It seems that today’s Supreme Court hearing of the case concerning DC’s gun regulations is getting a lot of media play today. One of the things I keep hearing is that DC only bans *handguns*, and that residents are free to keep shotguns and rifles for self defense.  And in that context, I suppose a handgun ban sounds a little more reasonable than it might otherwise. But this simply isn’t true, in a practical sense – securing the required permit for your shotgun/rifle is ridiculously difficult (bordering on impossible), and even if you do get it, the law requires that the gun be rendered nonfunctional at all times. There is no self-defense exception to that requirement. So what we have, in DC, is an effective complete ban on the legal possession of any firearm for self defense. I wish the reporting would be a little clearer on that.
Joy
Thanks for that clarification – it definitely didn’t come across on NPR this morning. And it does make me rethink my reaction to the story a bit.
I tend to be extremely anti-gun. On the other hand, I think it is pretty damned useless to let someone have a gun supposedly for home/self-protection, but make it unusable in an emergency. I mean, if you are going to have a gun in the house to protect yourself against a home invasion or something, having the bullets on the other side of the house, or the gun in pieces, is not going to do you much good. Which is why I particularly don’t get having a gun in the house if you have kids – in order to render it effective, it needs to be kept in an unacceptably dangerous state.
cbrtxus
What makes it particularly dangerous for DC residents is that the bad guys know that
the DC law requires that honest citizens be defenseless. Make no mistake, if you don’t have a functional weapon immediately available, you are defenseless.
Effectively DC attempts to guarantee the safety of the criminals that attack DC’s honest citizens. Whose side is the DC government really on?
The most deadly home defense weapon is probably a shotgun. But a shotgun is large. I have both handguns and a shotgun. If I hear a noise at night, I have a handgun in my right hand and a flashlight in the left.
Also, the point of self-defense isn’t to kill your attacker, it is to stop them. If you hit someone dead center with a 9mm bullet, they might survive to rob another day. If you hit someone similarly with a 12 gauge shotgun at close range, they are probably out of the crime business forever.
Thomas
John said: “Which is why I particularly don’t get having a gun in the house if you have kids – in order to render it effective, it needs to be kept in an unacceptably dangerous state.”
Unacceptably dangerous??
To you maybe. I grew up in a hose with a loaded shotgun and rifle. It was stored behind my parents bedroom and/or bathroom door. I knew where it was and how to use it from the age of 10.
But generally I wasn’t allowed in there to mess with it at a younger age.
Teach kids to respect you and the weapon and there’s nothing dangerous about it.
MB
Nothing dangerous about an unlocked and loaded weapon in a house with a child under 10? That’s insane, Thomas.
~
Cbrtxus, DC is hardly guaranteeing the safety of criminals. Don’t be daft. Further, you are *not* defenseless without a firearm. We are not living in a post-apocalyptic world where every person who looks at you on the street would kill you, given the chance.
Joy
Yeah, I sure want a loaded weapon in my nighttable with my one year old toddling around. Because one year olds definitely know how to respect me and a weapon, and of course she doesn’t mess with anything I don’t want her to.
Thomas
Nothing at all insane about it MB. I did not know it was there and was not allowed in that room.
I was hunting with a shotgun at the age of 10. By then I had proper respect for the weapon (and my parents had I considered “playing” with it).
My shotgun stays loaded, in the my bathroom.
Joy, I don’t own a handgun,. Not the most effective defense weapon. Still, nobody sad put it where the toddler can reach it. In/on a table would be stupid.
How do you keep you toddler away from the chemicals used for cleaning? Or a gas stove?
But the weapon unloaded and out of easy reach is useless for defense.
Maybe you all need to spend some time with a firearm? Learn to respect and handle it properly.
MB
Well, Thomas, not all children share your lack of curiosity.
As for spending time with a gun, well, I’ll grant that I can’t recall how much bathroom time I’ve got with a gun. None, I think. I can, however, refer you to a number of ex-deer, a dozen ex-pheasants, and hundreds of ex-clays that might speak to the matter.
Joy
Well, that is my point. I could have a gun in the house, and keep it where the toddler can’t get it, and then it would be useless for defense.
