Quote:
Originally Posted by woot
I find both sides of this argument to have merit, and have considered getting a gun myself, but the idea that arming oneself is a moral imperative seems pretty stupid to me. The vast majority of gun violence in this country is related to accidents/convenience, so while defending one's country against an evil government is noble, I'm not paranoid enough to think that the need to do so is more likely to arise than a neighborhood kid accidentally shooting himself with my gun or me shooting myself with it, whether accidentally or not.
|
I have two comments:
1. I suspect the rate of accidental shootings is very low among those people that properly store their guns. My guns are all locked away. And quickly accessible as well. But there are a lot of people who either don't care, or can't afford such solutions. If you can't afford it, you shouldn't own a gun.
2. If you think you may be at greater risk for suicide, or if you have a loved one that is at greater risk that also would have access to the arms, this may be a good reason to not own a gun, since it is a recognized risk factor for suicide. If you an old white male alcoholic who is divorced and own a gun and suffer bouts of depression--you are statistically a time-bomb in terms of suicide risk.
But the overall point is that there is always a risk to taking on a moral imperative. And that is why I'm saying why are some of you that are criticizing us that take on this risk, not willing to take on this risk yourselves?