Yes, the fantasy of the home invasion, pushed as justification for guns in homes. See my recent blog post at New Trajectory about some statistics to reveal how truly rare home invasions are, and some safer alternatives for home protection: http://newtrajectory.blogspot.com/2011/01/alternatives-to-gun-ownership-for-home.html
Do you lock your doors on your home? If so why? What are you paranoid about? Home invasions are extremely rare.
Actually I did read your linked post and I will agree with you that making your home an unattractive target is a good idea as are your list of steps you can take to do so. The only way to truly win a deadly force encounter is to avoid it.
I will disagree, of course on keeping firearms as a means of defense. Also I disagree on your point about escalating a home invasion from a robbery to a lethal force situation just because you have a firearm in your home. The victim is still the legal occupants of the home in the case of a criminal break-in. How do you determine if he wants your TV or to rape your small child before it is too late?
Ah yes, contrary to the ever popular “you shouldn’t have guns because we are too violent” approach, Michael Moore comes with the “you shouldn’t have guns because we are quite safe” argument.
I find it odd that Moore can quote with so much confidence the number of home invasions that occur when no government agency keeps track of such crimes.
I find my self agreeing with Michael Moore quite often these days. We are a violent nation and we take that same violence to other countries. To what end? Is Iraq any better off now? Afghanistan? And regarding home invasions, a relatively small investment in a home security system is a much better deterrent than a gun, which as was stated in the video, can easily be turned on the home owner. The violence here is escalating, even though people (like those in Arizona) are armed to the teeth. If we cannot calm down the rhetoric, how can we ever have a rational discussion about this issue?
When I suggest that some of the legitimate gun owners can't be trusted with guns, like in my Famous 10% theory, they sometimes retort by saying most of the gun crime is gang and drug related, inner city stuff.
Then when we question why they feel the need to keep guns at home they say home invasions are likely enough to warrant it.
Then when pressed they say, ok it's not likely at all, but if it does happen the consequences are so severe that you need to be prepared, like FWM's point that you don't know if the guy who just axed down your front door wants you TV or your child.
To that I say you might as well prepare for meteorites too.
Yes, the fantasy of the home invasion, pushed as justification for guns in homes. See my recent blog post at New Trajectory about some statistics to reveal how truly rare home invasions are, and some safer alternatives for home protection: http://newtrajectory.blogspot.com/2011/01/alternatives-to-gun-ownership-for-home.html
ReplyDeleteBaldr,
ReplyDeleteDo you lock your doors on your home? If so why? What are you paranoid about? Home invasions are extremely rare.
Actually I did read your linked post and I will agree with you that making your home an unattractive target is a good idea as are your list of steps you can take to do so. The only way to truly win a deadly force encounter is to avoid it.
I will disagree, of course on keeping firearms as a means of defense. Also I disagree on your point about escalating a home invasion from a robbery to a lethal force situation just because you have a firearm in your home. The victim is still the legal occupants of the home in the case of a criminal break-in. How do you determine if he wants your TV or to rape your small child before it is too late?
Ah yes, contrary to the ever popular “you shouldn’t have guns because we are too violent” approach, Michael Moore comes with the “you shouldn’t have guns because we are quite safe” argument.
ReplyDeleteBaldr, you make an excellent case for CCW.
ReplyDeleteFWM can't handle the fact that Laci may be far more effective at preventing crime than a firearm.
ReplyDeleteI find it odd that Moore can quote with so much confidence the number of home invasions that occur when no government agency keeps track of such crimes.
ReplyDeleteI find my self agreeing with Michael Moore quite often these days. We are a violent nation and we take that same violence to other countries. To what end? Is Iraq any better off now? Afghanistan? And regarding home invasions, a relatively small investment in a home security system is a much better deterrent than a gun, which as was stated in the video, can easily be turned on the home owner. The violence here is escalating, even though people (like those in Arizona) are armed to the teeth. If we cannot calm down the rhetoric, how can we ever have a rational discussion about this issue?
ReplyDeleteWhen I suggest that some of the legitimate gun owners can't be trusted with guns, like in my Famous 10% theory, they sometimes retort by saying most of the gun crime is gang and drug related, inner city stuff.
ReplyDeleteThen when we question why they feel the need to keep guns at home they say home invasions are likely enough to warrant it.
Then when pressed they say, ok it's not likely at all, but if it does happen the consequences are so severe that you need to be prepared, like FWM's point that you don't know if the guy who just axed down your front door wants you TV or your child.
To that I say you might as well prepare for meteorites too.
Askcherlock, Thanks for that comment. I like the way you think.
ReplyDelete