[V.Narayan]

At 120 civilian held guns per 100 population USA is more than 2.2X of the next highest major country Saudi Arabia and over 3.3X of the third highest major country, Canada, more than 24 X higher than China and almost 400 times higher than Japan. It says something very strongly about a society where so many people feel so strongly about keeping a weapon capable of instantly killing a human. I won't try to guess the reasons for this as I suspect the reasons will be complex and intermeshed. I also guess every American or Saudi for that matter has rationalized it in his/her mind in a dozen ways including how mature & responsible he/she is and what great self restraint they exercise..

The brutalization of US society is seen in many apparently disconnected actions and attributes from the wars on other small brown & black nations, the gun crime in their own country, police brutality, their prisons and so on. I'm sure Americans here would vehemently disagree with me but the theme of violence is a common thread running through all this.

[VIPER_SRT]

Originally Posted by nitinsharma1000

Thought I would post my newest acquisition . A Sig Sauer M18 in 9mm. I have owned firearms since the last 15 years, ranging from WW2 era rifles to an AR-15. For me, responsible gun ownership is a must and you need a certain discipline when handling firearms. Basic functional knowledge is a must for every type of firearm. You should check and make sure if a firearm is loaded or not even if you have seen someone check it with your own eyes. Never put your trigger on the trigger unless if you are ready to pull it (loaded or not) and never point it towards something that you do not intend to shoot (loaded or not). I always keep some of my firearms loaded as they are not showpieces or status symbols. I would hate to be in a situation where I have to use it. But I would hate it even more if it didn't work.

Congratulations! Haven't fired a M18 yet but I'm pretty sure its great. I own a P226 Legion RXP. I had a break-in attempt at middle of the night few yrs ago and that 5 min wait for the cops to show up was the longest 5 min of my life. With young kids at home and nothing to defend myself, whole perspective about safety for my family changed instantly.

Many are overwhelmed about gun ownership but it's all about safety, training and mostly common sense. I've a fingerprint gun safe bought from Costco, works like a charm. I believe Pros/Cons about firearms are mostly political and one side won't understand other's POV.

[Jeroen]

Originally Posted by Tubeless_tired

I see a lot of people say this, but isn't it kind of obvious and overall irrelevant?
It is like saying that people who have a knife in their homes are more likely to get cut from one than those who never interact with knives. Or like people who own animals are more likely to get bit by one. Am I making sense?

Of course, what you are saying is true. E.g. if you never ride a bicycle, the changes of falling of a bicycle or getting involved in an accident whilst riding a bicycle are zero. Get yourself a bicycle and you are part of the bicycle accident statistics.

Hoeever, I am alluding to a very different aspect and worrying statistic.

Google this: “are gun owners more likely to be shot”. You will get several hundreds of hits, mostly research in the USA.

From Stanford research:

Californians living with handgun owners more than twice as likely to die by homicide, study finds
share
Residents who don’t own a handgun but live with someone who does are significantly more likely to die by homicide compared with those in gun-free homes, research shows.

The research adds to a growing body of evidence showing that having a gun at home is associated with a higher risk of fatal injury.

“Despite widespread perceptions that a gun in the home provides security benefits, nearly all credible studies to date suggest that people who live in homes with guns are at higher — not lower — risk of dying by homicide,” said the study’s lead author, David Studdert, LLB, ScD, a professor of health policy at the Stanford University School of Medicine and a professor at Stanford Law School.

Source:
https://med.stanford.edu/news/all-ne...cide-risk.html

From Harvard research:

5. Firearms are used far more often to intimidate than in self-defense

Using data from a national random-digit-dial telephone survey conducted under the direction of the Harvard Injury Control Center, we examined the extent and nature of offensive gun use. We found that firearms are used far more often to frighten and intimidate than they are used in self-defense. All reported cases of criminal gun use, as well as many of the so-called self-defense gun uses, appear to be socially undesirable.

