Originally Posted By: surfstar
A loaded gun is more likely to kill someone who lives in the house than a burglar.
I have insurance. If someone steels my [censored], I get new stuff. People don't break into homes to kill you - if they did, you have some real enemies and should probably re-evaluate some life choices. That's gang/mob stuff.
Good luck with living in fear of being robbed, yet keeping a lethal weapon at the ready for accidental use.
Your opinion is predicated on a specious falsehood. The methodology used to establish the "more likely to kill you than a burglar" is full of errors in logic and analysis. So, no, the gun isn't more likely to kill a loved one than a bad guy, despite the anti gun rhetoric. Repeating a lie over and over doesn't make it any more true, but that's the MO for the anti gun crowd.
So, with that in mind, I too have insurance. Property insurance replaces my stuff and if you break into my house, you are welcome to peruse my first floor and help yourself to all the valuables there.
However, I also have life insurance in the form of lethal force. It protects the lives of those in my house. Should the property on my first floor not interest you, and you choose to come up the stairs, you're clearly demonstrating your interest in the people, not property, in my house and I will not let you harm them.
To defend against that threat requires a weapon. Period.
You can choose to fool yourself, if you like, and downplay the existence of that threat. But it is real, and to prepare for it requires effort, in the form of acquiring a weapon and training with it. Look, if you choose not to prepare, I understand. That's your prerogative. It's an unlikely event. But so is a car crash, and hail, or floods, and I prepare for them, too.
So don't criticize my choice to prepare by denying the reality of that threat. You prepare for a variety of contingencies, just not all of them.
A loaded gun is more likely to kill someone who lives in the house than a burglar.
I have insurance. If someone steels my [censored], I get new stuff. People don't break into homes to kill you - if they did, you have some real enemies and should probably re-evaluate some life choices. That's gang/mob stuff.
Good luck with living in fear of being robbed, yet keeping a lethal weapon at the ready for accidental use.
Your opinion is predicated on a specious falsehood. The methodology used to establish the "more likely to kill you than a burglar" is full of errors in logic and analysis. So, no, the gun isn't more likely to kill a loved one than a bad guy, despite the anti gun rhetoric. Repeating a lie over and over doesn't make it any more true, but that's the MO for the anti gun crowd.
So, with that in mind, I too have insurance. Property insurance replaces my stuff and if you break into my house, you are welcome to peruse my first floor and help yourself to all the valuables there.
However, I also have life insurance in the form of lethal force. It protects the lives of those in my house. Should the property on my first floor not interest you, and you choose to come up the stairs, you're clearly demonstrating your interest in the people, not property, in my house and I will not let you harm them.
To defend against that threat requires a weapon. Period.
You can choose to fool yourself, if you like, and downplay the existence of that threat. But it is real, and to prepare for it requires effort, in the form of acquiring a weapon and training with it. Look, if you choose not to prepare, I understand. That's your prerogative. It's an unlikely event. But so is a car crash, and hail, or floods, and I prepare for them, too.
So don't criticize my choice to prepare by denying the reality of that threat. You prepare for a variety of contingencies, just not all of them.
Last edited:
