Why I don't own a gun

[Craig Laughlin]

Article about Shootings in my area.

http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/20...gun-inside-car

In recent weeks 3 children in the greater Seattle area have been shot by themselves or other children. I believe in the right to own firearms but I don't think that makes it wise.

I used to own half a dozen guns but when my son got old enough to be interested I was not in a place to purchase a totally secure gun locker so I sold the guns. Now that I am back in Washington State were there are lots of good places to go shoot I sometimes wish I still had those guns. Until I read in the papers or hear on the news of another child killed by a gun someone thought was secure but was not.

The shooting of the police officer's child is from my town. It is connected to my church via fire department friends. - A police officer is extraordinarily well trained in handling a fire arm and yet his little girl is dead, shot by her sibling. Non of them will ever be the same again.

As I prayed about this in church last Sunday there was weeping in the congregation.

Can not emphasize enough the need to keep guns totally secure. This will probably reduce how well they could protect you but a child or grandchild's life is not worth it.

[Dana Grant]

This situation was present in my own family a few years ago -- cousin's child shot and killed his sibling -- accidentally while playing with a gun. It also hit the family of very dear friends of ours -- son accidentally shot himself with a gun; thought it was not loaded. No, we do not have guns in our home.

[David Parker]

These incidents are not 'accidents' they are examples of criminal carelessness.

My experience has been that cops are often not very well trained at all regarding firearms. Just because they carry them as a work tool doesn't mean they are experts. And stupidity and carelessness exists even among the 'trained'.

My wife and I carry loaded guns at all times. We are frequently with children. There is simply no way a child could ever touch or get a hold of one of our weapons. When they aren't holstered under our direct control, they are secured in our safe. Never has been an issue and never will be because we are not careless.

Much greater tragedy has occurred to far more children in swimming pools and automobiles. Yet many of us gladly own and use them with our children. Like anything else, it is a trade-off. If you can't be certain of your responsible handling of guns, then it is best to avoid them.

[Ryan Pugh]

"The people will weld their guns into tools that give life..." my contemporary paraphrase of Isaiah 2:4

[Craig Laughlin]

There is simply no way a child could ever touch or get a hold of one of our weapons.

This is what makes me nervous. The cost of discovering one is wrong can be very high with a firearm. No plan is perfect and no human executes a plan perfectly. Don't get me wrong I suspect that the chances of a child getting a hold of your gun is extremely low. It is the belief that it is impossible that gives me pause.

Edit - I wouldn't own a house with a pool either. Again not worth it, turn up the AC or go to the public pool. Or for those who live on a coast, go to the ocean.

[Dana Grant]

This is also why we don't have a pool. In my work I have seen the bodies way too many dead children who drowned in pools. We never wanted a pool for this very reason.

[Sarah Smith]

My husband's cousin lost an eye running with a pencil. We still use pencils.

Negligence is negligence, and seems to be the culprit.

I wouldn't be without a firearm--too many rattlers, mountain lions, and bears here. Staying inside isn't an answer as at they all get into the best of homes.

Seriously, properly handled a gun is no more dangerous than your kitchen stove.

Mishandled, and like that stove they can snuff out an innocent life.

Now, skateboards--lifesnuffers for sure with no redeeming use I can see.

[Paul DeBaufer]

These incidents are not 'accidents' they are examples of criminal carelessness.

My experience has been that cops are often not very well trained at all regarding firearms. Just because they carry them as a work tool doesn't mean they are experts. And stupidity and carelessness exists even among the 'trained'.

My wife and I carry loaded guns at all times. We are frequently with children. There is simply no way a child could ever touch or get a hold of one of our weapons. When they aren't holstered under our direct control, they are secured in our safe. Never has been an issue and never will be because we are not careless.

Much greater tragedy has occurred to far more children in swimming pools and automobiles. Yet many of us gladly own and use them with our children. Like anything else, it is a trade-off. If you can't be certain of your responsible handling of guns, then it is best to avoid them.

I couldn't agree more. Irresponsible/negligent firearm owners make it hard for the responsible, conscientious who get painted with the same brush.