1. Self-defense gun use is rare and not more effective at preventing injury than other protective actions

Victims use guns in less than 1% of contact crimes, and women never use guns to protect themselves against sexual assault (in more than 300 cases). Victims using a gun were no less likely to be injured after taking protective action than victims using other forms of protective action. Compared to other protective actions, the National Crime Victimization Surveys provide little evidence that self-defense gun use is uniquely beneficial in reducing the likelihood of injury or property loss.

Source: https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/hicrc/f...nse-gun-use-2/

From Senator Feinstein USA, member of the House Judiciary Committee

Washington—As the House Judiciary Committee prepares to hold a hearing on federal Assault Weapons Ban legislation on September 25, Senate Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) released the following statement on misinformation spread by the National Rifle Association:

“The mission of the NRA seems to center more and more on boosting the profits of gun manufacturers, so it’s no surprise that they want as many guns as possible in the hands of Americans,” Feinstein said. “But more guns don’t make us safer. In fact, more guns in homes mean more deaths, more accidents and more suicides.”

Feinstein continued: “If you own a gun, you’re more likely to get shot than if you don’t own a gun. That’s a simple fact. Even using a gun for self-defense doesn’t mean you’re less likely to get hurt, it means you’re more likely to get hurt. The NRA’s myths around gun ownership gloss over the dangers of gun ownership; it’s time we reveal NRA propaganda for what it is, advertisements to buy guns and enrich gun companies.”

NRA myth: The NRA says having more guns makes people safer.

Fact: Gun ownership is directly linked to higher instances of gun violence.

A National Institutes of Health study found that for each time a gun is used for self-defense, there are 11 suicide attempts involving firearms, seven assaults or murders and four gun accidents.
Another National Institutes of Health study discovered that owning a gun drastically increases the risk of gun violence in domestic violence cases. They found that a firearm in a home with a history of domestic violence correlates to a 500 percent greater chance that a woman will be killed.
One study published in the American Journal of Public Health found that the odds of an assault victim being shot increased 4.5 times if they carried a gun, and the odds of them being killed increased 4.2 times.
A study published in the Journal of Preventive Medicine found that using guns for self-defense during a robbery doesn’t lower one’s odds of being injured.

Source:
https://www.feinstein.senate.gov/pub...C-B8D09818BBD8

In general having access to arms, increases domestic violence. (In which typically women are on the receiving end, as usual)

Domestic violence victims are five times more likely to be killed when their abuser has access to a gun.13

25 million US adults have been threatened or nonfatally injured by an intimate partner with a firearm. 14

Women in the United States are 21 times more likely to be killed with a gun than women in other high-inco

The list goes on and on and on. You can pop the phrase “are gun owners more likely to be shot” into google translate and try it in different languages, you will find the same results. Even in countries with a lot of guns per head of the population, but less gun violence than the USA you will find similar trends. Luckily for those countries (e.g. Switzerland, Sweden) the relative and absolute numbers are a lot smaller, the principle remains the same.

Owning a gun means, statistically, you are more likely to get shot for a variety of reasons as the above articles show.

Unfortunately, there is still this myth that having a gun about the house, makes your house more safe. There is simply no evidence to make that claim. In fact, there is lots of evidence that suggest the exact opposite. If a burglar wants something from your house, and he knows you have a gun, he is going to bring one too.

Being proficient with a gun on a gun range, or hunting, is simply not enough to be able to handle a gun under duress. It takes a lot of training and practice.

Sadly, the world is still full of insecure men, that believe owning a gun makes them a true Harry Callahan. Nothing could be further from the truth.

There are still those that believe when somebody points a gun at you, the best cause of action is to get your own gun out. Statistically, that is simply not true.
People facing burglars, threats, hostage situations etc, are far more likely to survive if they just comply with the perpetrator demand.

Very sad.

Jeroen
(who has been on the wrong end of a barrel multiple times, different parts of the world, including twice in India and is actually a pretty good shot too!)

[mvadg]

Recently, the YouTube algorithm brought me shorts on how to use different types of guns. At first I was curious and soon I was enticed by how neat and slick the mechanisms were - until I realized what I had been sucked into admiring - devices for killing people!

Pure madness!

