who in the hell would agree to giving 400 people firearms O,o.. This is America i guess.. We'll probably see that population dwindle itself down in a few years time.
It is by far one of the most ridiculous things I've ever heard, but on the flip side I would imagine burglars would think twice if they knew every home owner was armed.
Indeed to the ridiculous thing. I dont know if burglars would think twice, or just go in with a bigger gun. I guess if it only has 400 residents then it might just be easier for them to go elsewhere.
While I don't think the legislation is going to pass, the article does say that many of the townsfolk are already armed in their homes. Maybe somebody who is really curious can do some sleuthing and find out what the crime rate is in that town or county? I'd suspect that such a small town doesn't have much violent crime anyway.
I think that some of them would indeed be discouraged and look for less risky (although not less criminal) forms of income. Perhaps street muggings, purse snatching and car theft would go up. Others, I suspect either the harder or more desperate ones, would just get a bigger gun --and you don't want a desperate criminal holding a gun... Having said that, if I lived in the sticks in the US, I would probably own a gun...
If citizens with guns reduces crime, why are a larger percentage of Americans in jail than the percentage for any other country? The logic seems inescapable.
I've been working on 5 (now defunct) web sites and a failed business venture. I've got free time again.
I've never really understood the argument for keeping a gun in the house to deter criminals. I understand why some people agree to that theory, but the theory itself doesn't make sense to me. The vast majority of home burglaries occur when the homeowners are away. Despite what you see on television, most criminals do not operate like some secret agent. They scout a location, looking for opportunity. They'll spot an empty house that offers some form of cover - a large bush, for example. They'll smash the window open, run through the house looking for obvious valuables, then leave within a few minutes. I'll say this again: Almost no crimes are committed while the homeowner is present. It presents too much of a risk. If you are away and you leave a gun in the house, it becomes a great object to steal. It can be pawned for a large sum, or used in another crime. If a crime happens while the homeowner is present, it is most likely in the middle of the night, while the homeowner is fast asleep. By the time you wake up, retrieve your gun, load it (because responsible gun owners keep their weapons unloaded, right?) and run downstairs like Rambo, the burglar will be gone. Or, he'll be waiting in a dark corner to shoot you in the back, because he heard you upstairs loading your gun. Kids and their guns. When will people learn that it just continues the cycle of violence? -monkey
Guns don't stop crime, viscous and cut-throat law enforcement does. Give the cops better guns and get them out of the hands of anyone but cops... voila, less violent crimes, and maybe less petty roberies which actually don't require a gun since they are done while the homeowner is away anyway...
It may sound like I'm crazy, but for my family, a gun (rifle) in the house is not only for defense against burglary but also against tyranny. Once the nation does become a police state, I can try to live free. That and because I can. My dad originally bought the thing just because it would soon be put on the assault weapons list and be banned. Basically giving the finger to the Clinton administration and wacko ultra-liberals. Honestly though, we take it to the range about once a year and the rest of the time it is locked away in the closet (of course unloaded and ammunition stored securely).
Whey hey! Welcome back! I should point out of course that it wouldn't be an AK-47 with grenade launcher. I agree with supermonkey. A gun does not suddenly make confronting a burglar a great idea. It is more for the very, very rare occasion that some mutter comes looking for you. Of course you want to keep it hidden and inaccessible to the opportunistic burglar.
A .357 double action revolver is a better choice for home defense in my opinion. Being simple to operate is a huge plus when waking up groggy to the sound of glass breaking. I would keep it loaded with extra ammo in a locked drawer next to the bed. Call the police but be prepared to confront the choir boy if he attempts to harm you or your family. It all depends but an alarm should be part of your security system as well as a firearm that you're very familiar with. I'm down to a semi-auto 12 gauge and .223 mini-14 at the moment...I would like a full auto but will settle for a neutered AK-47 or AR-15 Carbine in 6.5mm Grendel.
There is home defense and there is home defense. For defending your home against an intruder a handgun or short shotgun is preferable. What Geek1017 is talking about is more on the lines of the original intent of the second amendment which is a weapon to use for overthrowing the government if all else fails. Sadly, I'm starting to wonder if we may not reach that point by 2008
So something bigger and better then? .308, nice to see ya agian. I havent seen you pop up in any gun related discussion in a while and got worried.