[Ryan Pugh]

Seriously, properly handled a gun is no more dangerous than your kitchen stove.

Mishandled, and like that stove they can snuff out an innocent life.

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that mishandled guns have caused more deaths than stoves.

I'm not sure comparing guns with stoves is helpful.

[Jim Chabot]

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that mishandled guns have caused more deaths than stoves.

I'm not sure comparing guns with stoves is helpful.

I don't have the statistics, but I'm guessing that there have been quite a few deadly stove accidents. For the past eight or ten years, stoves have come with anti tip brackets that are installed behind and are designed to capture one leg of the stove. The reason given is that a child could stand on the door in order to reach the top, this would cause the stove to topple forward. Sounds plenty dangerous to me.

[Jim Chabot]

I don't own a gun because I am dangerous and I'm well aware of it. I can't be trusted with a gun so I don't own one.

When I was fourteen I managed to shoot my brother on the bridge of his nose within an eighth inch of his eye. A bunch of us neighborhood kids were having a routine BB gun fight out in the woods, my brother ducked behind a tree and I shot at the tree just as he looked out to see if anyone was there. Normally we would shoot each other in the legs or torso where it would raise a welt. Haven't gone near any sort of gun since then.

That said, I don't see guns as dangerous when kept and handled properly. I'm very thankful for folks like Dave Parker who can be trusted to carry. I shudder to think of a society where only folks with evil intent were carrying. As Jefferson said, an armed society is a polite society.

[Diane Likens]

When one of my friends was on a 7-day cruise with her husband and their sons several years ago, their home was burglarized. Of the many things stolen was the gun he had bought her a few weeks before (which she had never fired). With about a month of their return from their cruise, her gun was found in the waistband of a punk who had tried to outrun the police in a high speed chase. Turns out that gun had been used to shoot and kill a clerk at a Subway sandwich shop while the family was still on their cruise.

In any event -- some time ago she mentioned that she had not only replaced the stolen gun but that they'd bought her husband one as well. I told her, "That's great news! The next time you're burglarized, the bad guys will get TWO guns to kill sandwich shop clerks with instead of just one." She was not amused.

That's what scares me most about guns, I guess. If I owned one and it was not on my person every minute of every day, I'd be scared witless that it's gotten into the hands of an evildoer. That maybe comes across as somewhat paranoid???

[David Parker]

This is what makes me nervous. The cost of discovering one is wrong can be very high with a firearm. No plan is perfect and no human executes a plan perfectly. Don't get me wrong I suspect that the chances of a child getting a hold of your gun is extremely low. It is the belief that it is impossible that gives me pause.

Edit - I wouldn't own a house with a pool either. Again not worth it, turn up the AC or go to the public pool. Or for those who live on a coast, go to the ocean.

I have raised 5 kids with a swimming pool. They all began swimming as infants. We educated them and equipped them to deal with the fact that there was a large pool of deep water in the backyard. Before they were old enough to assuredly be able to swim to the steps in the event of a fall in, they were watched carefully.

My kids have likewise been educated and equipped to deal with the fact that there are loaded weapons in our home. They all know how to shoot and they memorized the "big 4" gun rules when very young. Regardless, my children have never had access to a loaded weapon without my immediate supervision. It is CA state law and common sense.

As to being "wrong" or executing a "plan perfectly", it really isn't that tough. As I am sitting here writing this, my Kimber .45 auto is secured in a shoulder holster beneath my suit coat. It is retained by a heavy duty strap/snap and requires me to both unsnap it and draw it from its retention holster before the hammer lock safety lever can be disengaged. The weapon simply can not fire in the holster. It truly is 'impossible'. This is simple mechanics. When I get undressed at night, I remove the weapon before taking off the shoulder rig and place it in our bedside electronic nightstand safe. Grandchildren can be happily running around our home and interacting with me the entire time and there is absolutely no risk that anybody is going to get shot. Our other guns are secured in the floor safe in my workshop which is virtually impregnable except perhaps to an explosive equipped safe-cracker.

And the positive payback of course is that we have much better options available to defend the life and safety of our children/grandchildren than if we had no weapons. But again, I have no quarrel with folks that choose to give up gun ownership/use because the risk/benefit doesn't pencil out for them. Freedom to choose should always work both directions.

