7 ms·

You can't swim in a gun. Guns have no useful purpose. The fact that pools are more dangerous doesn't justify owning a gun, so there is no "cognitive dissonance"

You can't swim in a gun. Guns have no useful purpose. The fact that pools are more dangerous doesn't justify owning a gun, so there is no "cognitive dissonance" here...We can eliminate unnecessary risk (like guns). And you can't kill your potential killer or rapist, unless you invite him in the pool and hope he drowns, with pools being dangerous and all. I hope you never have to wish you had a gun near you. Personally I have no pool, but... Pools, unless they are Olympic size ones used to do laps for most people are useless, "just [extremely dangerous] fun." Fun, like shooting a gun which also can save your life, or the life or your neighbor. Mighty useful if you ask me and much safer than pools.

sheri 14y ago
Isn't bringing up potential killers or rapists just fear-mongering in order to justify gun ownership? Is there any data supporting that gun ownership results in fewer rapes or deaths? I find defense being thrown about as a very valid reason for owning a gun, but in a country like the US, is there concrete evidence that gun ownership caused fewer home break-ins? I don't hope to be in a situation where I need a gun near me, but I also don't hope for someone confronting me having a gun in his/her hand.
- OGinparadise 14y ago
  When it happens to you, the % jumps to 100%/. end.of.story. Suppose you make illegal all guns right now. Do you think it will be hard for a crook to his hands on a now illegal weapon? All I need to know: A gun will help me defend myself and family. A gun can be kept safe by adhering to certain known gun safety principles. Accidents happen but then a brick from a building's facade can smack you in the head in the morning. Cops are great, if you have one right there, right when you need him/her. So, I think to myself, why not have one? Leaving all fun aside, it's a piece of mind.
  - jackowayed 14y ago
    This is a common argument, and while it has some merit, it also reeks of illusion of control bias. Guns make people feel safer because they feel more in control of their safety. In reality, if someone is armed and has broken into my house, I want it to be absolutely clear to them that I am unarmed. I want them to know that they have no need to attack me, and that they should just take some of my stuff and get out (by far the most likely reason they're there), leaving me unharmed. The alternative possibilities sound much worse to me. This is true in almost every situation where people talk about guns being useful against crime. I think I am more likely to harm myself, to incite the other party to harm me, to harm a bystander (maybe someone in my household), or to harm someone that I perceive as a much more serious and dangerous criminal than they actually are, than I am to successfully be a "good guy with a gun who stops a bad guy with a gun".
    - anonymoushn 14y ago
      My impression, from speaking to gun owners, is that in most situations in which a gun is useful you do not actually end up firing it. Your mention of "almost every situation" brought to mind the Portland mall shooting, where the shooter stopped and killed himself after seeing another man taking aim at him[1]. Other much more publicized mass shootings may have gone significantly better if the government did not publicly designate large, completely unsecured areas in which only criminals are allowed to have firearms. [1]: http://www.kgw.com/news/Clackamas-man-armed-confronts-mall-shooter-183593571.html http://www.kgw.com/news/Clackamas-man-armed-confronts-mall-s...
  - virtualritz 14y ago
    This is the same fallacy that makes people who are afraid of flying say they feel safer driving (in) a car because they are 'in control'. It doesn't change the fact that in reality they are orders of magnitude more likely to get hurt or even die while being in a car than while being on an airplane. Not having a gun when someone armed threatens me will most likely increase my chances of survival/getting out of the conflict unharmed. Maybe with a gun I have a better chance of retaliation but I'm also more likely to die. The bottom line is: any weapon you /add/ to a conflict rises the stakes for /all/ parties involved. And vice versa.
    - monochromatic 14y ago
      > Not having a gun when someone armed threatens me will most likely increase my chances of survival/getting out of the conflict unharmed. Maybe with a gun I have a better chance of retaliation but I'm also more likely to die. And this is known as the fallacy of making things up and asserting that they are most likely true.
      - virtualritz 14y ago
        The 1st sentence can be easily backed up by statistics about gun crimes. The 2n part is purely speculative on my behalf but I'd dare say that's straightforward enough to conceive by noticing the word 'maybe', prominently placed at the beginning. ;)
        monochromatic 14y ago
        I'd be curious to see your statistics. If they control for situations where two criminals have guns and are shooting at each other (i.e., they're actually about defensive gun use by the good guys) I'll be pretty shocked.
