Notwithstanding dangerous neighbourhoods, countries and the likes
Is there a pivotal defining reason as to why a civilian within a safe, first world, democratic, uber low crime rate suburb/city (i.e upper middle class suburbia in Sydney NSW) ought to have a firearm?
I can’t think of one…
I don’t think healthy, responsible people should be barred from owning a firearm. I’m not a nanny state advocate. Law enforcement, the millitary, security etc, firearms are understandable. Healthy people who like to shoot/hunt ought to shoot. But to allow someone such as myself (very long withstanding history of major depression) to procure a firearm is a stretch. It isn’t others I’d be a risk for, it’s the risk to myself. Granted one could argue “he ought to have the right to bla bla bla”. I think this relates to if the individual is of sound mind. When someone is that low/down in the dumps they don’t think rationally.
Guy working a desk job in the wealthy, HEAVILY policed suburbs of Sydney? No definitive reason for him/her to own a firearm. Home invasion you say? The chances of a home invasion occuring over there are slim to none, probably akin to winning the lottery albeit the prize being bad luck.
Proportionately there’s a far higher chance the guy who owns it is depressed and blows his head off.
Banning fireworks isn’t like a goal of I just think they are fucking stupid. And while you probably won’t cease fireworks happening just by banning you’ll drastically reduce the use of them. That seems a lot simpler than training people or other regulatory messages. Keep the big displays done by professionals if we want.
As for now people will stop shooting fireworks as they always have. After they blow themselves or a building up.
It’s FAR easier to commit suicide with a gun than by razor blade
Do you have the faintest idea as to how painful it is to deeply cut into yourself?
Same goes with alcohol/meds and drugs. I’ve seen countless overdoses, countless cases wherein someone required a ride to the ER (in or out of ambulance) to get their stomachs pumped.
Alcohol, knives and drugs are all proportionately more dangerous than guns if we take into account how many people they kill. The ease by which each dangerous commodity can dispatch a civilian differs.
Should also be noted, a vast majority of drug over-dosages in the USA are opiate based (last time I looked around 2x more die from opiate overdoses relative to gun deaths… This takes into account ANY gun death or opiate related death). But fentanyl is a legitimate medication with legitimate therapeutic applications. Fentanyl shouldn’t be banned as a result as like firearms is CAN be a necessity
I’d argue fireworks may be somewhat of a cultural necessity associated with certain festivals. Could you take them out? Sure… But it’d probably kill the vibe.
Great, but if the chance of getting into such an altercation is like 1-10,000,000 it’s a little bit overdramatic to say owning a gun is a pivotal necessity. The USA is a different beast all-together. Aside from Maine/a few other states the homicide rate by firearm is nearly 10x (or is it over 10x?) That of Aus.
That being said, this was present before Australia banned guns too.
So these are pivotal necessities required to maintain an orderly society?
As specified, I’m not for banning guns. But it seems inconsistent if one thinks we need to outright ban fireworks because of the dangers associated with them but you can sleep with a loaded pistol under your pillow.
In fairness, and I’m no expert so this is just a hypothesis, but I’m confident that the manufacturing practices and quality control of firearms/ammunition dwarf what we see in the fireworks market. That’s why I have zero issues sleeping with a loaded gun in my nightstand, I trust that Glock and Federal make a good product and it will not fail due to inaction. I’ve also had the luxury of observing that degree of predictability hundreds of times. I’ve used fireworks maybe tens of times, and every single time at least a handful of the fireworks fail in some capacity. That speaks directly to Q/C and mfg practices.
Note: This is not an argument for the necessity of gun ownership, but an argument against perceived inconsistent danger assessment when comparing the two products.
To maintain that standard. Full stop. Doesn’t take long for the society you describe to descend into a total shit show. Throughout history this is demonstrated going back to the beginning of recorded thought.
Now this is third hand paraphrasing, but I recall a former Soviet general or some other official being asked (or offering this information) why they never invaded or had plans to invade the US and it basically rested on the fact that privately owned firearms outnumbered the citizens.