[Michael Flowers]

This is why my dad not only kept the ammo in a different part of the house from the guns, but also kept trigger locks on all of the guns (shotguns and rifles, didn't have handguns). I have come to the point where I will own a rifle/shotgun for hunting purposes but I likely will not keep ammunition in the house except during hunting season.

I do believe that access to handguns should be greatly restricted. I realize that not all child shootings result from handguns, but the vast majority do. There are also not as many robberies that take place using a rifle because it is too big to conceal and much to difficult to run with. I am not for banning the owning of firearms, but increased safety measures couldn't hurt.

As has been said by others, it really comes down to individual responsibility in the end. Those who leave their weapons loaded an in reach of someone else are irresponsible. When a gun is not being used for its purpose it should be unloaded and properly stored. I realize that I grew up in a different era than most on this forum, I was 12 years old when the Columbine shooting took place and it has been an ever present reality of my world. Guns and ammo should not be stored in the same place or even the same room. Secure the guns as best as you can and put the ammo where even you have a hard time getting to it.

We need to think safety first for those at home, rather than safety against those who might come in.

[David Parker]

This is why my dad not only kept the ammo in a different part of the house from the guns, but also kept trigger locks on all of the guns (shotguns and rifles, didn't have handguns). I have come to the point where I will own a rifle/shotgun for hunting purposes but I likely will not keep ammunition in the house except during hunting season.

I do believe that access to handguns should be greatly restricted. I realize that not all child shootings result from handguns, but the vast majority do. There are also not as many robberies that take place using a rifle because it is too big to conceal and much to difficult to run with. I am not for banning the owning of firearms, but increased safety measures couldn't hurt.

As has been said by others, it really comes down to individual responsibility in the end. Those who leave their weapons loaded an in reach of someone else are irresponsible. When a gun is not being used for its purpose it should be unloaded and properly stored. I realize that I grew up in a different era than most on this forum, I was 12 years old when the Columbine shooting took place and it has been an ever present reality of my world. Guns and ammo should not be stored in the same place or even the same room. Secure the guns as best as you can and put the ammo where even you have a hard time getting to it.

We need to think safety first for those at home, rather than safety against those who might come in.

While I understand your sentiment, that protocol completely negates the purpose of having/using a weapon for defense. An unloaded weapon is nothing but a poorly designed club. Our carry weapons are always loaded. It is far more risky to frequently load/unload a weapon, than to properly secure it.

And of course anybody that has ever watched a zombie movie knows that the worst time to be trying to find ammo, load and chamber a weapon is when under duress or immediate threat.

[Craig Laughlin]

I have raised 5 kids with a swimming pool. They all began swimming as infants. We educated them and equipped them to deal with the fact that there was a large pool of deep water in the backyard. Before they were old enough to assuredly be able to swim to the steps in the event of a fall in, they were watched carefully.

My kids have likewise been educated and equipped to deal with the fact that there are loaded weapons in our home. They all know how to shoot and they memorized the "big 4" gun rules when very young. Regardless, my children have never had access to a loaded weapon without my immediate supervision. It is CA state law and common sense.

As to being "wrong" or executing a "plan perfectly", it really isn't that tough. As I am sitting here writing this, my Kimber .45 auto is secured in a shoulder holster beneath my suit coat. It is retained by a heavy duty strap/snap and requires me to both unsnap it and draw it from its retention holster before the hammer lock safety lever can be disengaged. The weapon simply can not fire in the holster. It truly is 'impossible'. This is simple mechanics. When I get undressed at night, I remove the weapon before taking off the shoulder rig and place it in our bedside electronic nightstand safe. Grandchildren can be happily running around our home and interacting with me the entire time and there is absolutely no risk that anybody is going to get shot. Our other guns are secured in the floor safe in my workshop which is virtually impregnable except perhaps to an explosive equipped safe-cracker.

And the positive payback of course is that we have much better options available to defend the life and safety of our children/grandchildren than if we had no weapons. But again, I have no quarrel with folks that choose to give up gun ownership/use because the risk/benefit doesn't pencil out for them. Freedom to choose should always work both directions.