        qu4z-2 14y ago
        I agree with you, but I just wanted to point out that it's fairly easy to read the Maybe as applying only to the first clause: > (Maybe with a gun I have a better chance of retaliation) but (I'm also more likely to die).
  - clicks 14y ago
    Just a general observation: your forceful, emotional phrasing/expressions only serve to discredit your position. 'end of story', 'All I need to know' are expressions that begin to end a discussion, they certainly don't make way for a healthy and productive exchange of ideas. (I don't mean to knock on you here, just thought I would point it out so you can think about this on your own. Cheers).
    - OGinparadise 14y ago
      'end of story', 'All I need to know' are expressions that begin to end a discussion, they certainly don't make way for a healthy and productive exchange of ideas. No exchange of ideas on this topic, I've considered them all and I have decided to be armed while in my home. Whether I use it, how and when I use are a different story, but at least I may have that option. Others may choose not to have a gun, it's their choice.
      - quesera 14y ago
        > No exchange of ideas on this topic So you are commenting just to offer your hard-won life wisdom to the rest of us? Thank you?
  - krschultz 14y ago
    Have you ever actually had an intruder in your home? I have had it happen twice. Once right after we moved into a brand new house (3-4 days after move in). Some local kids had figured out that the front door could be opened because the lock was installed wrong and were using the house to party while it was empty. They hadn't realized that people moved in. Our golden retriever scared the crap out of them and they never made it 5 feet into the house - even though the dog was on the second floor. Now there is a solid defense system. I'll note that at the time, we had 5 guns locked up in the closest safely stored. The dog was down the stairs and dealing with the situation before I was even conscious enough to think. The whole thing would have been over before the guns were out if it was worse than some dumb kids. Second time it happened was only 18 months ago. This was a little different because I was on a boat at night, but again I was certain that two big adult men were robbing boats in the vincity. I called the cops. The cops sent the coast guard. We hunkered down and hid (probably not the right call, should have turned on the lights). I wish I had a gun in that moment, they were 15 feet from our stern and definitely coming onboard. There is no where to go on a boat like that. I had a mag light and a radio, and when the guys started heading for my boat I hit them with the light. Meanwhile the cops went from sneaking over at 5mph to screaming over at 45mph. That defused the situation, but if there weren't cops and/or I had a gun I would have definitely shot a round or two into the water to scare them off. Possibly more. When the cops actually picked them up, it turned out they were 2 14 year olds sneaking onto boats at night stealing booze. The cops made them apologize for scaring the crap out of us, so I met them. They couldn't have been 115 pounds each. If I hadn't saw them, I honestly could have sworn under oath they were 300 pound linebackers based on their silhouettes on other boats. Thank god I didn't have a gun that day, I'm almost certain I would have shot one of them. This is how kids get shot while holding skittles and even trained police officers confuse wallets for guns. Your mind plays tricks on you. My lessons learned: keep the lights on. Own a dog. If there are intruders, make them totally aware you are there because most of the time, they want nothing to do with people. I'm not against owning guns, but if you store them safely they won't be as much help as you think.
    - largesse 14y ago
      Nice story, but it's a bit like management fad books. Experiences of a sample size of one extrapolated to the status of general truth.
- runeks 14y ago
  > Is there any data supporting that gun ownership results in fewer rapes or deaths? The claim was that "guns have no useful purpose". To refute this assertion, we don't need to prove that gun ownership results in fewer rapes or deaths (on, for example, a nation-wide basis), only that when someone attempts to harm you, a gun can be useful in defending yourself. I mean, when you buy a bag of chips you don't ask yourself whether there is proof that chips actually results in a more satisfied society. You buy them because you feel it benefits you, and that's an entirely acceptable justification, in my opinion.
- Symmetry 14y ago
  Well, people dissuading a killer/murderer by brandishing a gun and people being otherwise killed by guns are both very rare events, so I'd say that if one is "just fear-mongering" so is the other. In practice it's very hard to figure out whether gun ownership causes a reduction in crime, because it's well known that crime causes gun ownership and you have to have to be lucky in finding a good natural experiment to get around that. I'm not aware of any convincing research on the subject one way or the other, I'm afraid. And before bringing up the number of gun deaths that would be considered justified versus suicides or murders, we do have pretty good evidence that in those cases where a gun prevents a crime it's mostly by the threat of its use, not its use itself.