It wasn’t the military might the US had at the time, it was the number of armed private citizens that deterred it…
So, private citizens owning private firearms is the greatest deterrent to mass slaughter ever…
If you need a better reason, then I’m afraid no reason will suffice…
I believe it was a Japanese general who said that during WW2. The Soviets didn’t try to invade the US because it would have been impossible logistically. They lacked the naval and air power to do it. There is also the whole nuclear weapons thing.
I’m always reluctant to wade into PWI threads, but I did want to chime back in for a quick second.
Is there a pivotal defining reason as to why a civilian within a safe, first world, democratic, uber low crime rate suburb/city (i.e upper middle class suburbia) ought to learn BJJ, boxing, or any martial art?
Sexual assaults in Australia are the highest they’ve been in nearly 3 decades. Owning a personal firearm isn’t simply about preventing a homicide. But I guess if a lady gets raped, it’s like she won the lottery, just with bad luck as the prize. Yes?
To be clear, this would not be considered safe and responsible gun ownership.
Hobby, fitness, to compete and self defence come to mind.
Shooting can by all means also be a hobby or form of sport related competition. That being said, there’s a difference between choking someone out or throwing a kick/making a dash for it and shooting someone in the face, effectively killing the individual. In Australia, few are willing to assault someone at gunpoint. The chances of your attacker having a gun are slim to none unless you’re involved with organised crime.
I’m aware you have certain societies/neighoroods wherein more lethal force is required to tame various altercations. In the context of some drunken idiot on the street looking for a fight. Carrying a firearm to shoot him seems like a stretch
I’m aware my stance is askew from many on this forum. But it need be noted I’m arguably in line with the majority of those in Europe/Aus when it comes to guns, perhaps I’m slightly more conservative as I do believe a competent citizen has a right to own a gun whereas many here/in Europe believe it ought to be a privilege. I’m not some ultra left snowflake outlier. The gun culture present in America is almost entirely unique to America.
As to the sexual assault statistic. This is a problem, though the majority of sexual assaults that occur here aren’t of the “guy jumps out of the bushes and pins you down manner”. A large portion of assaults here occur behind closed doors. Scenarios like an uncle molesting his niece, a drug dealer assaulting his customer when invited inside. Regardless of the legality of firearms, there isn’t much room to use one when you’re suddenly pinned down.
If we look at gun laws in Aus, firearms are kept stored in a locked safe. Good luck reaching that safe, opening it, going to where you separately store the ammunition, loading the firearm and using it on a rapist.
Yet I knew MANY who owned guns in this manner. One gifting pistols for his 12-13y/o son to sleep with. As specified, I’m not anti-gun. I’m against idiots, violent felons or the or mentally ill owning them.
If you want a firearm, by all means procure one so long as you are mentally competent. On the other hand, plenty of European nations with relatively low (say around 5-10%) gun ownership rates seem to be doing fine with low firearm homicide rates, no mass shootings (unique to America as other countries with high firearm ownership rates don’t typically deal with school shootings), low rates of assault, theft and such.
If firearms were necessary for all civilians to own, wouldn’t many, many EU countries be in anarchy right now? Prior to covid Australia was considered to have the highest standard of living in the world (Melbourne in particular). But only like 5% own guns
There was recently a case in the USA wherein a bystander apprehended a shoplifter, a cop oversaw this as the shoplifter getting mugged and shot the guy dead. This is uncommon, but it rebukes the “if everyone had a gun everyone would be safe” sentiment… Sometimes the wrong people get shot when/if you have to act in a split second. Best to use less lethal methods if possible.
Call me naive, call me a snowflake… I’m just stating it the way I see it (and I’m no expert).
If gun ownership was the pinnacle of democracy/free speech, why is the USA ranked as a flawed democracy? Below the likes of NZ, AUS, Canada, most Nordic countries etc? To note I believe Australia will be bumped down to a flawed democracy in the near future