Suppose while out with your grandchildren in a park you have a cardiac event and pass out. While passed out one of the neighbor children take the gun off you and accidentally shoot someone? - Like I said no plan is perfect. Yours assume you will always be in complete control and that is a dangerous and false assumption.

[Michael Flowers]

While I understand your sentiment, that protocol completely negates the purpose of having/using a weapon for defense. An unloaded weapon is nothing but a poorly designed club. Our carry weapons are always loaded. It is far more risky to frequently load/unload a weapon, than to properly secure it.

And of course anybody that has ever watched a zombie movie knows that the worst time to be trying to find ammo, load and chamber a weapon is when under duress or immediate threat.

I realize that, and I would say that for someone who has a concealed carry permit and carries it with them all or most of the time the scenario is slightly different. I am more speaking of people who own a gun just to own a gun. A person who just leaves a gun in their nightstand drawer loaded all the time and has it there just as an "in case of option" is irresponsible (the exception would be if their is a trigger lock on it). Growing up in Alaska probably a third of the people actually had a concealed carry permit and actually carried, I would never expect them to go through the constant repetition of loading and unloading their gun (however, if it is a clip then that really wouldn't take much time). In your case, you say that you and your wife lock them up when you are not using them. That I commend and that is totally the right thing to do.

[Wilson Deaton]

We are frequently with children. There is simply no way a child could ever touch or get a hold of one of our weapons.

If I were a betting man, I'd bet that those whose weapons have taken the life of a child would have said the same thing prior to their tragedy.

Wilson

[Wilson Deaton]

Seriously, properly handled a gun is no more dangerous than your kitchen stove.

Mishandled, and like that stove they can snuff out an innocent life.

I'm guessing that you already own a stove. Why not defend yourself with that and get rid of your guns?

Wilson

[Glenn Messer]

Suppose while out with your grandchildren in a park you have a cardiac event and pass out. While passed out one of the neighbor children take the gun off you and accidentally shoot someone? - Like I said no plan is perfect. Yours assume you will always be in complete control and that is a dangerous and false assumption.

Suppose you are on the interstate with your grandkids in the car with you and you have a sudden fatal heart attack and the car crosses the median and hits an oncoming vehicle head on and kills all occupants in both cars? Like you said no plan is perfect.

[Wilson Deaton]

Suppose you are on the interstate with your grandkids in the car with you and you have a sudden fatal heart attack and the car crosses the median and hits an oncoming vehicle head on and kills all occupants in both cars? Like you said no plan is perfect.

Stoves are for cooking food.
Pencils are for writing.
Cars are for transporting.
Guns are for killing.

All of them can be involved in accidents but it is still rather odd to act as if there is no difference.

Wilson

[Craig Laughlin]

Suppose you are on the interstate with your grandkids in the car with you and you have a sudden fatal heart attack and the car crosses the median and hits an oncoming vehicle head on and kills all occupants in both cars? Like you said no plan is perfect.

Exactly. Just don't tell me there is no risk. I'm afraid of the driver that says it can't happen.

[David Morris]

Stoves are for cooking food.
Pencils are for writing.
Cars are for transporting.
Guns are for killing.

All of them can be involved in accidents but it is still rather odd to act as if there is no difference.

Wilson

This reminds me of a time I played the game Scattegories. The letter was 'D,' and one of the categories was 'weapons.' One of the players wrote 'dental floss.' My friends and I must have argued that one for a good 30 minutes, and the opposing argument in support of giving a point to that answer was that "anything could be a weapon."

Later in the game the letter was 'J.' The category was 'Villans.' I answered 'Jesus.' My argument was that it was a matter of perspective, that the Pharisees saw Jesus as such. I figured using their logic would get me a point. It didn't.

[G R 'Scott' Cundiff]

Article about Shootings in my area.

http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/20...gun-inside-car

In recent weeks 3 children in the greater Seattle area have been shot by themselves or other children. I believe in the right to own firearms but I don't think that makes it wise.