[Tubeless_tired]

Originally Posted by Jeroen

There are still those that believe when somebody points a gun at you, the best cause of action is to get your own gun out. Statistically, that is simply not true.
People facing burglars, threats, hostage situations etc, are far more likely to survive if they just comply with the perpetrator demand.

Very sad.

Jeroen

I think a large part of gun ownership in the USA comes down to "feeling" safe rather than actually being safe. When you know that 90% of the population has guns, you can't help but feel "out gunned" in your own home, and hence it comes as a peace of mind. Must state that this is exclusively an American problem, at least among the developed nations, that people like owning guns just to sleep soundly. What they don't understand is the plethora of harms that come with gun ownership. Or maybe they do, and believe that the risk/reward ratio is in their favour, I am not sure.

[am1m]

Originally Posted by Jeroen

People facing burglars, threats, hostage situations etc, are far more likely to survive if they just comply with the perpetrator demand.

I guess this is what most parents living in areas susceptible to violent crime do teach their children. At one of my earlier jobs, I was talking with my manager's manager in the US who mentioned that his 17-year old son had been mugged by a man with a gun the previous week. Apparently the boy resisted and was injured slightly in the scuffle- by the mugger's fists, not the weapon, thankfully. I was young and stupid too back then, and I thought why not get on the boss's good side by saying something nice about his kid, so said something about how brave the boy must be to stand up to a mugger. The answer was an emphatic- "He's an idiot! He's lucky he didn't get shot!"

Originally Posted by Jeroen

(who has been on the wrong end of a barrel multiple times, different parts of the world, including twice in India...

Would like to hear more about these, if you're ok posting the stories.

Originally Posted by Tubeless_tired

When you know that 90% of the population has guns

I think the actual percentage of gun owners is far less. The ratio of weapons to people is high because people who do own guns own multiple and the overall population is relatively low.

https://www.pewresearch.org/social-t...gun-ownership/

Originally Posted by Tubeless_tired

Must state that this is exclusively an American problem, at least among the developed nations,

A lot of it has to do with the political organization of the pro-gun lobby. They punch much above their weight because they are well organized and channel that into a political voice/influence. The anti-gun proponents are still disorganized. But I guess that is changing.

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2...g-on-the-n-r-a

[Jeroen]

Originally Posted by am1m

Would like to hear more about these, if you're ok posting the stories.

I can’t say much about the incidents in India. I was there in an official capacity and it would not be appropriate to disclose the details on a public forum.

I can share one interesting story: I lived and worked in Kansas City, USA for almost four years. One of the first things I did was to get my Private Pilot License. Through one of my local car clubs, I became friendly with a guy who owned a plane. A nice twin engine Beechcraft Baron. Lovely plane. He had his own business, with offices all across the USA. So he used his plane to travel from office to office. He invited me along on one of his trips. Even though I don’t have a twin rating, I could still fly during cruise, navigate, help with the radios’ and so on. We had been away for about 4 days. We were making our way back to our home base in Kansas City coming from the East Coast.

We had filed, and were flying under IFR (Instrument Flight Rules). Our plan was to stop at a well known local airport about 50-60 miles east of Kansas City. Everybody coming in from the east would always stop there, because the fuel was so cheap. Especially on a twin like this, it could easily save $ 150-175.

So we landed, my friend was flying and I was handling the radio’s and communication. As soon as we touched down, the tower advised us that we needed to taxi to the far end, very remote, of the field. So I told them, we are familiar with the field and we are here for cheap fuel, and asked for clearance to proceed to a very different part of the airport.

But the tower remained adamant. They told us in no uncertain terms, we needed to go to this very specific location. So we complied. When we finally got there, and turned around a huge hangar we met with a scene I will never forget. I can best describe it as a scene from the movie The Blues Brothers. There must have been two dozen cop cars, all along the field perimeter, blue lights flashing, doors open. Behind each door was a cop and they all had guns aiming for us!!!

My friend and I looked at each other. We both realised, we don’t really know much about each other. Just mates, that like to fly together. Obviously, this was some serious shit going down.

