Nope, it has nothing to do with where people live and everything to do with the fact that a gun in the home is more likely to be used in a domestic violence incident, drug/alcohol fueled rampage, or an accidental discharge, than to deter an intruder. Throw in the sheer amount of people in this country who are prescribed mind altering drugs like ambien and codeine, and it's nothing but a recipe for people injuring/killing themselves or their loved ones with their own guns.

[Edited on September 10, 2015 at 10:52 AM. Reason : .]

9/10/2015 10:51:41 AM

but it's a little misleading. for example if you aren't in a household with children, and don't do drugs or drink excessively, aren't depressed, don't have any domestic partner or don't have arguments with them, operate a firearm safely, etc... then your risk changes and that statistic doesn't really apply to you

that statistic is more about other factors than about guns themselves. it's appropriate to use that statistic to decide that we need some restrictions or regulations to account for those things, but you can't say that "guns make you less safe"

[Edited on September 10, 2015 at 11:36 AM. Reason : .]

9/10/2015 11:33:37 AM

Ok, so if you don't have children, pass regular drug/alcohol tests, are licensed to safely operate a firearm, and never argue with your domestic partner, then you can have a gun? That would comprise what, 15% or less of Americans? Congratulations, you've just cut gun ownership in half, mission accomplished!

9/10/2015 11:46:13 AM

This just in, in houses where there is a domestic abuser, domestic abuse is more likely to happen

9/10/2015 4:40:13 PM

U GOT SUM DATER AND FANCEE SHARTZ TWO BACKUP THAT CLAIM?

9/10/2015 5:11:29 PM

Quote :

"Ok, so if you don't have children, pass regular drug/alcohol tests, are licensed to safely operate a firearm, and never argue with your domestic partner, then you can have a gun? That would comprise what, 15% or less of Americans? Congratulations, you've just cut gun ownership in half, mission accomplished!"

Who's going to enforce that? Some Psychology master's student that couldn't get into medical school? Please protect me, my neighbor could have a gun!

9/10/2015 9:00:25 PM

Quote :

"are licensed to safely operate a firearm"

Fuck that, I don't want murderous cops to be able to have guns in their homes when they're off duty. Lock em up in the cabinet at work until you get back on the beat the next day.

9/10/2015 9:42:19 PM

Quote :

"I really am curoous gun owners. Im more aligned with modern european society and The love affair with guns truly does baffle me. 4 big qiestions. A: What is in your home that you feel you need a gun to protect? B: why dont you just put it in a safety deposit box to be sure? C: do you even insurance? Alarm system? D: do you value your materials over the lives others?"

Everyone else needs to answer this.

Quote :

" chances are they'll resort to violence if you awake. "

Actually, this is false. Most home invasions are for stuff, not lives. Unless someone has a vendetta against you, there is no gain in harming you. People enter homes to get stuff that is worth money. Is there a bounty on your head?

Quote :

"I will repeat this again, I would NEVER shoot someone for touching/stealing/harming stuff, and I'd bet 99% of gun owners would agree."

If this is the case (your family is what you want to protect), then you don't need a gun at all because a gun in your home significantly increases the risk of one of someone in your home being killed.

http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2012/12/gun-violence-and-the-irrational-fear-of-home-invasion/266613/

There are 100 home invasion homicides per year and 18,000 gun suicides per year.
(1 in 20,000 chance that your home invader will kill you) Obviously, the odds someone would enter your home JUST to kill someone are significantly lower than that. Most homicides occur when people confront an intruder or resist a burglary.

10/1/2015 6:34:38 PM

Quote :

""I really am curoous gun owners. Im more aligned with modern european society and The love affair with guns truly does baffle me. 4 big qiestions."

"Guns are fun to shoot and I don't live near anyone that could be effected by my shooting." Is a perfectly fine response.

I tend to agree that the "need to protect" your playstation is silly, but what a person chooses to do as a hobby is none of my business.

