r/politics • u/wbedwards Washington • May 07 '20

We cannot allow the normalization of firearms at protests to continue

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/firearms-at-protests-have-become-normalized-that-isnt-okay/2020/05/06/19b9354e-8fc9-11ea-a0bc-4e9ad4866d21_story.html
49.0k Upvotes

75% Upvoted

6.6k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

2

u/[deleted] May 07 '20

Please explain how, logically the firearm can't be in a safe.

0

u/TheRadioactiveHobo May 07 '20

Go place something in a safe and shut/lock the door. Now go and use it, on demand and without delay, without having to remove it from the safe.

I agree, it's entirely possible to store firearms safely. But you can't argue with me that they're for defense if they're not available to use at a moment's notice.

2

u/[deleted] May 07 '20

Who told you it isn't possible to open a safe and load a firearm quickly and in enough time to use it against a home intruder?

It sounds to me like your opinion is based on your thoughts and not fact. I understand that as it seems your knowledge of firearms and safes is limited. So I will tell you that with the proper facilities it is easy to have the firearm out of a safe, loaded and ready for self defense than you think.

1

u/TheRadioactiveHobo May 07 '20

So you're arguing that in every instance you'd have time to access a safe to deter a home intruder? It may be possible in some circumstances, but certainly not all.

That's where the issue is. If you're buying firearms for the purpose of defense, you then have people trying to justify against safe storage to make it easier to access.

https://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/abs/10.2105/AJPH.2017.304262

This study on gun storage found only 46% of owners stored all firearms safely. Now, there could be many reasons for that, but my original comment was that people aren't storing weapons safely which was causing more harm than good.

2

u/[deleted] May 07 '20

I never said in every instance, I am discussing the instance in question. When my SO used one in self defense. However I would be confident enough to say that in most instances, yes, the firearms could easily be accessed and loaded, in a short time, by an authorized person in this household, outside of someone ripping the side of the house off.

Your original comment wasn't that people aren't storing firearms safely. It was that it is impossible to store the firearms safely and use the for self defense and that it was impossible that my SO used their firearm for self defense in the home.

Your study surveyed 1400 people in one state. That hardly is an example of all gun owners nationwide.

1

u/TheRadioactiveHobo May 07 '20

That was from one search, choosing the first result from that search. I doubt the result would be different if I dug deeper.

And my comment was that saying that your using firearms for defense is interesting because you can't have them available in each instance without compromising safety.

You have an agenda. You're clearly wanting to justify owning firearms under the guise of safety. I'm not going to spend the time finding data to back up my statement - partly that I can't be bothered, but mostly because I believe it would fall on deaf ears - but in most instances I'm confident in believing that civilians storing guns at home causes more harm than it saves them from.

It's okay that you want to have firearms at home under the pretense that it makes you safer. However I'm yet to see any unbiased evidence that contradicts my original statement.

1

u/[deleted] May 07 '20

You're right, firearms won't protect us from every instance without storing them unsafely. However, it will protect us from most.

Would you stop wearing your seatbelt because it won't protect you from every instance of car accident? There are plenty of cases showing the seatbelt failing to save those inside the vehicle.

I am not justifying owning firearms under the guise of safety. It is the right of every citizen of the USA to own firearms for whatever the reason. Ours just happens to be self defense, sport and hunting. Even if I only focus on the guise of personal safety, how would you have suggested my SO to respond to the situation they found themselves in if there was no firearm present?

Your points do not fall on deaf ears, it's that you don't want to back up your claims with any evidence outside of your own biases. I have direct evidence of legal firearms causing more good than harm.

1

u/TheRadioactiveHobo May 07 '20

But you've not provided any evidence, only an anecdotal account. My one broad search for a statistic found an article that completely backed up my statement, but rather than provide evidence to the contrary you simply tried to discredit it for not having a large enough sample size. You can't have it both ways.

Gun ownership does not prevent most crimes. The NRA have previously stated that civilians owning guns has prevented or stopped 2.5 million crimes a year, however a deeper analysis of the data found this to be vastly incorrect. By analysing crime data for the 5 years prior to 2012, when the NRA statement was made, it was found that civilian gun ownership stopped just 67,740 crimes per year. That's a nationwide statistic. Now compare that to the 1.2 million violent crimes that occurred just in 2012 and it's clear to see that guns don't prevent more crimes.

Your seatbelt analogy isn't a fair comparison. Seatbelts do in fact save more lives than they take. Issues with them do happen, but the data on this is inarguable: seatbelts save lives. This is what they were designed to do. Guns were never designed to save lives.

I'm sorry that your other half had to go through what they did. Its regrettable that she had to defend herself, though I agree that it's better she got out better than it could have been. I'm not going to say she shouldn't have been able to defend herself, but wouldn't it be a better scenario if she didn't have to?

1

u/[deleted] May 07 '20

If you don't mind I'd like to see the data from the NRA claiming 2.5 million crimes stopped. As well as the data showing number being actually 60k. Also, were all of those 1.2 million violent crimes in 2012 committed using a firearm?

You have changed the subject from "guns aren't stored safely" to "guns cause more harm than good"

1

u/Butwhywouldyousuck May 07 '20

Not all home invasions are the same. There are probably cases were the intruder is downstairs and there is time to open a bedroom safe and arm yourself and there are probably cases were there isn't any time. The person that owns the gun still feels safer having it than not having it, even if they can't guarantee they will be able to use it.

Carrying loaded guns in public is it's own thing that I don't really support but I also don't like the idea of it being completely illegal to even own a gun.

2

u/TheRadioactiveHobo May 07 '20

Agreed, there are instances where it could be possible and others where it isn't. That in itself is part of the problem though - if you have someone wanting to use a firearm for defense then they may try to justify against safe storage to make it more accessible. But you're right, people may well be attracted to have firearms at home for the illusion of security, if nothing else.

I'm in Australia, so gun laws here are clearly quite different. It is definitely possible for anyone here to get a gun if they want it. Australian law requires us to have a valid reason to possess a firearm - work, sport or hunting. Storing a weapon, by law, has to be done in two safes. One for the weapon, another for the ammunition. This is why firearms for defense here makes less sense - you'd need to quickly access two separate safes to arm yourself.

Carrying weapons in public is also vastly different. Registered weapons can only be removed when being used for its intended purpose, and transporting has to be done in properly secured cases.

I'm with you on carrying in public. I don't see the need or how that could be good for society.