We were directed to a parking spot. We shut down the engines and were still busy with running the various check list when a cop with a Bull horn told us to put our hands up on the dashboard, where he could see me. A number of cops, had come closer and were circling our airplane, each and every cop aiming guns at us. Any gun you can imagine, from shotguns, to handguns, to semi-automatics!

The cop with the bull horn screamed at me: Passenger, remove yourself from the cockpit, keep you hands in the air. When I stepped down from the plane several cops jumped me, wrestled me to the floor and hand cuffed me. Next, my friend underwent the same treatment: Pilot, removing yourself from the cockpit, keep your hands in the air.

We were marched into one of the offices, they kept us seperate. We were not allowed to say or ask anything. Through the windows I could see, they brought dogs over, that were sniffing out our plane.

After two hours or so, it was obvious they had not found anything. Finally somebody showed up and started to ask me all these questions. Why did we land here, so close to our home base. I told them about the cheap fuel. I also pointed out 6-7 other aircraft from the same home base as us, that I had spotted earlier. Everybody lands here for cheap fuel I told him. You knew we were going to land here, we had filed and were flying an IFR flight plan. Nothing unusual.

I asked him, what we were supposed to have done and or accused off. He grudgingly told me they had a tip off. A twin engine Cessna with two guys was supposed to be carrying drugs! I had suspected something like that.

I asked him: are you sure? A twin engine Cessna? Yes, he said.
So why are we sitting here with hand cuffs? We are flying a twin engine Beechcraft!! Turns out the DEA (Drug Enforcement Agency) knows a lot about drugs, but no so much about planes.

We were eventually let go, no apologise.

Both my friend and I were members of the AOPA (Aircraft Owner & Pilot Association). The AOPA had been warming its members for some time. According to their statistics, a huge number of these DEA actions towards private planes are completely uncalled for. Many of their members had been complaining bitterly. The DEA seemed to responding on very little concrete evidence. Also, they have very little understanding of how aviation works. Planes have been intercepted for no reason and forced to land.

The AOPA did also publish a protocol for what you need to do, say (or rather not do and say) when you find yourself in one of these drug raids. It worked well for us, we did not get shot.

It is a very worrying feeling to have dozens of guns aimed at you.

Early on in my career I worked in the offshore and oil industry. Which meant I also travelled a lot in various part of Africa. I was in Gabon when one of their civil wars broke out. Bullets flying everywhere, I was travelling with a colleague who got shot in the leg. Huge trauma, blood everywhere. I had to put an improvised tourniquet (two belts) on his leg. He made it, but never regained full functionality of his leg. He (and I) were a lot luckier than some others who got killed in the cross fire.

During a stint in Beira Mozambique (1979) our hotel got taken over by local gunman. Never figured out what they wanted, but again guns poked in my face!! And of course, having spend ten years in the merchant navy means I have had my share of Pirates trying to board our vessel. Heavily armed Pirates!!

How I learned to shoot is a very different story.

Jeroen

[SN88]

If anybody can help here. My father( now retired) was a high profile govt officer and he was instrumental in major underworld raids for which he was given a presidential award for busting the biggest smuggling haul during his time. Due to various reasons and threats he has been allowed to own a gun and has a valid license for it.

He has been wanting to transfer the license and the fire arm to my name but we are not able to find a solution as there is no threat to my life, but he might yet have spurned criminals due to the past.

Can anyone advise if this is possible or he should just surrender the license in a few years?

[asitmonty]

Originally Posted by Jeroen

From Stanford research:

Source:
https://med.stanford.edu/news/all-ne...cide-risk.html

That study also states
"they found in a recent study that people who lived with a handgun owner were seven times as likely to be shot and killed by a spouse or intimate partner. Eighty-four percent of those victims were women."

Germany has guns too - but what they do is at the first sign of violence - domestic or otherwise - you lose the license automatically. And then no more license till some psychiatrist gives you a clean bill after months of therapy. But USA - nope. 2nd amendment is pretty powerful there.

I have fired multiple types of guns during my time in USA and I do have an interest in guns. And I secretly feel proud for having a decent spread at 25 yards. But I am not a gun supporter at all, and I would rather live in a place similar to Singapore where your safety is not dependent on whether or not you have guns. For a society to have guns, their citizens have to be very matured and responsible. In India, we still get overly excited about the political party we voted for and for the religion we are born into.