10/1/2015 7:30:09 PM

Quote :

"I don't live near anyone that could be effected by my shooting"

smdh

10/1/2015 8:25:59 PM

^ If you live in Montana on a ranch--not in Cary where you have neighbors.

I don't know why that would result in SMDH.

10/1/2015 9:12:47 PM

^^^

That study/article fails to consider


Whether the gun used in the shooting was present in the home before the shooting or if the shooter brought it with them;

Whether the victim who resided at the location was a member of a criminal organization (gang)

Whether the victim was related to a member of a criminal organization (gang) who resided at that location

Whether the victim was related to a member of a criminal organization (gang) who previously resided at that location

Whether the victim who resided at that location was involved in illegal activities like drug sales

Whether the victim was related to someone involved in illegal activities like drug sales who resided at that location

Whether the victim was related to someone involved in illegal activities like drug sales who previously resided at that location

Cases of self defense where the mention of a gun stopped an attack without being displayed or fired

Cases of self defense where the presentation of a gun stopped an attack without being fired

Cases of self defense where a gun stopped an attack by being fired and not hitting the attacker

Cases of self defense where a gun stopped an attack by being fired and hitting the attacker but not killing him

[Edited on October 1, 2015 at 9:41 PM. Reason : .]

10/1/2015 9:39:02 PM

10/1/2015 10:39:32 PM

Touche

Quote :

"Nitpicking is the unmistakable mark of cluelessness. "

[Edited on October 1, 2015 at 11:21 PM. Reason : a]

10/1/2015 11:18:08 PM

Quote :

"That study/article fails to consider Whether the gun used in the shooting was present in the home before the shooting or if the shooter brought it with them; Whether the victim who resided at the location was a member of a criminal organization (gang) Whether the victim was related to a member of a criminal organization (gang) who resided at that location Whether the victim was related to a member of a criminal organization (gang) who previously resided at that location Whether the victim who resided at that location was involved in illegal activities like drug sales Whether the victim was related to someone involved in illegal activities like drug sales who resided at that location Whether the victim was related to someone involved in illegal activities like drug sales who previously resided at that location Cases of self defense where the mention of a gun stopped an attack without being displayed or fired Cases of self defense where the presentation of a gun stopped an attack without being fired Cases of self defense where a gun stopped an attack by being fired and not hitting the attacker Cases of self defense where a gun stopped an attack by being fired and hitting the attacker but not killing him"

Don't let logic and facts get in the way of emotion. What the hell are you thinking?

10/2/2015 12:25:49 AM

guns don't kill people

people who say guns don't kill people kill people

10/2/2015 10:02:34 AM

I think most people can logically assume the threat of residents having guns deters a lot of break ins.

A home invasion homicide is rare, so why bother having guns?

Same logic:

A mass shooting in a gun-free zone is rare, so why bother having gun laws?

10/2/2015 10:15:35 AM

Why is murder even illegal? If someone wants to murder someone, they'll murder someone. Law or no law.

10/2/2015 10:26:57 AM

Just pointing out how the logic should apply both ways. If it is statistically unlikely, why bother?

10/2/2015 11:14:11 AM

No problem, I wasn't really directing my comment at you, just that form of argument in general.

10/2/2015 4:20:19 PM

obama beating the drum again

annoying to use mass shooting to make a point when your own solutions wouldn't prevent mass shootings.

