If I’m consciously planning for this eventuality… fuck it, I’m moving. There has to be a country out there that will accept me and that isn’t a ridiculous violent shithole.
Zombies don’t respect international boundaries and everywhere will be a ridiculous violent shithole. See my initial post in this thread.
But a general home invasion type situation? That’s been known to happen. And happens even in countries with strict gun control.
With one or two overlap exceptions, my firearms fill unique slots in my potential shooting needs:
- personal carry(ies)/home defense
- easy to operate/low maintenance home defense
- hunting/long-range shooting
- skeet/trap/bird* - with the added benefit of home defense
- target plinking/small game/training for young-uns
As it happens, I enjoy some form of all of those activities except home defense. I just think it’s easy enough to be prepared for without any super-specific scenario in mind.
* Honestly though, the couple of times I’ve gone after dove, I just borrowed somebody’s 20ga. If I see one cheap enough, I might grab it, but I really don’t want to have to keep another ammo type around. And I rarely dove hunt these days.
However owning a gun means you are far more likely to accidentally kill yourself, an innocent or just commit suicide than you are to ever experience a home invasion*. And very unlikely to survive one, gun or not. “Home invasions” mainly get talked about as a pro-gun talking point, not because they are a significant issue or one that gun ownership helps with. As far as crime goes, owning a gun just means a burglar gets a free gun.
- Especially in the context of this thread, in which case a “home invasion” would consist of a death squad with government backing. Or an artillery shell landing on your house.
I don’t disagree exactly, but want to add a bit more nuance and dispute your earlier points in terms of degree. First, the point I quoted, and here I agree 100% and said as much upthread, arming yourself for a fight against the US military acting with government support or tacit government neglect is fundamentally a losing game. They will always have more of everything unless it’s fully open civil war, and that’s a scenario beyond the OP.
The earlier points aren’t wrong, but it’s part of a calculation of risk. I’d be infinitely safer if I got rid of my car, and had everything delivered (leaving out work). There is immensely more versatility in my life by having and driving a car, but it’s by far my biggest daily risk. So I drive safe, wear seatbelts, avoid times and places of terrible congestion or accident prone intersections.
Owning a gun is also about accepting a risk in your home and taking deliberate actions to mitigate it. If you or anyone in your family (others have shared their experiences) have even slight tendencies in that direction, it’s not an acceptable risk IMHO. If you have young children (below, say 12) in the house, no matter how well trained, it’s likely an unacceptable risk. If you can’t be bothered to secure your firearms, store them properly, and maintain them in a safe fashion, ditto. All of these failures will absolutely lead to multiple risk factors, above and beyond the fact that anyone can be careless or just clumsy and screw up putting you at risk!
So yes, you’re adding a risk factor to the house, but there are parties where rightly or wrongly, it’s an acceptable risk.
I’ll share a bit more.
I got my CCW permit years and years ago, after being a target shooter and having a revolver in the house for home defense. I never needed to do home defense, but still had it secured in a biometric handgun safe, and it went safe → solid sided transport case → range → case → broke down for immediate cleaning → safe. And it was stored unloaded with a full quickloader adjacent.
Both my wife and I (the only members of the household) took a formal firearms safety and familiarization course prior to bringing the gun into the house.
Now, on to the CCW. I got that AFTER taking a refresher course, which included live fire and local legal trainging on responsibilities, because I felt there was risk. Why? Because I had just secured a job at a 24 hour a day retail pharmacy chain, and as new hire, was working the late shifts. In the two years prior to that four (4) in town had been subject to attack, including 2 of employees in the parking lot. Don’t get me wrong, if I’m behind the counter and they ask for something, I’m giving everything I can get 10/10 times and never thinking about being a hero. But if they go after me in the parking lot when I don’t have anything to give? I was worried. One of the reasons I ended up going in a very different direction.
Okay, digression mostly over. Back to the OP, if you are arming yourself because of a Trump win, you likely have a specific reason to be afraid (note, I’m being clear, you’re buying from fear at least in part, not just a fully rational/logical evaluation of risk). Many said reasons may NOT stand up in said logical arguments, but there are ones that are more AND less valid.