I used to own half a dozen guns but when my son got old enough to be interested I was not in a place to purchase a totally secure gun locker so I sold the guns. Now that I am back in Washington State were there are lots of good places to go shoot I sometimes wish I still had those guns. Until I read in the papers or hear on the news of another child killed by a gun someone thought was secure but was not.

The shooting of the police officer's child is from my town. It is connected to my church via fire department friends. - A police officer is extraordinarily well trained in handling a fire arm and yet his little girl is dead, shot by her sibling. Non of them will ever be the same again.

As I prayed about this in church last Sunday there was weeping in the congregation.

Can not emphasize enough the need to keep guns totally secure. This will probably reduce how well they could protect you but a child or grandchild's life is not worth it.

I appreciate the way you have framed this issue. It's about what you do and why you do it. I can't imagine anyone posting to argue with you that you should do differently any more than anyone should have to defend their coming to a different conclusion.

Good post and a timely reminder for all who own firearms.

[David Parker]

Suppose while out with your grandchildren in a park you have a cardiac event and pass out. While passed out one of the neighbor children take the gun off you and accidentally shoot someone? - Like I said no plan is perfect. Yours assume you will always be in complete control and that is a dangerous and false assumption.

Well, that would require that I be alone, that the first and only persons to find my body are children that are willing to dig through/under my clothing, and are willing to remove the weapon from a retention rig, disengage the safety and then do something stupid with it. Frankly, that is such a remote possibility that it does not concern me. Certainly not enough to change the risk/benefit factor for me.

[David Parker]

I realize that, and I would say that for someone who has a concealed carry permit and carries it with them all or most of the time the scenario is slightly different. I am more speaking of people who own a gun just to own a gun. A person who just leaves a gun in their nightstand drawer loaded all the time and has it there just as an "in case of option" is irresponsible (the exception would be if their is a trigger lock on it). Growing up in Alaska probably a third of the people actually had a concealed carry permit and actually carried, I would never expect them to go through the constant repetition of loading and unloading their gun (however, if it is a clip then that really wouldn't take much time). In your case, you say that you and your wife lock them up when you are not using them. That I commend and that is totally the right thing to do.

Agreed. Leaving a loaded gun in a nightstand drawer is not only foolish, but illegal in CA if a child is able to access it and cause harm.

As to loading/unloading, yes I carry a magazine fed weapon (not a 'clip' ) and it is indeed quick and easy to remove/insert, but there is still the round in the chamber that must be ejected/reloaded. Best to keep it 'cocked & locked' and secure and not mess with it except for training/shooting/cleaning.

[Daniel Hamlin]

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that mishandled guns have caused more deaths than stoves.

I'm not sure comparing guns with stoves is helpful.

Food for thought:

Car accident deaths: 12.3 deaths per 100,000 people http://drivesteady.com/cars-per-capita
Gun accident deaths: 0.36 deaths per 100,000 people http://www.gun-control-network.org/GF01.htm

Even adding in homicides and suicides gun deaths are 10.26 deaths per 100,000 people.

[Craig Laughlin]

Food for thought:

Car accident deaths: 12.3 deaths per 100,000 people http://drivesteady.com/cars-per-capita
Gun accident deaths: 0.36 deaths per 100,000 people http://www.gun-control-network.org/GF01.htm

Even adding in homicides and suicides gun deaths are 10.26 deaths per 100,000 people.

Thanks Daniel this is helpful. - I'm assuming you consider the gun-control network.org a reliable source? - If so I have to say their information is extremely disturbing. The United States outpaces all the other countries in gun deaths by enormous margins. I don't know anything about the gun laws in the other countries but maybe we should look at what they are doing.

I think you are absolutely right about automobile deaths. I'll bet a huge number of those deaths are alcohol and teenage drivers under 18. If we would make DUI first offense extremely painful and second offense serious jail time, then raise the age for the first license to 18 we would probably see a larger drop in those numbers. Sadly both sides of the aisle protect drunk drivers.

I'm for making our roads safer. I think we are in vastly greater danger from other people with cars than we are from other people with guns.

[Sarah Smith]

In a lifetime in a culture where families have firearms, I've personally known of two children who were injured or died by them.