10/3/2015 6:08:27 AM

10/3/2015 11:56:29 AM

Quote :

"In Oregon you are prohibited from buying a firearm if you have a felony conviction, have been discharged from a juvenile court in the last four years, or have been diagnosed with a mental illness. Even if Mercer could not have passed a mental health background check to obtain a firearm, a loophole in the law means he could have purchased the weapons from an unlicensed vendor, such as a private individual at a gun show, or on the internet. Until very recently such sales, which are estimated to make up around 40 per cent of all gun trade in the U.S. according to Smart Gun Laws, were not subject to background checks in Oregon. On August 9 legislators in Oregon did attempt to close this loophole by requiring private sellers to pay for background checks at licensed gun dealers. However, sheriffs in rural areas, including where today's shooting took place, said they had no intention of enforcing the new rule, NBC reports, saying it would require too much work. Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3257921/Oregon-college-gunman-kicked-Army-2008-emerges-police-seven-weapons-home-six-guns-school-including-assault-rifle-THREE-pistols-used-massacre.html#ixzz3nZljeZu8 Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook"

Looks like, at least in Oregon, there is a gun show loophole.

10/4/2015 1:57:16 AM

it's a private sale loophole. that private sale could take place anywhere, including a gun show.

10/4/2015 10:24:51 AM

I'm not sure why people get so pissy about what it's called

Actually I do, because they've fallen into the gun lobbys guidance to argue about the wording instead of acknowledging that it's a problem and closing the gap

10/4/2015 11:07:14 AM

I still say there should be something on your drivers license that pre approves you to buy a firearm, like a background check. If you have the stamp on your license, you are already checked out to buy a firearm (like having to show your CCW or pistol permit to buy a handgun in NC).

That way these private sales can still occur (which makes the gun guys happy), and checks you out for buying a firearm (which should make the gun control guys happy).

10/4/2015 11:13:52 AM

That was one of the main reasons I got my CHL, makes buying a firearm a lot easier because they don't have to do all the background checks compared to not having one. And even though you don't need one for a private purchase in TX, it is nice to have and most people will show theirs to make the other feel better about the transaction.

I wouldn't have a problem with making it a requirement or having people need to go to a gun store for a background check for a private purchase.

10/4/2015 11:53:34 AM

i don't get pissy about it. i just want to make sure folks understand that it's not just gunshows, it's anywhere.

10/4/2015 11:56:07 AM

^^ whoa whoa, it's not the pro-gun side exploiting wordsmithing and not calling things what they are on that one.

^ I'd be for a broad purchase permit system, on a shall-issue basis, with any sort of registry or provision that could lead to de facto registration explicitly prohibited. I'd be for tightening up who is eligible where we can, although I think that would be marginal and mostly a matter of improved reporting to NICS. A firearms purchasing card, like you say, but not on the driver's license. Those are updated too infrequently.

10/4/2015 11:58:38 AM

^x8

Well, for that analogy to work right, there would have to be changes to the laws regarding buying shoes and bombs, neither of which changed after the shoe bomber.

On the other hand, metal detectors in schools have increased outside of high crime inner city schools, many schools have implemented check in and out policies to control access, students are often subjected to multiple forms of surveillance and tracking, multiple school districts are testing or buying and installing panic button systems and something as simple as chewing your pop-tart into the shape of a gun is enough to get you suspended, and bringing a disassembled clock in a box is enough to get you arrested.

So we've made plenty of changes since Columbine to security at schools. And they're all about as effective and useful as taking your shoes off at the airport.

10/4/2015 12:06:47 PM

^ So, basically, our response to both shoe bombs and school shootings are retarded

10/4/2015 4:32:06 PM

Thanks Obama, and Hillary, and all the gun control people, for continuing to keep guns in the hands of people who don't really need them.

http://money.cnn.com/2015/10/05/investing/gun-stocks-surge-2015/index.html?iid=hp-toplead-dom

10/5/2015 12:33:11 PM

^ that's mostly the NRA's doing...?

That's what they were payed to do.

[Edited on October 5, 2015 at 1:10 PM. Reason : ]

10/5/2015 1:09:25 PM

thanks, humans, for existing so that paranoid people can be paranoid

10/5/2015 1:21:00 PM

anytime a big name politician rattles a sabre about gun control, gun and ammo sales go through the roof. it has next to nothing to do with the nra. gunmakers' best spokeperson in the last decade is obama, though somehow he doesn't get that.

