Quote:
Originally Posted by martinguerre
MSD...i don't think i accused you of anything. i read this thread considering your other posts on the board, and i think it's fair to say you advocate gun ownership and rights, a position which i respectfully disagree with. i'm confused about what the problem is here. would broader gun ownership be a reasonable response to this ruling, or not?
|
The reason I phrased it the way I did (specifically excluding the mention of any sort of weapon) was to see who would assume by my posting history that I meant what you inferred. I fully expected the response to be what it was, but as I typed it, I was not thinking that everyone should be armed.
I don't think that broader gun ownership would necessarily be a reasonable response. If a person who was being stalked by a violent person felt that their life was in danger, was willing to use learn how to use a gun, and was willing to use lethal force to defend against that person, then yes, it would be appropriate. I don't think that the majority of US citizens are capable of using lethal force in self-defense because of psychological barriers built up during a lifetime of living in a culture in which life is considered sacred and precious. I am willing to take a life to save my own or the life of another, and therefore I feel that owning a gun is a reasonable means of personal defense if the police are not alerted in time and the locks on my windows and doors do not keep an intruder out of my home (this will be extended outside of my home once I have a pistol permit.)
On a side note, I don't think that universal gun ownership is the solution to anything other than overpopulation in a country whose adults annually recieve close to 100,000 injuries requiring emergency room treatment from plumbing fixtures, shopping carts, and key rings.
For those who are not willing to kill in defense, alternative methods of defending themselves are a necessity. An alarm system that will alert you and law enforcement to a break-in and hopefulyl scare off an intruder is a way to protect yourself. A loud, scary-looking dog (probably not a vicious one if you have kids) who isn't afraid to beat the hell out of someone who comes in through a window at night can probably respond to a threat faster than an armed person who has to wake up, arm him/herself, identify an intruder, and respond if necessary. The big mean dog is also less likely to incur the wrath of an anti-gun jury. Bars over windows, if equipped with an emergency release system in case of a fire, plus deadbolted doors are probably the most reliable way to keep you safe. Awareness of your surroundings and knowing how to react if you are confronted by a violent individual are your best means of defense.
If you are willing to use lethal force to defend yourself from lethal force or serious harm, and you are responsible enough to safely own, maintain, and use a firearm, then I would suggest finding training in their use and buying a gun. If any of those don't apply, then stick with preventing situations in which a gun could help you. Guns aren't a magical solution to the crime problem, but in the right hands they can be a great asset.