The chemicals are up out of reach or behind locked doors. (And actually, I’ve replaced the cleaners with products like vinegar and baking soda that aren’t poison.) These are places that would not be easy to access in case of emergency, hence the above.
I’m personally not willing to learn how to use a firearm, because I don’t think I could use one even in self-defense. Not without being a very different person than I am now. And I think it is therefore responsible of me not to have one. I understand other people having a different feeling about them, but I am extremely uncomfortable with any gun in a household with children. And if I knew a neighbor/friend kept a gun in their house, I’d be uncomfotable with my child being in their home.
Thomas
MB,
I was very curious and got into all sorts of mischief. But fear for my rear end kept me out there. There were also photo developing chemicals in there, so there were lots of reasons to keep me out. For a long time the bedroom door was kept locked when I was there.
Good to know you have experience. I see Joy doesn’t, and I suspect the same for John, whom I original responded to.
Thomas
Joy,
I’m fine with you not own a firearm, though I think it would be good for you (and everyone else) to have experience with them. To many people have a fear of something due to their lack of understanding/experience whit it.
Cars are far more dangerous for drivers, passengers, and others, yet no one is banning them. NHTSA says 42,880 deaths in 2003. Emergency Nurses Assoc. say 30,242 “gun-related” deaths 2003.
while there are some people I’d be concerned about, most of the people I’d leave my kids alone with I trust.
In some areas I’d be concerned if they didn’t have a firearm. Luckily I don’t know anyone in those areas that well anymore.
cbrtxus
Thomas, my father had a handgun when we were growing up. It was a Colt 38 Super. It was in a small closet that he built just for it over the doorway. He could easily reach it and it was always ready for action.
Of course, as small children, we didn’t even know that it was there nor could we get to it even if we wanted to.
Later on, when we were approaching the point where we might find a way to reach it, my father sat us down and explained what it was and what it could do to a person. We watched him unload it and then he explained about safe handling. You never touch the trigger unless you intend to fire the weapon. You never point a weapon at any living thing that you don’t intend to kill. We could handle it with him supervising but he always required that we handle it properly–as if it was loaded. Then we would watch him reload it and put it away. We would never have thought that it was unloaded because we knew for a fact that it was always loaded. My father saw to that.
He told us that any time we wanted to see the weapon or handle it, just tell him. At that point, he would repeat the process of unloading it and explaining safe handling yet again. And, of course, we were warned that attempting to even touch it without him supervising would result in some terrible punishment that he never quantified. But we grew up thinking that my father’s disapproval was punishment enough to deter almost anything that we might do.
After once or twice, the handgun was no longer of any special interest. When I took my course for the concealed carry permit, there was nothing about the safe handling had not already been instilled from childhood. My father was a very wise man. That said–any responsible owner of any dangerous objects (chemicals, small magnets, 5 gallon buckets, firearms, etc.) should do whatever is necessary to assure that children aren’t injured or killed.
MB, I don’t think that you are “daft†just because you and I disagree about some things. If D.C. is trying to assure that honest citizens don’t have immediate access to a functional [loaded, assembled, not locked] weapon, in my opinion, they are guaranteeing the safety of criminals that might attack the honest citizens. Obviously, gun laws are not going to force criminals to carry unloaded, disassembled, trigger-locked weapons.
MB, if you don’t have a firearm, what defense do you have? Most of us are not karate experts. I don’t believe that every person on the street is a threat. I will say that I would feel a whole lot safer in Houston, Texas than Washington D. C. based on the crime statistics.
Actually, I believe that most people are good. The fact that in Texas, we have a large number of good people with concealed carry permits makes me feel more secure rather than less secure.
I live in Houston. It is very unusual for someone to invade an occupied home here. Criminals know that such activity is quite likely to get them killed. They seem to be concentrating more on “property crimes†such as burglary. But even that has gotten to be more dangerous for them now. We don’t seem to be having as much carjacking either–the law allows any honest citizen to carry a handgun in the car now. Concealed carry in public requires a license of course.
