# Why do you need a gun? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [January 11, 2013, 5:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-you-need-a-gun/646873 "2013-01-11T17:22:24Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 8
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2013, 2:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-you-need-a-gun/646873/141 "2013-01-13T02:21:01Z")
> [@ed\_anger](#): > > Disagree, the courts are never out of the equation. As people have already pointed out on this board, the interpretation of the second amendment has shifted over time. In contrast, the franchise (or anything else, really) being limited to white land-owning males has not been a matter of interpretation for quite some time. The changes have been written down and shit. ---
**Author:** ![Absolute](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/b2d939/32.png) [@Absolute](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Absolute)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2013, 2:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-you-need-a-gun/646873/142 "2013-01-13T02:25:12Z")
I have always viewed the “2nd amendment defense” for gun rights as a last resort anyway. If gun rights advocates cannot make a reasonable argument from first principles for gun rights in today’s society, then the 2nd amendment is just an anachronism and remains in existence simply because of inertia. I’ve never found any of this stuff about the militia particularly credible. The people I’ve met who talk loudest about “the need for a militia” are usually 350+ pound guys who get winded getting up into their pickup truck. In the end - the US is a free country and should remain so. “Freedom” to me means that citizens should be free to make their own decisions, and take their own risks, as long as they do not harm others. Given that the vast, vast majority of firearms owners in the US do not use them to harm others (except in self-defense), it seems to me that jumping straight to a blanket ban is unreasonable. I do not mind comprehensive background checks, elimination of the “gun show loophole”, universal licensing/permitting systems, etc. My personal favorite is a comprehensive insurance system, in which you may only legally own a gun if you obtain an insurance policy on it that will reimburse the victims if the gun is ever used illegally, as well as reimburse police costs, etc. Rather than a bunch of ignorant, grandstanding politicians determining which weapons and types of owner are dangerous and which are not, let the insurance industry figure it out, just as they presently figure out which drivers and which models of car are most likely to be involved in an accident. Given all the other options for reducing gun violence that have not been tried, jumping straight to a blanket ban on certain kinds of presently-legal weapons and equipment seems excessive, and I can’t help but wonder if advocates of such a ban are motivated more by mean-spirited dislike of guns and gun owners than a genuine desire to improve safety while respecting other people’s rights. ---
**Author:** ![Condescending\_Robot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a183cd/32.png) [@Condescending\_Robot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Condescending_Robot)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2013, 2:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-you-need-a-gun/646873/143 "2013-01-13T02:27:23Z")
> [@Absolute](#): > > I can’t help but wonder if advocates of such a ban are motivated more by mean-spirited dislike of guns and gun owners than a genuine desire to improve safety while respecting other people’s rights. Well, duh. ---
**Author:** ![ed\_anger](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/bbce88/32.png) [@ed\_anger](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ed_anger)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2013, 2:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-you-need-a-gun/646873/144 "2013-01-13T02:29:52Z")
> [@Condescending\_Robot](#): > > Well, duh. Terrible, this dislike of people being shot. ---
**Author:** ![Absolute](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/b2d939/32.png) [@Absolute](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Absolute)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2013, 2:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-you-need-a-gun/646873/145 "2013-01-13T02:45:34Z")
> [@ed\_anger](#): > > Terrible, this dislike of people being shot. If someone was simply motivated by a “dislike of people being shot”, then they would try to find a rational solution that reduces gun crime while still preserving the rights of millions of law-abiding citizens. Instead, we are listening to a parade of people who are really motivated by a dislike of guns and gun owners, using recent tragedies as an excuse to promote their agenda of limiting gun ownership in general, not just gun crime. In their eyes, all gun owners are borderline psychopaths and criminals - why else would anyone want to own one of these murdering death machines? And so there is no reason to make any distinction between reducing gun crime, and reducing gun ownership. Guns = bad, and anything that limits the rights of gun owners must be the right thing to do. ---