stuaxo 14y ago
Does it always have to come down to killing ?
- OGinparadise 14y ago
  Does it always have to come down to killing ? It depends on what the intruder /attacker has in mind.
- flyinRyan 14y ago
  A gun has no other purpose, so yes.
  - largesse 14y ago
    You don't get to decide the purpose of all guns. Mine are for target shooting.
    - Zirro 14y ago
      Perhaps a non-lethal gun could be used for that purpose? (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airsoft_gun https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airsoft_gun)
      - largesse 14y ago
        It could be but I have a swimming pool, kitchen knives, and stairs also so it isn't a high priority. Oh, and my bath mat. I'm very worried about my bath mat.
    - flyinRyan 14y ago
      And what is the point of target practice? Target practice is to guns as boxing practice is to boxing. Even if you never actually fight.
      - jlgreco 14y ago
        How about fun? I used to shoot at targets with a bb gun as a kid. I sure as hell wasn't practicing to be a bb gun killer....
shin_lao 14y ago
You've obviously never been in a life threatening situation. It's very unlikely owning a weapon (gun, knife, spray, whatever) will be of any use. "Killers" or "Rapists" (whatever that means) take you by surprise and pulling a gun is not an option (even if you had the mental discipline and self control to do it). If you care about self defense, learn Krav Maga or another martial art that will condition you to actually increase your odds of survival... After years of rigorous training. Just for the record, if you live in the 1st world, the probability of dying because of murder is so low that mentioning is a waste of time. Turn off the TV. ;)
- duck 14y ago
  I'm sure Krav Maga would work well against a 800 pound brown bear.
- largesse 14y ago
  I have several friends who've defended themselves with guns during a home invasion. It does happen.
  - seestheday 14y ago
    Where the heck do you live? Are you not able to move for some reason? Stories like this seem so foreign to me.
    - sukuriant 14y ago
      The woods, or some of the shadier areas of the city, places where police aren't immediately accessible I would rather like to live in the woods if I had the chance. I find it a wonderful location, quiet, peaceful. Guns still have a place in this world, it just might not be a place that you, personally, see.
      - seestheday 14y ago
        Oh, I have no problem with guns. I own a rifle and enjoy target shooting. I recently got my hunting license and plan to start hunting this summer. I have also lived in very rural areas and some very shady parts of town. I'm in Canada though, so handguns just aren't as prevalent up here (although I do have friends with restricted licenses and handguns they can shoot at the range). I had an "interesting" youth. Growing up in rural area means I'm no stranger to seeing people at parties getting beer bottles smashed over their heads during fights or hit with ash trays at bars. Looking back at that, there was not a single situation where a person having a handgun would have made things better. It almost definitely would have made things much worse. People would have died as opposed to just need stitches at the hospital. Even in this rural area, it wasn't that difficult to talk my way out of bad situations. I was blasted out of the blue once, but it was a case of mistaken identity. I think that if home invasions were a real threat to my family then I would really start to think about moving. There are just so many nicer places to live.
rimantas 14y ago
> And you can't kill your potential killer or rapist So, how many of those were killed/wounded in defense last year in US compared to all gun deaths?
- Dove 14y ago
  Wikipedia has some links to studies collecting statistics on that. Though it's important to note that you're asking the wrong question; if I recall correctly, in something like 90% of defensive gun uses, no shots need to be fired. The threat alone is enough for the criminal to surrender or retreat. What you want to measure is how often a gun use prevents a crime. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defensive_gun_use http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defensive_gun_use Anyway, it seems a middle of the road number from the studies is . . . about a million defensive gun uses per year? Lower bound is 55,000 - 80,000. Wikipedia also gives a homicide with guns rate: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_States http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_Stat..., looks like about 8,000 in 2012. It should be borne in mind that a lot of those homicides are from things like gang violence, and would be conducted with illegal guns or other weapons even if gun laws were super-tight. So I'd say the numbers show a clear win for guns.
jlgreco 14y ago
A 25 metre long pool is easily used for lap swimming of any intensity and even smaller pools remain useful for people who only require low intensity exercise.

