Study confirms the idea that schools should have armed/trained security.

[Mormolyce]

I've tried to make that argument on another thread, but it devolved "CAN'T AIM FOR LEGS MUST SHOOT CENTER MASS OR MISS"

I think you point the gun at them and tell them to surrender, and if for some reason they're insane enough not to comply you pull the trigger and hope for the best.

How many people have died from full automatic gunfire in this country in the past 20 years? Ak-47 and sub-machine guns can all be made semi-automatic, and I would bet those outfit members have semi autos. Until recently all automatic weapons had to have been manufactured before 1993, so there was a fixed supply of them and they were really expensive.

But lets go with your crowded hallway example. I think 8 rounds of buckshot in a shotgun would be more deadly than 30 rounds of automatic ak-47 fire. Not to mention that the majority of automatic weapons are illegally owned and obtained now, the current heavy restrictions on automatic guns are no more effective at stopping people that want them than a drug law is at preventing people from getting high.

In that case why don't spree killers use shotguns? Seeing as they're supposedly more effective.

Statistics speak both for and against gun control.

For: Your gun is several hundred percent more likely harm a family member or a friend than an intruder. If you pull a gun on an intruder you are more likely to die than if you don't. Guns escalate far more problems than they solve.

Add to this the psychological trauma that comes with killing someone, even an intruder. You can sit on a forum and yap about how it is your right and bla bla bla but in reality your life will never be the same again.

Against: Canadians have slightly more fire arms per capita than Americans and their gun related violence is in line with most of western Europe and far below the US.

I don't know where that Canada stat comes from, I've heard it myself but I don't think it's correct.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Number_...ita_by_country

Canada has less than 1/3rd the number of guns per capita, America has almost as many guns as people and is a massive outlier. I wonder if that statistic was originally "registered gun owners" or something.

[Deleted]

Those three things aren't so unreasonable that you wouldn't have to take them into account as potential contingencies. It's not like we're talking about aliens beaming it up to the mother ship or something. In fact, one of the main ways that criminals get their weapons in the first place is by stealing them from people who thought they were being responsible.

Or are you just so bothered that somebody raised an objection to your argument that you can't even fathom a situation in which it might fail?

Find me some articles where people got their guns stolen while they had some in a "hidden" firearm safe. It's not surprising to have your gun stolen if you hide it between the rest of your daily shit you use.

[RicardoZ]

Find me some articles where people got their guns stolen while they had some in a "hidden" firearm safe. It's not surprising to have your gun stolen if you hide it between the rest of your daily shit you use.

Ah so now we're adding the earmark that the safe has to be hidden. Good luck: http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=...fe&FORM=HDRSC2

Apparently in this case it's just a couple of feet from Rich's bed. But I guess the criminals never check the bedroom. They'd never find the safe with the keypad that he can reach and open within 10 seconds of being startled from a deep sleep.

[Deleted]

Ah so now we're adding the earmark that the safe has to be hidden. Good luck: http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=...fe&FORM=HDRSC2

Apparently in this case it's just a couple of feet from Rich's bed. But I guess the criminals never check the bedroom. They'd never find the safe with the keypad that he can reach and open within 10 seconds of being startled from a deep sleep.

I am curious as to how you are going to open it.

[Felya]

So when someone drinks and crashes their car they can sue the alcohol company, the bar, the car company, all the manufacturers that make the parts in the car and all the while have zero personal responsibility.

Don't get me wrong, the perpetrator still suffers the full extent of the law. With alcohol, we already punish people and bars who sell alcohol or even give alcohol, to those they are not supposed to. Be it too young or too drunk. Same thing with drugs, a person who sells the drug causing an overdose, is persecuted for manslaughter. Insurance companies for cars already determine how much you should pay, based on your drinking record.

[Filathorn]

Ah so now we're adding the earmark that the safe has to be hidden. Good luck: http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=...fe&FORM=HDRSC2

Apparently in this case it's just a couple of feet from Rich's bed. But I guess the criminals never check the bedroom. They'd never find the safe with the keypad that he can reach and open within 10 seconds of being startled from a deep sleep.

