Proper temperament for gun ownership?

I’d like to start my post off by saying that I am not advocating for the removal of any persons rights under the second amendment. I would like to get the opinions of responsible gun owners on two specific demographics of gun owners that I regularly encounter.

Being in the military I find there to be a very open culture when it comes to gun ownership. It’s something that I of course see no problem with. Though there are two rather specific types that concern me. The second more than the first. I will title them here as I do in my head. Please note that the titles aren’t meant to denigrate or persuade. Just my mental notes.

“The Toy Collectors”
I know a fair few service members that often brag about their purchase of new accessories. Some normal attachments such as scopes and the like, some a bit less practical. I know one guy in my unit sporting a bayonet attachment on a glock and another with some form of attachment meant to fire around corners. Neither seem practical for carrying on person or really home defense in my opinion.

“The Hopefuls”
The second, and the one that concerns me the most, are those who regularly make clear a desire to use their firearms against a human target. Now I’ve never heard them advocating violent crime, but they do generally hope to be put in a position where they need to protect themselves or others. I’ve always thought of guns like life insurance. Have it because you may need it, but hope that day never comes.

These groups often intersect, but I felt like making some distinctions could be beneficial to discussion. Do you believe that these people have the proper temperament to make good decisions when it comes to conflicts where deadly force could be considered? Do you believe that this is a normal part of gun ownership, and their decision making would not be impacted any more than a person that does not share these traits? Maybe you’ve never experienced people like this before? I’d like your take.

And again, I am not advocating for the removal of any person’s second amendment rights.

 

You have a beautiful dog avatar.

 

Thanks! He was cuter as a pup. Now he’s a bit of a stinker. Still a good dog though.

 

A responsible person gets the training they need for whatever they are doing, especially if it could lead to their death or that of others.

But you cannot force people to be responsible. That is the main Achilles heel of the 2nd Amendment.

However if you look closely at Australian or Canadian or English gun controls, those do not work either.

 

You’re right there. I am a strong advocate for proper training and certification where it applies, but responsibility can’t be mandated unfortunately. Not even sure of how you might go about it.

As for gun control I believe that it should never be banned from public discussion, but what form, if any, would work best; I can’t say. What works/doesn’t work for one country can’t always be applied across the board for other countries.

 

There are always people that use their rights responsibly and those that do not.

To me a large part of our problem is that the gun has ceased to be a common every day tool. When it was a tool then your children learned how to use it, most people had them, and you saw them every day. This stole the romance or mystic from the gun. Now it his held up as either a idol or a monster. It has been given status beyond the scope of a simple tool that provides protection and sustenance. We have a gun culture and I approve of that. But that culture is being polluted by politics, entertainment, and ignorance.

 

I think that is a fair point. I’m by no means young, but I have never lived in a time or geographical location where gun ownership and handling was a majority population thing. I wonder if some of the immaturities I mentioned would be as prevalent or exist at all back then.

 

First sorry about the spelling "Mystic" lol.

Of course there have always been places without a lot of guns apparent but those were settled areas. Our gun culture is tied to our expansion and the frontier. For me I live in Kansas and have lived in both rural and urban areas. While in rural areas I saw guns all the time. They were on racks in the basement around all the kids. In the back of trucks with their windows rolled down. Guys would be cleaning them during picnics after Church. There was no fear, few accidents, and nothing mysterious about them. Kansas and rural Kansas in particular has maintained that "frontier" perspective.

But when I lived in more urban areas it was different. The only guns you ever saw were on the hips of police or in video games. So you equated them to entertainment, violence, or power. Kids would see them and be intrigued and yet they lacked the basic knowledge that is needed to be around them safely. Cities instead of banning guns and restricting them should be doing the opposite. They should be having gun education days. Shooting contests demonstrations at fairs and gatherings. Open carrying should be promoted so that there is no mystique around them or fear. I am never afraid of the person that openly carries their weapon. Criminals rarely show they are dangerous until it is too late.

 

If we want to have training for guns before we allow that freedom, I would like to recommend we also have training for voting before we allow that freedom.

 

Again very well put. You’ve clearly put a lot of thought into the topic. I think that you’re right. Given the majority of the population lives in urban areas they tend to only see one type of gun use. Violence. Either criminals or police stopping criminals. I guess “Man shoots rodents on his farm with .22” isn’t quite news worthy. I suppose it’s easy to see why gun ownership is so scary to many people.

While I don’t view open carriers as any kind of threat I do give a wide berth. I associate that type of statement making with less responsible owners, and I saw more than my fair share of NDs down range.

 

While I do agree voters should take the time to educate themselves; irresponsible voting doesn’t make you an immediate threat to those around you, or yourself for that matter. It’s the same reason we require a drivers license.

 

1. Open carry should be allowed.

2. Gun training in public schools. (Parents should be able to opt their kid out. )

3. Concealed carry can require a license if the state wishes.

4. Carry on private property is up to the owner.

5. Any criminal using a gun is buried under the prison.

 

So you don't think that "irresponsible voting" causes harm to yourself and those around you?