**Author:** ![ed\_anger](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/bbce88/32.png) [@ed\_anger](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ed_anger)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2013, 2:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-you-need-a-gun/646873/146 "2013-01-13T02:51:51Z")
> [@Absolute](#): > > If someone was simply motivated by a “dislike of people being shot”, then they would try to find a rational solution that reduces gun crime while still preserving the rights of millions of law-abiding citizens. > > Instead, we are listening to a parade of people who are really motivated by a dislike of guns and gun owners, using recent tragedies as an excuse to promote their agenda of limiting gun ownership in general, not just gun crime. > > In their eyes, all gun owners are borderline psychopaths and criminals - why else would anyone want to own one of these murdering death machines? And so there is no reason to make any distinction between reducing gun crime, and reducing gun ownership. Guns = bad, and anything that limits the rights of gun owners must be the right thing to do. Look at the Supreme Court cases I’ve cited, there’s already numerous limits on gun ownership. Maybe responsible gun owners need to realize that national registration is in their own best interest, instead of painting everyone that supports gun control as nut cases. ---
**Author:** ![Absolute](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/b2d939/32.png) [@Absolute](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Absolute)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2013, 2:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-you-need-a-gun/646873/147 "2013-01-13T02:53:36Z")
> [@ed\_anger](#): > > Look at the Supreme Court cases I’ve cited, there’s already numerous limits on gun ownership. Maybe responsible gun owners need to realize that national registration is in their own best interest, instead of painting everyone that supports gun control as nut cases. For a variety of reasons, I think gun registration is a bad idea, not to mention a political non-starter, because of the threat of confiscation. But I would fully support licensing for gun owners. And I agree that gun rights supporters should realize that their best way out of this situation is to propose a reasonable solution themselves, instead of just “turtling” and refusing any attempt at reform. I was very disappointed, though not surprised, at the NRA’s ridiculous attempt at deflection with the “a gun in every school” policy. At best, this would only result in the gun-toting retiree being shot first, and at worst, result in a string of bad press every time a gun-toting retiree did something stupid. ---
**Author:** ![Nars\_Glinley](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/nars_glinley/32/8177_2.png) [@Nars\_Glinley](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nars_Glinley)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2013, 3:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-you-need-a-gun/646873/148 "2013-01-13T03:24:33Z")
> [@Absolute](#): > > I was very disappointed, though not surprised, at the NRA’s ridiculous attempt at deflection with the “a gun in every school” policy. At best, this would only result in the gun-toting retiree being shot first, and at worst, result in a string of bad press every time a gun-toting retiree did something stupid. Many many types of businesses have armed guards and yet the news doesn’t seem to be full of stories of them doing stupid things. And I’d rather have the gunman take on the armed guard first since there’s at least the possibility of the guard stopping the gunman. If nothing else, the commotion would alert the teachers and more kids would probably be saved. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2013, 4:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-you-need-a-gun/646873/149 "2013-01-13T04:47:00Z")
> [@Absolute](#): > > For a variety of reasons, I think gun registration is a bad idea, not to mention a political non-starter, because of the threat of confiscation. But I would fully support licensing for gun owners. And I agree that gun rights supporters should realize that their best way out of this situation is to propose a reasonable solution themselves, instead of just “turtling” and refusing any attempt at reform. > > I was very disappointed, though not surprised, at the NRA’s ridiculous attempt at deflection with the “a gun in every school” policy. At best, this would only result in the gun-toting retiree being shot first, and at worst, result in a string of bad press every time a gun-toting retiree did something stupid. Well you may be disappointed but the teachers in my state aren’t. They’re lining up to get their carry permit. It seems they understand that it doesn’t matter what size clip a nut job uses when nobody else has a gun. ---
**Author:** ![China\_Guy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/779978/32.png) [@China\_Guy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/China_Guy)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2013, 5:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-you-need-a-gun/646873/150 "2013-01-13T05:40:42Z")
> [@Absolute](#): > > I do not mind comprehensive background checks, elimination of the “gun show loophole”, universal licensing/permitting systems, etc. My personal favorite is a comprehensive insurance system, in which you may only legally own a gun if you obtain an insurance policy on it that will reimburse the victims if the gun is ever used illegally, as well as reimburse police costs, etc. Rather than a bunch of ignorant, grandstanding politicians determining which weapons and types of owner are dangerous and which are not, let the insurance industry figure it out, just as they presently figure out which drivers and which models of car are most likely to be involved in an accident. I would be on board with the above. And hell, put me in the “guns are a hoot to shoot” camp. Man, I had a blast shooting from a 22 at tin cans in the woods to blasting off banana clips of AK47’s on a target range… ---