If said person was a random, white, Christian who voted Democrat most of the time but didn’t make a big deal of it and was well integrated into the community, they’re probably at or near lowest risk. But, if you aren’t any of those things, well, history shows plenty of examples of how being an outsider under a demagogue can get bad fast even without direct government attention.
I’m a secular jew, I almost never go to synagogue, but if I did, I would be wary - they’ve been targeted. If I was visibly Muslim, similar concerns. The violence against Asian and Asian-Americans during Covid, attacks on African-American communities, LBGQT+ attacks around the nation, perceived “illegal immigrants” (who may have been citizens for generations here in the southwest) and on and on and on.
These are valid worries - you have to judge if your personal, individual risks under an amplifying factor such as a Trump win are greater than even the most mitigated risks of having the firearm in your house.
I have already refuted that earlier.
Me and my faithful pooch can handle anything that comes up.
Is he a rescue?
More importantly, is he housebroken?
Most people that I know that are gun owners are somewhat Apolitical. They like to shoot, they like to hunt. As long as you practice good gun safety and respect the weapons, it’s a pretty safe sport/activity.
Swimming pools kill more kids annually in the US than guns.
Swimming pools!!!
Haven’t seen that one in quite a while.
Can ladders be far behind?
Have any data to back up this claim?
Fine, whatever, here’s my cite that you’re wrong by a factor of 3.
Moderating:
I am only saying this once: This is not the thread for a gun control debate or to cite gun violence studies, as has previously been pointed out by a moderator. Further hijacks into such debates will earn warnings.
If you are worried the government will invade your home, your firearms aren’t going to help you. If you are worried your neighbors will invade your home, I’d suggest that reinforcing your walls and doors, and investing in solid locks, is more likely to be useful. I guess rebuilding walls is expensive. I still think it’s a lot more likely to be useful.
Agreed, but I’m not going down without a fight. There are too many instances in history where people do that and wind up dead anyway, in more horrible ways than getting gunned down in a firefight. Again, this is NOT my expectation and certainly not my reasoning behind any of the firearms I own.
I’ve got brick walls and solid doors, but I also have windows and I suspect the HOA would frown upon iron bars. In any case, given enough uninterrupted time, people can get through damn near anything - doing so under fire is a different story. They’re much more likely to move on.
And yet again, I don’t expect any of these scenarios to happen. My “home invasion” comment was about 2 or 3 yahoos coming in to rob the place, not armed insurrection.
For 2 or three yahoos, just locking your doors should be good enough. And do you really want to kill them?
I’m pretty sure I could kick down just about any door in my neighborhood. Not because I’m a big, tough guy, but beacuse those doors aren’t really designed to stop a determined person. And while I don’t personally want to kill any particular person, I’m willing to use deadly force against one or more persons who invades my home. I don’t think that’s unreasonable of me.
See @Odesio 's post. I’ve recently replaced the front door, so I think it’s decently secure to the frame of the house, it has glass in it. Break that and you’re in.
Do I want to? Of course I don’t. Am I willing to should jacking the shotgun and a verbal warning not be enough? With my wife and kids in the house, you’re goddamn right I am.
ETA: We’re getting pretty far afield of the OP, so I’ll end the hijack now and say that I’m done responding to questions about home defense in cases other than a “Trump wins” scenario, which is something I’ve already stated is really unlikely to cause civil unrest.
Actually, yeah, kind of. Well, regardless of if the Reign of Terror begins or not.
It’s not exactly for going on a rampage or defending myself (though that’s always a possibility).
Just from anecdotes I’ve heard, maybe even from this board, merely holding a Concealed Weapon Permit, can help defuse any initial distrust from an officer of the peace, should he or she have reason to interpolate you.
That’s reason enough for me to interview with the county sheriff (in a shall-issue state, but interview must be in person and they are backed up for a while for what will be a simple “yes, no, here’s my money, sir”).
If a cop has any yen to look me up, they’ll see I’m a law-abiding, fees-paying, freedom-loving dude. And as a bonus, if I feel like carrying concealed, I can.
If you are including arming yourself with documents, i am renewing my passport and i finally am upgrading my driver’s license to real id. The real id is for much the same reason stranger wants a gun permit. I think it will make me look more trustworthy to the cops.
I expect both documents to arrive by mail before the election. Here’s crossing my fingers.