Yes, he might have exaggerated with his damn number of 10 seconds, and neither of us will ever know. But I ask for the third time, will he ever need it within 10 seconds? If someone enters someone elses home, will they be standing on the owners bed within even 1-2 minutes with a weapon aimed at the owner? I'd rather think that in that case, they are trained professionals and will kill/harm him no matter if he's even awake and holding the gun before they begin.
So could we please stop focusing on the extremly irrelevant potential exaggeration and focus on the point at hand instead? This was mentioned 10 pages ago, that's like 200 years in internet time!

[Mormolyce]

2nd amendment of the US constitution. Some people don't trust the police or government to protect them and to protect their country in the event that their government becomes tyrannical.

In every other Western country we call those people "nutcases".

According to the Wikipedia page, the US has had 77 deaths as a result of a school shooting since 2010. This includes the shooter themselves and is inflated by the 28 of Sandy Hook. Most of them end in none or shooters only death and a few injuries. This is a very miniscule problem that effects a VERY VERY miniscule amount of the population of the US. Intending to ban guns for such a small problem is ridiculous.

It's unusually high in the US but as a proportion of the population yes, it's small. It's just particularly devastating when it does happen.

Most gun deaths are caused by cheap handguns IIRC.

Those three things aren't so unreasonable that you wouldn't have to take them into account as potential contingencies. It's not like we're talking about aliens beaming it up to the mother ship or something. In fact, one of the main ways that criminals get their weapons in the first place is by stealing them from people who thought they were being responsible.

Or are you just so bothered that somebody raised an objection to your argument that you can't even fathom a situation in which it might fail?

That's actually not true, most illegal guns are via straw purchases, dodgy gun shop owners and the like. Theft accounts for like 15% of all illegal guns.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontl...ocon/guns.html

But if you mean that the vast majority of illegal guns ultimately derive from legal sources, that is true.

[RicardoZ]

I am curious as to how you are going to open it.

Yes, because these are special criminals who don't know how to open locks or can't lug it out to their car and figure it out later. Of course, at least with you anyway, there's no chance they could just make you do it. Maybe that might fly on some other mere mortals though.

[Deleted]

Yes, he might have exaggerated with his damn number of 10 seconds, and neither of us will ever know. But I ask for the third time, will he ever need it within 10 seconds? If someone enters someone elses home, will they be standing on the owners bed within even 1-2 minutes with a weapon aimed at the owner? I'd rather think that in that case, they are trained professionals and will kill/harm him no matter if he's even awake and holding the gun before they begin.
So could we please stop focusing on the extremly irrelevant potential exaggeration and focus on the point at hand instead? This was mentioned 10 pages ago, that's like 200 years in internet time!

10 seconds was not exaggerated and you are right that I will never need to get it at that speed, I was just saying that I can have it in that time, the fact is that it is not that much slower than keeping it unlocked by your bed and it much more secure from theft when you are not around. There is no logical reason not to use a gunsafe if you keep firearms in the house.

[Filathorn]

Yes, because these are special criminals who don't know how to open locks or can't lug it out to their car and figure it out later. Of course, at least with you anyway, there's no chance they could just make you do it. Maybe that might fly on some other mere mortals though.

If gun safes were implemented, they'd probably do something like in Norway, where a gun safe is bolted to a concrete floor or some other solid feature. Make it weigh like 80kg, bolt it to concrete and it's kinda hard to just "lug it out to your car and figure it out later".

10 seconds was not exaggerated and you are right that I will never need to get it at that speed, I was just saying that I can have it in that time, the fact is that it is not that much slower than keeping it unlocked by your bed and it much more secure from theft when you are not around. There is no logical reason not to use a gunsafe if you keep firearms in the house.

I honestly don't care about the number, and wouldn't be sad if the number was never mentioned again. It doesn't matter, because it's completely irrelevant. You'll never need to test that number out in practice, which is the important part. My point, in case anyone still wonders, is that I'd like this thread to stop focusing on the irrelevant details mentioned ages ago and rather focus on what is actually being discussed right now.

[Deleted]

Yes, because these are special criminals who don't know how to open locks or can't lug it out to their car and figure it out later. Of course, at least with you anyway, there's no chance they could just make you do it. Maybe that might fly on some other mere mortals though.

Ah, I understand your mistake now, you are confusing a gun safe with a gun cabinet.