**Author:** ![Odesio](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/odesio/32/20003_2.png) [@Odesio](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Odesio)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2013, 6:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-you-need-a-gun/646873/151 "2013-01-13T06:01:29Z")
> [@ed\_anger](#): > > Look at the Supreme Court cases I’ve cited, there’s already numerous limits on gun ownership. Maybe responsible gun owners need to realize that national registration is in their own best interest, instead of painting everyone that supports gun control as nut cases. Okay. Let’s say I support a national registration or licensing plan of some sort. As a gun owner, what do I get in return? No, “you get to keep your guns” isn’t a good answer. If I’m registered with the Feds does that mean I can move to Chicago and take my guns with me? Does it mean I can carry a concealed pistol in every state? What compromise are you willing to make? ---
**Author:** ![ed\_anger](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/bbce88/32.png) [@ed\_anger](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ed_anger)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2013, 6:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-you-need-a-gun/646873/152 "2013-01-13T06:19:27Z")
> [@Odesio](#): > > Okay. Let’s say I support a national registration or licensing plan of some sort. As a gun owner, what do I get in return? No, “you get to keep your guns” isn’t a good answer. If I’m registered with the Feds does that mean I can move to Chicago and take my guns with me? Does it mean I can carry a concealed pistol in every state? What compromise are you willing to make? You get the knowledge that with every gun carefully tracked you will live in a safer country. ---
**Author:** ![obbn](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/d6d6ee/32.png) [@obbn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/obbn)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2013, 6:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-you-need-a-gun/646873/153 "2013-01-13T06:31:41Z")
We have a 20g pump shotgun, .22 semi-auto rifle and a pink .22 automatic pistol good my wife. The shotgun is used for the occasional snake that wanders on the acreage. The .22s are used for target shooting. The only one I would use for hinge defense would be the shotgun. As the first post said, I hope to never have to use one in anger, but good to know I can if I have to. ---
**Author:** ![Lumpy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lumpy/32/446_2.png) [@Lumpy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lumpy)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2013, 8:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-you-need-a-gun/646873/154 "2013-01-13T08:48:29Z")
> [@ed\_anger](#): > > Just as the Second Amendment is constantly being re-interpreted in the courts. The Federalist papers offer an academic insight at best for us now. “Reinterpreted”?? The franchise to vote was changed by explicit amendments to the Constitution. Saying that the meaning and purpose of a written provision can be completely changed by reinterpretation smacks of _Animal Farm_ > [@ed\_anger](#): > > On appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, Presser argued, in part, that the charges violated his Second Amendment right to bear arms. The Court disagreed and upheld Presser’s conviction. The Court cited Cruikshank for the proposition that the Second Amendment means only that the federal government may not infringe on the right of states to form their own militias. This meant that the Illinois state law forbidding citizen militias was not unconstitutional. However, in its opinion, the Court in Presser delivered a reading of the Second Amendment that seemed to suggest an absolute right of persons to bear arms: “It is undoubtedly true that all citizens capable of bearing arms constitute the reserved military force or reserve militia of the United States,” and “states cannot … prohibit the people from keeping and bearing arms.” > > Despite this generous language, the Court refused to incorporate the Second Amendment into the Fourteenth Amendment. Under the first section of the Fourteenth Amendment, passed in 1868, states may not abridge the Privileges and Immunities of citizens of the United States. The privileges and immunities of citizens are listed in the Bill of Rights, of which the Second Amendment is part. Presser had argued that states may not, by virtue of the Fourteenth Amendment, abridge the right to bear arms. The Court refused to accept the argument that the right to bear arms is a personal right of the people. According to the Court, “The right to drill or parade with arms, without, and independent of, an act of congress or law of the state authorizing the same, is not an attribute of national citizenship.” [/quote] Not exactly: The court followed the State of Illinois’s lead in focusing with surgical narrowness on the technical legality of