My next door neighbors had a gas stove malfunction. They lost their two year old to carbon monoxide poisoning, and 4 of their other kids suffered severe brain damage and will never be normal.

Should we all get rid of our gas stoves?

Point is that any tool can be mishandled and cause injury or death. I'll go out on a limb a suggest bathtubs and ladders also kill a lot of people, and maim more. How many of us still have them?

Guns are for killing, but that doesn't mean for killing humans. They provide us with food, as do rototillers. Ever see a kid who's feet got caught by the tiller? They are also for firing to scare away predatory animals.

Tractors and grain augers seem to take a lot more kids than guns do.

[Paul DeBaufer]

In a lifetime in a culture where families have firearms, I've personally known of two children who were injured or died by them.

My next door neighbors had a gas stove malfunction. They lost their two year old to carbon monoxide poisoning, and 4 of their other kids suffered severe brain damage and will never be normal.

Should we all get rid of our gas stoves?

Point is that any tool can be mishandled and cause injury or death. I'll go out on a limb a suggest bathtubs and ladders also kill a lot of people, and maim more. How many of us still have them?

Guns are for killing, but that doesn't mean for killing humans. They provide us with food, as do rototillers. Ever see a kid who's feet got caught by the tiller? They are also for firing to scare away predatory animals.

Tractors and grain augers seem to take a lot more kids than guns do.

I don't know but the gas stove malfunction with the catastrophic results doesn't seem like a case of criminal irresponsibility/negligence. The cases of young children shooting themselves and/or their friends or siblings ALWAYS is a case of criminal irresponsibility/negligence. Adults who are so cavalier with their firearms so that young children can obtain them and kill should be charged with some for of murder or aggravated battery with a deadly weapon. These are not just tragic accidents, but are the result of criminal negligence.

The same with DUI deaths, they are never just accidents. Automobiles are inherently dangerous, like firearms, and must be used responsibly. Alcohol and/or drug use (even when said drugs have been legally prescribed) then driving IS criminal irresponsibility/negligence. So called accidents during the act of criminal negligence/irresponsibility are not true accidents, they are the likely result of the irresponsible behaviour.

Firearms, like automobiles, should not be denied to those responsible enough to own and operate them.

[Daniel Hamlin]

Thanks Daniel this is helpful. - I'm assuming you consider the gun-control network.org a reliable source? -

Not necessarily. I just Google'd "gun accident rates" or something like that and they popped up. I'm guessing their numbers are in the right ballpark, but I couldn't know for sure. I was just curious and was trying to get a first order approximation. If anything their numbers are probably too high, just like the NRA's numbers are probably too low.

[Daniel Hamlin]

Suppose while out with your grandchildren in a park you have a cardiac event and pass out. While passed out one of the neighbor children take the gun off you and accidentally shoot someone?

I think the zombie scenario David mentioned is probably more likely.

[Abraham Williams]

I doubled major in college in criminal justice/ pastoral ministry... And I did a internship with the columbus pd in ohio and I have to say that police are constantly trained and have to meet requirements to be able to be a officer who carries a gun....I also have a concealed license but as a pastor I choose to leave it at home when i am at church...now there are churches that would have a gun sunday where I grew up(West Virginia) and have a hunters sunday...but I believe that you should never have a gun near some one that is under 18 that has no training in a gun...I love at my church we have a gun club that meets and we go clay shooting, to the range...etc but I strongly believe having it far away from kids and teens.

[Dana Grant]

::::disrupting thread for just a second::::::

Welcome, Abraham! Where in WV did you grow up? I'm from Beckley..my parents still live there.

And I had to smile when I saw your double major -- criminal justice and pastoral ministry -- that's quite a combination!!

:::::::::k, carry on your regularly scheduled thread subject now::::::::::

Dana

[Abraham Williams]

I grew up in charleston in a place called teays valley...I have been to Beckley alot I have family there!!!

[Billy Cox]

My next door neighbors had a gas stove malfunction. They lost their two year old to carbon monoxide poisoning, and 4 of their other kids suffered severe brain damage and will never be normal.

Should we all get rid of our gas stoves?