We have a “Castle Doctrine†law that makes it very clear that we can defend ourselves if attacked and that criminals have little legal recourse if they are injured while attacking us.
As our gun laws in Texas have more and more recognized an honest citizen’s right to keep and bear arms as well as defend ourselves, we did not see an increase in violent crime as a result. Did violent crime increase or decrease after the virtual ban on honest citizens keeping functional firearms for self-defense? After the storms we did see an uptick in crime generally but we suspect that some of that was imported from New Orleans. Concealed carry licensed people in Texas have crime rates far below that of the average citizens. Obviously, carrying a weapon does not what turns an honest citizen into a criminal.
Joy
I don’t have a fear of guns, I just have no desire to learn how to use something which is designed to kill people. Especially because I doubt I could use one to that purpose.
Does that leave me defenseless? Well, yes, in many ways. And that is something I have to (hopefully) live with.
cbrtxus
Joy, this isn’t intended to be a rude question. Would you be unwilling to use deadly force even if that was the only reasonable way to save yourself or a loved one from being killed or seriously injured?
I would run like a rabbit (but not from my own property) rather than use deadly force. But I have already decided that I would use it rather than risking being seriously hurt or killed by someone who has attacked me.
Obviously, a weapon should not be kept for self-defense unless you are willing to use it to defend yourself or your loved ones.
If you are in a state and city that does recognize the rights of a citizen to keep a weapon for self defense (almost all of them do) then the bad guys cannot assume that you are defenseless. In a strange way that offers some protection. It is probably better than you don’t advertise the fact that you are defenseless. It is nothing to be ashamed of but you wouldn’t want to make yourself a target either. Most people are good people, but it only takes one bad apple to ruin your day or your life.
Thomas
MB, where about in Houston? I lived in the heights (inside 610, NW corner, on 18th St.) in ’92 before i moved to Mississippi for school.
Never locked the doors to the house at night. No need. Same with my car, it was always unlocked.
Other than the hand gun that’s similar to my growing up and introduction to firearms. Dad did have a pistol, but I never saw it. Later learned it was keep in a dresser drawer under his briefs!
My son’s experience has been similar too. My daughter (now 3yr) will get the same.
I’ve never cared for hand guns though, and don’t own one. Just the pump action 20ga I’ve had for 20+ years.
Thomas
(this if odd. my wife’s name is Joy.)
Joy,
My shotgun was not designed to kill people.
Rabbits, squirrel, deer, duck, dove, and quail sure. And it’s done that quite handily for over 20 yrs.
It’s also killed a few snakes and dogs over the years.
I know many people that carry a pistol when hunting. It for close in protection, where a high power rifle is useless, and for finishing off wounded game.
Nothing at all about killing people.
Thomas
I meant cbrtxus, not MB.
Sorry about that.
Where’s the edit button when I need it…
cbrtxus
Thomas, I live in South East Houston a few miles North of Hobby Airport. Glenbrook Valley is on one side of me.
My father told me that when he was a child (I’m 61 years old so it was a few years ago) his family drove to Pikes Peak. As they were preparing to leave, they couldn’t even find a key to the house. So they closed the doors and departed without locking them. Of course, when they returned, they found everything as they left it.
I own several handguns. My brother and I enjoyed target shooting years ago. We even did reloading.
I needed a more concealable handgun for a border watch last year. I purchased a Glock 19. The organization tries to have at least one person with a concealed carry permit at each position. But all firearms must remain concealed at all times which is required by the Texas law. My other handguns were larger and heavier even though the Glock has similar capabilities. The Glock doesn’t have as many moving parts. It is easier to maintain which I like. And it has a reputation for dependability.
Joy
Thomas, I wasn’t talking about a shotgun, or any gun, used for hunting. I actually respect hunters and hunting quite a bit, as long as the animals are eaten/used afterwards (this is despite the fact that I don’t get the appeal of hunting with a gun, in which there is a huge advantage conferred on the human).
But a handgun in the house is designed to protect yourself from other people, i.e. to shoot them.