the specific clause of the Illinois law Presser was convicted of violating. The decision explicitly said that the court was not ruling on whether the rest of the Illinois law was unconstitutional or not. The SC was not denying the Second Amendment so much as it was reaffirming the precedent set in Cruikshank that the privileges and immunities clause of the Fourteenth Amendment did not incorporate the Bill of Rights to the states. The quote above about drilling or parading with arms not being an attribute of national citizenship speaks to that: the court ruled in several cases that the Fourteenth Amendment applied only to rights of national citizenship. Most of Presser’s constitutional claims- including that the Illinois law had transformed the state militia into an unconstitutional state army- were ignored by the court as irrelevant to his conviction. Most of the rest of your cites are cases simply reaffirming _ad nauseum_ that the Federal government wasn’t supposed to interfere with the states. Applying a similar stringency to voting rights or interstate commerce would yield outrageous results. No one’s denying that in the past restrictions on gun ownership have been accepted; but the closer you look at the precedents the more _ad hoc_ they look, like the government was looking for excuses to backpedal on the guarantee of the Second Amendment. > [@ed\_anger](#): > > You get the knowledge that with every gun carefully tracked you will live in a safer country. What if I judged myself safer with a gun then with a gun control law of dubious effectiveness? Do you think gun owners would champion guns if we were certain that we were keeping them in spite of an increased danger to ourselves? The whole premise that gun control leads to overall increased safety is something we haven’t been convinced of. ---
**Author:** ![Keeve](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/f07891/32.png) [@Keeve](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Keeve)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2013, 11:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-you-need-a-gun/646873/155 "2013-01-13T11:47:35Z")
Here’s the OP checking in. I’m sorry that my question got misunderstood as requiring gun people to justify themselves. But I don’t blame them. I sympathize with those who have been attacked so often that they see persecution in some poorly-chosen words. As I tried to say in the OP, I do have certain feelings about guns, but I don’t feel qualified to voice those feelings without some more fact-finding. This thread was part of my attempt to fill that void. And, despite the off-topic discussions, this thread **HAS** been of great help for me to understand part of this debate. For example, the “fire extinguisher” analogy is very apt. We all take certain precautions against danger. But this analogy also illustrates why I started the thread to begin with. We choose these protections based on our own cost/benefit analysis, which is by nature extremely subjective. For example, when one chooses which TYPE of fire extinguisher to buy, and how many to buy, he has to consider the types of fires that might break out, that types of damage that they might cause, and the extent of that damage, and weigh that against various downsides, such as the purchase price. Different people will weigh those factors and come up with different answers, even under identical conditions. This is because we all have different tolerance levels for the various kinds of danger, and differing feelings about the downsides. One person will be so nervous about fire that they’ll have a high-quality extinguisher in every single room, and another will have none at all because it clashes with the decor. But I see downsides to guns that don’t apply much to fire extinguishers. I’m confident that even the gun-lovers here will agree that a gun has more potential for dangerous misuse than a fire extinguisher has, although the fire extinguisher does also have some share of this danger too. And it is my opinion that this greater danger must be offset by having a greater upsides. Please don’t misinterpret my use of the word “must” there. I’m not saying that you must justify your gun ownership to me, but that in your own mind, you must see some great upsides to the gun when you decided to buy it. After all, you didn’t just buy the gun, but you also bought a lock for it, not to mention the time and money of learning how to use it properly. So I came here to learn about those upsides. And at least one thing has become very clear to me: Just as person who lives in a wooden shack under the dry Nevada sun has a much greater need for a fire extinguisher than one who lives in a brick condo in the Buffalo snow, so too, there are many reasons for gun ownership that simply never occurred to this able-bodied city-dweller. People who are less able to defend themselves are but one example. I never realized that guns are useful for the snakes (and other critters) on one’s land. And I often forget that in many neighborhoods - even in suburbia - the danger of having a bear come into my house is much greater than in my neighborhood. And all the more so for those living in truly rural areas, where the time it takes for the police to arrive can make them almost useless. There are also those who own guns simply because they enjoy them. I don’t share that passion, but your posts have helped me to understand it. In any case, some of the things that I enjoy would be difficult for you to relate to, and even before I began the thread I accepted the validity of your desire in this area. (In my OP, I phrased it in terms of hunting, but what I meant was all recreational gun use.) So again, I thank all those who responded to my question. ---