This is a bogus argument. Gas stoves, when properly functioning and used for their intended purpose never kill people. The same is true of tractors, grain augers, rototillers and motor vehicles. When those devices kill or injure someone, it is always an accident or a crime.

By contrast, when a handgun is properly functioning and used for its intended purpose it is used for killing a human target. I think it's safe to say that the vast majority of people who buy a handgun do so with a potential human target in mind. Yes it can be used on animals or simply for target shooting, but the loaded gun in the nightstand scenario fits neither of those uses.

Having said that, I think there is a huge difference between someone saying "I will never own a gun" and "Nobody should own a gun." Craig is saying the former.

Some people consider the risk of having a 'tool' in the house designed solely for the purpose of killing another human being, and they consider it an acceptable risk to be mitigated by strict instruction and measures to prevent misuse and accidents. I think it's entirely possible to safely keep a gun in a house with children, but the recommended safety measures greatly reduce the handgun's utility for home defense.

I am not opposed to guns, but for me, at this point in my life, the risks far outweigh any potential benefits. If the risks/benefits lead someone else to a different course of action, then more power to them.

[Ryan Scott]

Food for thought:

Car accident deaths: 12.3 deaths per 100,000 people http://drivesteady.com/cars-per-capita
Gun accident deaths: 0.36 deaths per 100,000 people http://www.gun-control-network.org/GF01.htm

Even adding in homicides and suicides gun deaths are 10.26 deaths per 100,000 people.

Does this include people killed in war or people killed by police or as intruders in a home?

[Michael Flowers]

Given that it says accidents I would assume not. When the death is caused by a trained person or in deliberate defense, then it really isn't much of an accident usually.

[David Parker]

This is a bogus argument. Gas stoves, when properly functioning and used for their intended purpose never kill people. The same is true of tractors, grain augers, rototillers and motor vehicles. When those devices kill or injure someone, it is always an accident or a crime.

By contrast, when a handgun is properly functioning and used for its intended purpose it is used for killing a human target. I think it's safe to say that the vast majority of people who buy a handgun do so with a potential human target in mind. Yes it can be used on animals or simply for target shooting, but the loaded gun in the nightstand scenario fits neither of those uses.

That doesn't make it a 'bogus argument' unless your premise is that any force or threat of force used to prevent or stop an assault is wrong. The 'intended purpose' of a gun is to be a force multiplier, and for law abiding citizens, only in legal and appropriate ways. A gun is employed (shown, or drawn, or pointed) many more times than it is fired. Just the presence of the weapon frequently prevents a crime. And if it is fired, unlike what we see on TV and in film, most people that get shot, do not die. The legal intended use of a gun in defense is never to 'kill', but to stop the assault. We are taught to stop the threat, not to kill. If the death of the assailant occurs, it is a non-intended consequence.

For those of us that view self defense and the defense of innocents as a moral and noble endeavor, the ownership and use of a gun has every much as positive an 'intended purpose' as a stove, chainsaw, or automobile.

Having said that, I think there is a huge difference between someone saying "I will never own a gun" and "Nobody should own a gun." Craig is saying the former.

I think we all agree with that. Thankfully those in this country that would ban personal weapons are now a tiny minority, but it wasn't always so...

Some people consider the risk of having a 'tool' in the house designed solely for the purpose of killing another human being, and they consider it an acceptable risk to be mitigated by strict instruction and measures to prevent misuse and accidents. I think it's entirely possible to safely keep a gun in a house with children, but the recommended safety measures greatly reduce the handgun's utility for home defense.

A $40 electronic safe on the nightstand solves the problem very effectively. Can be opened in ~2 seconds in the dark. Weapons can be safely loaded and ready inside.

I am not opposed to guns, but for me, at this point in my life, the risks far outweigh any potential benefits. If the risks/benefits lead someone else to a different course of action, then more power to them.

Amen to that!

[Ryan Scott]

Given that it says accidents I would assume not. When the death is caused by a trained person or in deliberate defense, then it really isn't much of an accident usually.

True, I'm just wondering how those numbers would be different if intentionality was involved. Certainly there's a few people every year who die from intentionally being run over.