 

Not in the same way that an untrained individual with a firearm can do harm to people in the immediate area.
Do you not think that people should be educated on how to be safe around firearms?

 

In the early 1990s, my daughter shot and killed an armed robber attempting to rob her bar, when she was alone at 3 in the morning. I taught all my children that robbers and bad people make the bad choices they do, and we do not have to be damaged by them. It is choices they make, not us, We are the victims if we are unarmed and not ready to shoot to kill. I have also served in a shooting war, and you know you MUST kill them or they will kill or damage you. The home front is nothing different. There are 30-40 murders in Chicago over a weekend alone. There are people in the USA, and a lot of them, who will kill. And we have way too many MS13 Illegal aliens who have no regard for law, order or honestly. The only way to protect and keep your rights (and your self free and alive) is to accept that sometimes killing in necessary in self defense, and you had better be ready for it when/if it ever comes your way.
I personally honor people who are willing to defend their lives, rights, property and freedoms because they make ALL OF US safer.
Want to stop the border crossing in a week? Start shooting the illegals the second or immediately after they Illegally step on our land. It would dry up. But the drug cartels are buying the media and on the internet because they do NOT want the drug and human trafficking to stop, and they find (as Hitler called them) useful idiots to support their own destruction.

 

I think it is a waste of money and if you are willing to waste money on that, I don't understand why we shouldn't require "voting lesson" before you vote.

Misinformed voting kills FAR more people than misinformed gun owners.

Looking at the statistics it is glaringly obvious what the problem with firearms is and it has nothing to do with "gun collectors" or "hero complex guys'" at all.

If we are not going to look at the statistics in an honest light, I refuse to vote for widespread losses of freedom that don't actually do anything yet cost huge amounts of capital

 

There is an aspect of gun ownership which makes it difficult for others to judge the gun owner. It is hard to define that aspect. However, it takes a lot of thought by the gun owner ahead of time and that thought, if revealed to others can be misinterpreted as an eagerness to use the weapon.

If the weapon is there for home defense, the owner has to make up his mind ahead of time that he will be willing to use the weapon. It has to be a cold blooded approach. It requires the owner to think through likely scenarios which might require use of the weapon and to use it without hesitation, if those conditions are met. These scenarios are taught in firearm training. However, being taught them and being willing to follow them are two very different matters. Hesitation in a life or death situation will get you killed.

 

Definitely agree with this.

But I have two pistols and a rifle about 20 feet away from me right now in a safe. Do I have a bit of hero complex with the fantasy of "being the hero" and shooting a robber trying to harm my girlfriend? Sure do!

You can blame the movies, media, male mind or whatever else.

But just because I have some stupid fantasy does not mean I am going to go out and cause harm.

I think the OP linking that and homicides is extremely flimsy and pretty dishonest to try to claim.

 

It depends. If you are going to say give a speech, and you carry a pistol just in case, and someone in the crowd starts violence, it is a fantasy of a hero complex to be packing.
I just installed a hidden drop down shelf in my bedroom and it contains two loaded guns, but you would never suspect it to be a gun case. I have two seconds to put that loaded weapon in my hand and can beat that time. So can my wife. Yet we have not children, but a burglar will only think it is a shelf. An intruder will be dead in a matter of seconds. We have two mastifs that weight in the 150lb range that will give us time to get to the two seconds next to the bed to be armed with a loaded weapon.
Do I ever want to kill someone? Sorry, not what I want to do, but if I feel threatened, I WILL DO. Remember, bad people make bad choices, and I do not want to be the one to pay for them.

 

No offense meant at all, but what does that have to do with the topic of "hero complex" and "gun collectors" being the cause of gun homicides?

It seems like you are proving my point/agreeing with me

 

I almost always concealed carry. It keeps criminals guessing and doesn’t alarm others. I only open carry when I am by myself. (Home, in the woods, gas pump at night, etc...). I don’t carry to make a statement.

 

I just don't understand why people twist and turn stats, use anecdotal evidence and "feeling" arguments to try to enact gun laws.

We have 7% of the population doing like 85% of the gun homicides in this nation. Furthermore, probably half of the black males can be crossed off the list.

The obvious problem is Africa American Poverty and Gang related incidents in a TINY % of the area of the country.

Yet we are too afraid to speak this out in the open and instead want to create laws for people that are having certain day dreams or that have a hobby of collecting.

It is so a$$backwards that I simply don't understand where these arguments come from.

We want to create gun laws based on "Hero Complex" and "Gun Collecting" (with zero proof that either of these creates a likelihood to use a firearm other than anecdotal evidence)....

But we refuse to create any laws where 3-4% of the population generates 85% of the homicides. Absolutely insane ...

 

I do not carry. My weapons are strictly for home defense. However, let me assure you I consider them necessary for our safety considering our isolation, location and age.

So, careful with your lumping. We are all different with different needs.

 

If men and women were required to get training to be a parent we wouldn't have problems with guns, rape, drug addiction, or anything else.

 

I guess that'll work as long as people only try to kill you in the house.