Having said that, in India, I do think one needs a gun at his home/car (or even a conceal carry). And the only reason is if you ever get attacked by someone with intention of causing you injury - even once in your 50 years of adult life - the police is not coming within 10 minutes. I have decent training in MMA, and I can probably take down an untrained, unarmed attacker, even double my size. But the moment you add a knife, or some MMA training, or an extra person (even if a skinny female teenager) to the equation, I know that I have no chance of escaping unharmed.

In US, I would have simply locked myself in a room, or hid somewhere and called 911. In India, I have called 112 only to find it busy, and they called me back 6 hours later.

[m8002?]

Originally Posted by asitmonty

For a society to have guns, their citizens have to be very matured and responsible.

Isnt that a contradiction? It cannot work where everyone is mature, responsible and holding a gun.
Only case where this works is in the case of Nuclear weapons having them as deterrents. Here mutual destruction is assured but in guns, the injuries could be fatal to one.

[asitmonty]

Originally Posted by m8002?

Isnt that a contradiction?

Sorry man. I am not sure why you think it is a contradiction.
Germany is a pretty mature society. And they have guns. And still a very low homicide rate. Scandinavian countries are the same.

[V.Narayan]

Just like most of us don't need to carry potassium cyanide capsules I don't see why we need to carry guns unless we live in a lonely forest with wild animals. Guns are little more than an overdose of machismo in a society.

[WorkingGuru]

The first thing that the establishment of a monarchy does is to either de-weaponise its subjects, or out-weapon them.

By doing so, it serves many purposes. They don't need to have reasonable governance (& other) policies that make sense to the subjects of the state, for they fear no backlash by the honest but weakened common man.

Anyway, IMO modern world is too over-connected and there is too much unorganised information flow. People today have the kind of unfathomable facilities that history never provided and we are misusing the sufficient freedom & peaceful world we have attained into doing things that massage our ego far too much instead of making use of those facilities to improve/develop our cognitive, intellectual and spiritual senses.

[Jeroen]

Another mass shooting in the USA:

https://eu.jsonline.com/story/news/c...cs/9775305002/

Note:

Five of the people who were injured were armed and taken into custody, police said Saturday

Being armed did not do them any good it seems.

Last month, Shannon Freeman, a 30-year-old father and beloved chef, was shot and killed at The Loaded Slate bar. Prosecutors say a 24-year-old man shot him 11 times and continued to do so even after he fell to the ground, after what appeared to be minimal interaction between the two inside the bar.

In February, Krystal N. Tucker, 31, was killed and two others injured in a shooting at the popular Brownstone Social Lounge, where Tucker worked. Authorities say the shooter had been denied access to the bar because of its age restrictions, and after being escorted away, drew a gun and opened fire

Jeroen

[Arun Varma]

My father owns a licensed Westley Richards cape gun (side by side rifle and shotgun - the elephant gun of yore). It has been a topic of much disgruntlement between us. We come from a heritage of land ownership, hunting and of course, guns. Currently, however, there is absolutely zero scope for its use. There is nothing legal that can be meaningfully taken down with a gun of that caliber. No one in our family hunts anymore. Any meat consumed is of the factory / pasture farmed variety. As a consequence, the rifle lies idle. For me, a gun has to be used meaningfully - for self defence or for legal hunting / sport / marksmanship. Self defence is a moot point in this day and age in our country (at least, in the place we live). Hunting as I mentioned is more of a pain. It is impractical to use a gun that can take down any of the big 5 in Africa, for marksmanship. He has kept it only from a 'prestige' perspective. The only value I personally see is that of heritage! Unfortunately, the process of upkeep and license renewal is extremely cumbersome. I see him at his septuagenarian age running from pillar to post to get it renewed every time and it is getting more painful each time. I have been asking him to dispose of it for decades now but unfortunately, he has not relented.

My personal take therefore, is that unless you have a very specific / limited lifestyle that supports ownership of a gun, it is more of a pain and has little to no practical value in our country!