sheri 14y ago

Isn't bringing up potential killers or rapists just fear-mongering in order to justify gun ownership? Is there any data supporting that gun ownership results in fewer rapes or deaths? I find defense being thrown about as a very valid reason for owning a gun, but in a country like the US, is there concrete evidence that gun ownership caused fewer home break-ins? I don't hope to be in a situation where I need a gun near me, but I also don't hope for someone confronting me having a gun in his/her hand.

OGinparadise 14y ago
When it happens to you, the % jumps to 100%/. end.of.story. Suppose you make illegal all guns right now. Do you think it will be hard for a crook to his hands on a now illegal weapon? All I need to know: A gun will help me defend myself and family. A gun can be kept safe by adhering to certain known gun safety principles. Accidents happen but then a brick from a building's facade can smack you in the head in the morning. Cops are great, if you have one right there, right when you need him/her. So, I think to myself, why not have one? Leaving all fun aside, it's a piece of mind.
- jackowayed 14y ago
  This is a common argument, and while it has some merit, it also reeks of illusion of control bias. Guns make people feel safer because they feel more in control of their safety. In reality, if someone is armed and has broken into my house, I want it to be absolutely clear to them that I am unarmed. I want them to know that they have no need to attack me, and that they should just take some of my stuff and get out (by far the most likely reason they're there), leaving me unharmed. The alternative possibilities sound much worse to me. This is true in almost every situation where people talk about guns being useful against crime. I think I am more likely to harm myself, to incite the other party to harm me, to harm a bystander (maybe someone in my household), or to harm someone that I perceive as a much more serious and dangerous criminal than they actually are, than I am to successfully be a "good guy with a gun who stops a bad guy with a gun".
  - anonymoushn 14y ago
    My impression, from speaking to gun owners, is that in most situations in which a gun is useful you do not actually end up firing it. Your mention of "almost every situation" brought to mind the Portland mall shooting, where the shooter stopped and killed himself after seeing another man taking aim at him[1]. Other much more publicized mass shootings may have gone significantly better if the government did not publicly designate large, completely unsecured areas in which only criminals are allowed to have firearms. [1]: http://www.kgw.com/news/Clackamas-man-armed-confronts-mall-shooter-183593571.html http://www.kgw.com/news/Clackamas-man-armed-confronts-mall-s...
- virtualritz 14y ago
  This is the same fallacy that makes people who are afraid of flying say they feel safer driving (in) a car because they are 'in control'. It doesn't change the fact that in reality they are orders of magnitude more likely to get hurt or even die while being in a car than while being on an airplane. Not having a gun when someone armed threatens me will most likely increase my chances of survival/getting out of the conflict unharmed. Maybe with a gun I have a better chance of retaliation but I'm also more likely to die. The bottom line is: any weapon you /add/ to a conflict rises the stakes for /all/ parties involved. And vice versa.
  - monochromatic 14y ago
    > Not having a gun when someone armed threatens me will most likely increase my chances of survival/getting out of the conflict unharmed. Maybe with a gun I have a better chance of retaliation but I'm also more likely to die. And this is known as the fallacy of making things up and asserting that they are most likely true.
    - virtualritz 14y ago
      The 1st sentence can be easily backed up by statistics about gun crimes. The 2n part is purely speculative on my behalf but I'd dare say that's straightforward enough to conceive by noticing the word 'maybe', prominently placed at the beginning. ;)
      - monochromatic 14y ago
        I'd be curious to see your statistics. If they control for situations where two criminals have guns and are shooting at each other (i.e., they're actually about defensive gun use by the good guys) I'll be pretty shocked.
      - qu4z-2 14y ago
        I agree with you, but I just wanted to point out that it's fairly easy to read the Maybe as applying only to the first clause: > (Maybe with a gun I have a better chance of retaliation) but (I'm also more likely to die).
- clicks 14y ago
  Just a general observation: your forceful, emotional phrasing/expressions only serve to discredit your position. 'end of story', 'All I need to know' are expressions that begin to end a discussion, they certainly don't make way for a healthy and productive exchange of ideas. (I don't mean to knock on you here, just thought I would point it out so you can think about this on your own. Cheers).
