply to all of us. We drive cars anyway because transportation is essential. Guns, usually, not so much.
This story fails to provide any sort of clear insight. “Shit can sometimes happen” is not the topic at hand.
Let me be somewhat direct; is the OP more or less safe now that they own a gun?
It’s absolutely pertinent to the discussion of statistical probability. Removing a statistically significant cause of shit happening guarantees that that particular cause is no longer in the picture.
I have no idea, and nor did I ever venture an opinion on the matter. To repeat, I was explicitly non-critical and non-judgmental about that specific circumstance. What I do believe is true is that millions of other people, acting out of the same concerns, ultimately do make America much less safe. It’s somewhat analogous to the “tragedy of the commons” in economics, in the sense that everyone acting in their self-interest is ultimately contrary to the common good. In the case of guns, it’s sometimes contrary even to their own self-interest.
Every driver believes they are great drivers. Every gun owner believes they are safe. Statistics of course prove otherwise.
But some drivers, and some gun owners are right. They are safe.
Provided each class is sane, and the equipment is well maintained and operated, operating a motor vehicle is more likely to get you into some random crazy shit than owning a gun will. I’ve owned a gun since I was 9 years old. I’ve never had a close call. I’ve been driving nearly as long, and every time you hit the road it seems as if some random asshole is trying to kill you. My training in both has prevented any accident of any kind.
Now, that does not take into account idiots that want to carry loaded weapons around for no reason. They are looking for a fight. I put dangerous, reckless, irresponsible drivers in the same category as far as the danger they present.
That’s simply a volume issue. Because there are so many more cars than there are guns, statistically speaking you are far more likely to have a problem with a vehicle than a gun. The same way that a dog bite is much more likely to happen than being bitten by a tiger.
Though that ultimately shows why gun control is helpful.
OK. Good point. When you hear hoofbeats, think horses, not zebras.
Gun control is a fine idea IMHO.
I’m not sure that’s actually true. From what I’ve read, there are more guns than people in the US, but that’s not the case for cars- it’s something like 390 million firearms vs. 280 million cars.
The number of guns is irrelevant. When I said “more cars than guns”, what I meant was more car owners than gun owners. I should have been clearer.
It’s believed that around 30% of adult Americans are gun owners. An additional 11% don’t own a gun but live in a household with a gun. So that’s a bit over 40%.
Whereas, over 90% of American households have access to a vehicle.
So much more than double the population has access to a car compared to a gun.
That’s not even mentioning the fact that people who have access to a vehicle are far more likely to use it in a given day than to use a gun. I drive many times per week. I haven’t fired my pistol (or even taken it out of my home) in years.
So yes, the prevalence of vehicles out in the public dwarfs the number of guns. The average person is in far more danger of being injured by a vehicle than a firearm. But again, that’s solely due to volume and statistics, not the inherent danger of a vehicle versus a gun.