Good luck lugging a loaded safe down the stairs.

- - - Updated - - -

If gun safes were implemented, they'd probably do something like in Norway, where a gun safe is bolted to a concrete floor or some other solid feature. Make it weigh like 80kg, bolt it to concrete and it's kinda hard to just "lug it out to your car and figure it out later".

Exactly, Superman is the only guy carrying out a proper gun safe.

[RicardoZ]

That's actually not true, most illegal guns are via straw purchases, dodgy gun shop owners and the like. Theft accounts for like 15% of all illegal guns.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontl...ocon/guns.html

But if you mean that the vast majority of illegal guns ultimately derive from legal sources, that is true.

Exactly, so then what's the point of having safes in the first place?

- - - Updated - - -

If gun safes were implemented, they'd probably do something like in Norway, where a gun safe is bolted to a concrete floor or some other solid feature. Make it weigh like 80kg, bolt it to concrete and it's kinda hard to just "lug it out to your car and figure it out later".

Good luck enforcing that in America.

[Filathorn]

Exactly, so then what's the point of having safes in the first place?

- - - Updated - - -



Good luck enforcing that in America.

I don't see how it'd be a problem. It's another 500$ investment required to keep firearms. It's not as if it's cheap as it is, don't get one til you can afford to keep one properly.

[RicardoZ]

Ah, I understand your mistake now, you are confusing a gun safe with a gun cabinet.

Even if you're talking about a little safe like they have on cruise ships for your valuables, then I still don't see the point. It would be all the easier for somebody to just nick it from your gaff.

- - - Updated - - -

I don't see how it'd be a problem. It's another 500$ investment required to keep firearms. It's not as if it's cheap as it is, don't get one til you can afford to keep one properly.

Yes, because only the rich deserve the luxury of their Constitutional rights.

[Kapadons]

10 seconds was not exaggerated and you are right that I will never need to get it at that speed, I was just saying that I can have it in that time, the fact is that it is not that much slower than keeping it unlocked by your bed and it much more secure from theft when you are not around. There is no logical reason not to use a gunsafe if you keep firearms in the house.

This. We don't ask that you give up your guns. Just be responsible when using and storing them.


Also, get a an alarm system for the house. Ours was free to install and the 24/7 protection service costs us around $20 per month. Significantly deters theft and increases awareness time to you of potential intruders. Ours also lets us close the garage remotely, detects carbon monoxide etc. If we went for the upgraded package we could turn off lights remotely and such.

[Filathorn]

Even if you're talking about a little safe like they have on cruise ships for your valuables, then I still don't see the point. It would be all the easier for somebody to just nick it from your gaff.

- - - Updated - - -



Yes, because only the rich deserve the luxury of their Constitutional rights.

No, only people willing to invest in their own and others security deserve the luxury of keeping a lethal stupidity in their house.

[Deleted]

Even if you're talking about a little safe like they have on cruise ships for your valuables, then I still don't see the point. It would be all the easier for somebody to just nick it from your gaff.

- - - Updated - - -



Yes, because only the rich deserve the luxury of their Constitutional rights.

Who the fuck does not bolt their safe down? A safe not bolted down is just a metal box.

[Rukentuts]

Also, get a an alarm system for the house. Ours was free to install and the 24/7 protection service costs us around $20 per month. Significantly deters theft and increases awareness time to you of potential intruders. Ours also lets us close the garage remotely, detects carbon monoxide etc. If we went for the upgraded package we could turn off lights remotely and such.

Alarms also come free of the risk of hurting someone in your family, and are more effective at scary away burglars than someone trudging through a dark house half asleep in their boxers with a loaded firearm.

They also work to protect your shit when you have to work.

[Eroginous]

I'm actually supportive of the whole gun safe thing. Making it mandatory would be a little far, but the government could subsidize them by offering a coupon or a rebate to anyone who purchases a gun, making the decision to get a safe pretty easy.

[Deleted]

I'm actually supportive of the whole gun safe thing. Making it mandatory would be a little far, but the government could subsidize them by offering a coupon or a rebate to anyone who purchases a gun, making the decision to get a safe pretty easy.

A good idea and no doubt cheaper than armed guards in every school, you can also keep more than just firearms in the safe meaning burglars get less loot.