  - OGinparadise 14y ago
    'end of story', 'All I need to know' are expressions that begin to end a discussion, they certainly don't make way for a healthy and productive exchange of ideas. No exchange of ideas on this topic, I've considered them all and I have decided to be armed while in my home. Whether I use it, how and when I use are a different story, but at least I may have that option. Others may choose not to have a gun, it's their choice.
    - quesera 14y ago
      > No exchange of ideas on this topic So you are commenting just to offer your hard-won life wisdom to the rest of us? Thank you?
- krschultz 14y ago
  Have you ever actually had an intruder in your home? I have had it happen twice. Once right after we moved into a brand new house (3-4 days after move in). Some local kids had figured out that the front door could be opened because the lock was installed wrong and were using the house to party while it was empty. They hadn't realized that people moved in. Our golden retriever scared the crap out of them and they never made it 5 feet into the house - even though the dog was on the second floor. Now there is a solid defense system. I'll note that at the time, we had 5 guns locked up in the closest safely stored. The dog was down the stairs and dealing with the situation before I was even conscious enough to think. The whole thing would have been over before the guns were out if it was worse than some dumb kids. Second time it happened was only 18 months ago. This was a little different because I was on a boat at night, but again I was certain that two big adult men were robbing boats in the vincity. I called the cops. The cops sent the coast guard. We hunkered down and hid (probably not the right call, should have turned on the lights). I wish I had a gun in that moment, they were 15 feet from our stern and definitely coming onboard. There is no where to go on a boat like that. I had a mag light and a radio, and when the guys started heading for my boat I hit them with the light. Meanwhile the cops went from sneaking over at 5mph to screaming over at 45mph. That defused the situation, but if there weren't cops and/or I had a gun I would have definitely shot a round or two into the water to scare them off. Possibly more. When the cops actually picked them up, it turned out they were 2 14 year olds sneaking onto boats at night stealing booze. The cops made them apologize for scaring the crap out of us, so I met them. They couldn't have been 115 pounds each. If I hadn't saw them, I honestly could have sworn under oath they were 300 pound linebackers based on their silhouettes on other boats. Thank god I didn't have a gun that day, I'm almost certain I would have shot one of them. This is how kids get shot while holding skittles and even trained police officers confuse wallets for guns. Your mind plays tricks on you. My lessons learned: keep the lights on. Own a dog. If there are intruders, make them totally aware you are there because most of the time, they want nothing to do with people. I'm not against owning guns, but if you store them safely they won't be as much help as you think.
  - largesse 14y ago
    Nice story, but it's a bit like management fad books. Experiences of a sample size of one extrapolated to the status of general truth.
runeks 14y ago
> Is there any data supporting that gun ownership results in fewer rapes or deaths? The claim was that "guns have no useful purpose". To refute this assertion, we don't need to prove that gun ownership results in fewer rapes or deaths (on, for example, a nation-wide basis), only that when someone attempts to harm you, a gun can be useful in defending yourself. I mean, when you buy a bag of chips you don't ask yourself whether there is proof that chips actually results in a more satisfied society. You buy them because you feel it benefits you, and that's an entirely acceptable justification, in my opinion.
Symmetry 14y ago
Well, people dissuading a killer/murderer by brandishing a gun and people being otherwise killed by guns are both very rare events, so I'd say that if one is "just fear-mongering" so is the other. In practice it's very hard to figure out whether gun ownership causes a reduction in crime, because it's well known that crime causes gun ownership and you have to have to be lucky in finding a good natural experiment to get around that. I'm not aware of any convincing research on the subject one way or the other, I'm afraid. And before bringing up the number of gun deaths that would be considered justified versus suicides or murders, we do have pretty good evidence that in those cases where a gun prevents a crime it's mostly by the threat of its use, not its use itself.

stuaxo 14y ago

Does it always have to come down to killing ?