**Author:** ![ChickenLegs](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ecc23a/32.png) [@ChickenLegs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ChickenLegs)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2013, 2:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-you-need-a-gun/646873/156 "2013-01-13T14:26:24Z")
OP - I think you’ll find that serious shooters don’t see any “greater danger” from owning firearms. Like me for instance. Sure, I understand that if I point a gun at someone and pull the trigger, he will be injured or die. Sort of like how, if, while driving my truck, if I move the steering wheel two inches to the right I’ll plow through a crowd of shoppers. So I just don’t do those things. I respect guns and the damage they can do, like I respect cars, medicine, and power tools. I excerise necessary care with these items. It’s not really all that hard for a responsible adult to not accidently shoot yourself or someone else. I haven’t come close in 35 years. I don’t know anyone who’s accidently shot himself or another. I don’t know anyone who has had his own gun used against him by a criminal. But I do know people who have successfully defended themselves with firearms. I think you’ll find this common with gunowners: we consider the “greater danger” of gun ownership to be essentially zero, greatly outweighed by the benefits. Glad you got the info you were looking for. ---
**Author:** ![ed\_anger](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/bbce88/32.png) [@ed\_anger](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ed_anger)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2013, 2:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-you-need-a-gun/646873/157 "2013-01-13T14:42:14Z")
> [@Lumpy](#): > > No one’s denying that in the past restrictions on gun ownership have been accepted; but the closer you look at the precedents the more _ad hoc_ they look, like the government was looking for excuses to backpedal on the guarantee of the Second Amendment. My point is that the Constitution is a living document interpreted by the legislature and the Supreme Court, to suggest otherwise is disingenuous. Some courts will add further restrictions, other courts like the current one will loosen them. Whether you agree or not with the decisions probably has more to do with how in tune you are with the current zeitgeist. > [@Lumpy](#): > > What if I judged myself safer with a gun then with a gun control law of dubious effectiveness? Do you think gun owners would champion guns if we were certain that we were keeping them in spite of an increased danger to ourselves? The whole premise that gun control leads to overall increased safety is something we haven’t been convinced of. Why do you think national registration means you wouldn’t have a gun? Wouldn’t you be happier if there were fewer loose guns floating around illegally? ---
**Author:** ![artemis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/91b2a8/32.png) [@artemis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/artemis)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2013, 3:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-you-need-a-gun/646873/158 "2013-01-13T15:09:32Z")
Glad to hear you found the thread helpful, **Keeve**. It’s been my experience that most people do have rational reasons for making the choices they make (even if we don’t initially understand them). **Chicken Legs** , I think we do need to remember that not everyone who goes out and buys a gun for protection is a serious shooter. If they get a model that’s simple to use (like a revolver) and get at least a little bit of training, that’s not necessarily a problem. But if they don’t, tragedies sometimes do result because of their inept handling of their weapon. I see that as more of an education problem than a gun problem, though. And a gun which is stolen is more likely to be fatally misused than a stolen fire extinguisher. Again, this is a problem that better education can reduce, now that gun safes are so inexpensive and easy to open in a hurry. ---
**Author:** ![ChickenLegs](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ecc23a/32.png) [@ChickenLegs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ChickenLegs)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2013, 3:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-you-need-a-gun/646873/159 "2013-01-13T15:19:45Z")
> [@ed\_anger](#): > > Why do you think national registration means you wouldn’t have a gun? The concern is that registration will lead to confiscation. See New Zealand, Canada, Australia, the UK, Chicago, etc. ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2013, 3:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-you-need-a-gun/646873/160 "2013-01-13T15:24:37Z")
> [@ChickenLegs](#): > > The concern is that registration will lead to confiscation. Which is kind of a pointless fear, when you think about it. If the government was determined to confiscate all the guns, they don’t need registration; they just seize the membership records of the NRA. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-you-need-a-gun/646873.md?page=7) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-you-need-a-gun/646873.md?page=9)