10/5/2015 4:34:17 PM

^ it's the NRA that stokes this fear of Obama, Obama isn't the first to talk about gun control, and is very mild about it compared to past democrats.

They, at least used to, put out ads about Obama coming for their guns, which is where this derangement of gun nuts comes from.

10/5/2015 4:50:15 PM

every election season, they send out "vote for _______ and they'll take away your freedom/guns" flyers

that's also what they put on the cover of their magazine, America's First Freedom

[Edited on October 5, 2015 at 5:08 PM. Reason : to stoke the paranoia ]

10/5/2015 5:07:14 PM

and those politicians that fill in the blanks give them all the fodder they need

10/5/2015 6:33:35 PM

The irrational fears of the gun extremists is a relatively new thing... you didn't see this before the early 2000s.

10/5/2015 7:10:47 PM

1994?

10/5/2015 7:56:49 PM

^^^

how? by doing nothing?

at this point politicians are at risk for a bad rating from the NRA for not supporting the loosening of gun laws

10/5/2015 8:11:56 PM

by opening their mouths any chance they get. though you're right, they're doing nothing

how often have you heard obama say anything about gun control that wasn't conveniently right after a shooting in the news? what about hillary?

shootings are nothing new. but they sit on their hands when everything quiets down. they don't want to actually do anything about it.

[Edited on October 5, 2015 at 8:24 PM. Reason : ]

10/5/2015 8:22:21 PM

they don't do anything because they will lose elections if they do

10/5/2015 9:54:01 PM

And it is a lot easier to have something to point to and say we need to fix

10/5/2015 10:07:21 PM

Quote :

"The irrational fears of the gun extremists is a relatively new thing... you didn't see this before the early 2000s. "

Maybe you're being purposefully obtuse. It isn't the extremist right wingers that are rushing out to buy guns every time Obama and Hillary open their mouths about gun control. It's those who probably have been on the fence about buying a gun, but figure "hey, with all this stuff going on in the news, and all this talk, I better go ahead and get one."

The surges in gun sales have nothing to do with the NRA.

10/5/2015 10:52:25 PM

the exact opposite is happening, actually

gun ownership has been in decline for years

which means less people are stockpiling more and more

[Edited on October 5, 2015 at 11:14 PM. Reason : but truthiness]

10/5/2015 11:06:01 PM

^Can you provide a link to that stat? Gun ownership has surged in the past 10 years, with more than 100 million guns being added in that time frame. Consequently, gun homicide rate has gone down by 49% in the past 20 or so years.

10/6/2015 7:56:27 AM

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/85c182d0976f44b0a54780b7df8633bb/major-survey-shows-gun-ownership-declining

10/6/2015 8:10:57 AM

^I have a hard time believing that article. Gun ownership is raging right now, with tons and tons of new shooters coming to the sport. The article below basically says that if you ask a bunch of gun owners in a national poll about their guns, most will respond that they dont have any (skewing the poll).

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2015/03/12/is-gun-ownership-really-down-in-america.html

10/6/2015 8:21:29 AM

well that article fits your fantasy of more guns making violence go down so it must be true. Also it is in the foxnews opinion section so you know its credible..

sorry but survey of 2000 people by NORC at the University of Chicago > some opinion piece on foxnews by this guy...

Dr. John R. Lott, Jr.

John R. Lott, Jr. is a columnist for FoxNews.com. He is an economist and was formerly chief economist at the United States Sentencing Commission. Lott is also a leading expert on guns and op-eds on that issue are done in conjunction with the Crime Prevention Research Center. He is the author of eight books including "More Guns, Less Crime." His latest book is "Dumbing Down the Courts: How Politics Keeps the Smartest Judges Off the Bench" Bascom Hill Publishing Group (September 17, 2013). Follow him on Twitter@johnrlottjr.

10/6/2015 8:55:49 AM