OGinparadise 14y ago
Does it always have to come down to killing ? It depends on what the intruder /attacker has in mind.
flyinRyan 14y ago
A gun has no other purpose, so yes.
- largesse 14y ago
  You don't get to decide the purpose of all guns. Mine are for target shooting.
  - Zirro 14y ago
    Perhaps a non-lethal gun could be used for that purpose? (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airsoft_gun https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airsoft_gun)
    - largesse 14y ago
      It could be but I have a swimming pool, kitchen knives, and stairs also so it isn't a high priority. Oh, and my bath mat. I'm very worried about my bath mat.
  - flyinRyan 14y ago
    And what is the point of target practice? Target practice is to guns as boxing practice is to boxing. Even if you never actually fight.
    - jlgreco 14y ago
      How about fun? I used to shoot at targets with a bb gun as a kid. I sure as hell wasn't practicing to be a bb gun killer....

shin_lao 14y ago

You've obviously never been in a life threatening situation. It's very unlikely owning a weapon (gun, knife, spray, whatever) will be of any use. "Killers" or "Rapists" (whatever that means) take you by surprise and pulling a gun is not an option (even if you had the mental discipline and self control to do it). If you care about self defense, learn Krav Maga or another martial art that will condition you to actually increase your odds of survival... After years of rigorous training. Just for the record, if you live in the 1st world, the probability of dying because of murder is so low that mentioning is a waste of time. Turn off the TV. ;)

duck 14y ago
I'm sure Krav Maga would work well against a 800 pound brown bear.
largesse 14y ago
I have several friends who've defended themselves with guns during a home invasion. It does happen.
- seestheday 14y ago
  Where the heck do you live? Are you not able to move for some reason? Stories like this seem so foreign to me.
  - sukuriant 14y ago
    The woods, or some of the shadier areas of the city, places where police aren't immediately accessible I would rather like to live in the woods if I had the chance. I find it a wonderful location, quiet, peaceful. Guns still have a place in this world, it just might not be a place that you, personally, see.
    - seestheday 14y ago
      Oh, I have no problem with guns. I own a rifle and enjoy target shooting. I recently got my hunting license and plan to start hunting this summer. I have also lived in very rural areas and some very shady parts of town. I'm in Canada though, so handguns just aren't as prevalent up here (although I do have friends with restricted licenses and handguns they can shoot at the range). I had an "interesting" youth. Growing up in rural area means I'm no stranger to seeing people at parties getting beer bottles smashed over their heads during fights or hit with ash trays at bars. Looking back at that, there was not a single situation where a person having a handgun would have made things better. It almost definitely would have made things much worse. People would have died as opposed to just need stitches at the hospital. Even in this rural area, it wasn't that difficult to talk my way out of bad situations. I was blasted out of the blue once, but it was a case of mistaken identity. I think that if home invasions were a real threat to my family then I would really start to think about moving. There are just so many nicer places to live.

rimantas 14y ago

> And you can't kill your potential killer or rapist So, how many of those were killed/wounded in defense last year in US compared to all gun deaths?

Dove 14y ago
Wikipedia has some links to studies collecting statistics on that. Though it's important to note that you're asking the wrong question; if I recall correctly, in something like 90% of defensive gun uses, no shots need to be fired. The threat alone is enough for the criminal to surrender or retreat. What you want to measure is how often a gun use prevents a crime. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defensive_gun_use http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defensive_gun_use Anyway, it seems a middle of the road number from the studies is . . . about a million defensive gun uses per year? Lower bound is 55,000 - 80,000. Wikipedia also gives a homicide with guns rate: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_States http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_Stat..., looks like about 8,000 in 2012. It should be borne in mind that a lot of those homicides are from things like gang violence, and would be conducted with illegal guns or other weapons even if gun laws were super-tight. So I'd say the numbers show a clear win for guns.

jlgreco 14y ago

A 25 metre long pool is easily used for lap swimming of any intensity and even smaller pools remain useful for people who only require low intensity exercise.