And I honestly don’t know what I would do in a self-defense, kill or be killed situation. Given that I have no training to deal with that kind of a situation, and that I’m a woman and have some inherent strength disadvantages that would only compound the effect of having no training, I kind of figure that if I fought I would lose. Possibly even with a weapon involved (I’d really hate to have a gun and have it taken from me in some kind of encounter, for example). Also, I’m not a pacifist, but I haven’t had the desire to put the effort into the training I’d need, and I also just plain disagree that arming everyone is the way to make society safer.
Luckily, I live in a pretty safe small town and try to be smart about where I go and who I’m around and take simple precautions.
Thomas
Joy,
My point was my shotgun is both, and a pistol can be too.
I meant to agree earlier, in case it wasn’t clear.
If you are not certain you can pull the trigger when you need to, don’t own one.
If you won’t train to use it properly, again don’t try to use one.
My point was that I think some experience with one if good for everyone. Once a person knows their capabilities and have appropriate respect for them (but not fear) they generally understand why guns are not the great evil many would have us believe.
Case in point, I’ve never heard of a gun killing someone and more than a hammer or a knife. But the zealots make liken animals, waiting to kill someone at any moment.
I’ve never met anyone who knew how to use them properly that favored bans or restrictions.
Joy
Well, I think even if I learned how to use one I would still be pretty damned anti gun, and in favor of bans and restrictions. The people I know who use guns are also in favor of bans and restrictions, so I suspect there is a population difference there.
Sure, you can kill someone with a hammer or a knife. But a gun is a lot easier to kill someone with, taking less physical effort, and there is more psychological distance between the person weilding the gun and the person being shot, which I think contributes to it being as dangerous as it is. That is another reason I don’t like the idea of one in the house – it is a hell of a lot easier to use a gun impulsively and catastrophically than it is to weild a knife or hammer in the same way, just due to the physical properties.
Now, do I know for sure the science behind this analysis, and the numbers of people killed by various weapons? No. But of course you have to take into account the base rate of the different weapons available, as well as the deaths by various means, in order to figure out which is most deadly and risky to have in the house. Hammers and knives have a lot of non-deadly, functional uses too, like cars.
cbrtxus
Joy, probably everyone would support some sort of restrictions. For example, I don’t believe that anyone who has been convicted of a violent crime should legally own a firearm. I also believe that anyone who uses a firearm while committing a crime should serve some serious time.
You do realize that any ban on firearms would impact mostly honest citizens? Criminals will get their guns one way or another. They are criminals, they don’t obey laws. Washington DC has a horrendous violent crime rate. When they totally banned handguns, the violent crime went up rather than down.
I don’t believe that anyone should have a weapon that doesn’t want one. If someone chooses to be defenseless, that is their right. I do object to anyone thinking that they might have the right to require that I be as defenseless as they are. In my opinion, being defenseless is not the best defense against violent criminals.
MB
CBRTXUS – you keep using this word “defenseless”. I don’t think it means what you think it means.
cbrtxus
MB, good morning.
According to my dictionary, “defenseless” means unprotected–lacking any form of protection and therefore vulnerable. And that is what I mean when I use the word “defenseless.”
The police try to protect us generally speaking. Unfortunately, they sometimes don’t arrive in time. When that happens, self-defense would be our only defense assuming that we have the means.
There can be circumstances where police protection isn’t available. For example, I own a small business and frequently work late. My car would be the only one in the parking lot. If I call the police requesting an escort to my car, they would probably laugh at me and explain that they are not security guards.
I actually started carrying a handgun after a fellow working one block over was robbed and killed while simply walking to his car. He was reported missing that night and they found his body in the trash bin the following day. Fortunately, in the years that followed the murder of that poor fellow, I have only had one occasion where I had to “persuade†a criminal to seek an easier victim. That was on my own parking lot. As soon as he saw that I was armed, he lost interest in me.
I would certainly call the police and reserve my own use of deadly force as a last resort. The fact that I have a means with which to defend myself may be a threat to a criminal but it isn’t a threat to my fellow honest citizens.
I would much rather have the means defend myself and my loved ones and hope that I don’t have to use it than to need the means and not have it i.e. be defenseless.
What do you think that the word “defenseless” means by the way?