Feeling Safe in the United States

[Toriver]

I've lived in the rural US most of my life: small-town Minnesota, Wisconsin and North Dakota. Many people I know in this area, including family, own hunting rifles and go hunting regularly. I've been skeet shooting a couple times myself (though admittedly I suck at it). Never once has anyone I've known in the US been shot, either accidentally or on purpose. Never once has anyone I know even thought about shooting anyone else. They have a healthy respect for firearms, and any time I have ever been to a place with guns, they have always been safely and securely stored away when not being used. In the US, I have never been in a place where I have felt unsafe.

I lived in Japan for four years, the last part of which was in a neighborhood in a mid-size city where there were known Yakuza. The only time I ever believed I heard gunfire that was not skeet shooting was in that neighborhood in Japan. It may or may not have actually been gunfire, but whatever those sounds were in the middle of the night, they did not sound safe. However, at the same time, that was the only time I felt unsafe in Japan, too.

Essentially, my stance and point on the whole subject is that it's not the presence and prevalence of guns, but the individuals that have them. In many places in the US you have to pass a background check and other tests to get a concealed carry permit and/or buy a gun. Sure, you could say that we can never be sure who will snap and suddenly go crazy on everyone, but they could do that with any number of dangerous objects. Instead of a firefight in Texas you may end up with a real-life Texas Chainsaw Massacre. Not like anyone's going to go out and call for a ban on chainsaws.

What I really don't understand is how somehow people still feel more unsafe with a hunting rifle in a redneck's hands than a pistol in an inner-city gangster's hands. That's just beyond me.

 

[Azahul]

You did nothing to argue against you being spoiled. It isn't necessarilly and insult in itself. It's not a positive quality to be sure. I guess you can take the mention of any negative quality as an insult, but you ask me and I believe it takes a little something else to be an insult. For starters it isn't really an insult if there was no intent to harm behind it. Having seen poverty does not mean you experianced it. And that final little bit no your comments would not be made invalid, but it does point out a source for some of them.


Just thought you should know.

I didn't bother to argue against being spoilt because it should have been patently obvious that I'm not, and I didn't particularly want to turn this into an argument about me. Regardless, if you're going to insist I am, then let's make some things clear. First, my parents aren't exactly wealthy. They're reasonably well off, but they sacrifice any chance at financial security by spending their money on doing what they love, travelling. Take the three year sailing trip, for example. A family of five on a 14m long yacht that, at its widest, was about 2.5m across. Having a shower consisted of a bucket of salt water and then rinsing that off with a kettle of heated fresh water that needed to be shared amongst at least two other people. We had food, and the electricity to operate lights (and fans when it got too hot), and that was about it as far as luxuries went. So for three years we washed our clothes by hand, baked our own bread, had no access to any of the electronic mediums of entertainment that I'm nearly positive you must have in order to be able to post on this site, and by and large ate either what we could catch or what we could trade for from locals. No, not poverty, but I hardly think the experience left me a spoilt rich kid with no appreciation for what people below the poverty line go through. The biggest luxury we had in those years was just always having enough to eat, and seeing how the people around us lived during that time I can say I'm damned well thankful for that.

Just thought you should know.

 

[Wyes]

...As several others in this thread, I live in Australia. We never really had a gun culture, and there were always some restrictions on firearms. But the tipping point in favour of pervasive gun control came about due to the Port Arthur Massacre [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_Arthur_massacre_%28Australia%29], wherein one well-armed man gunned down 35 people and injured 23 others (and is to date one of the deadliest mass shootings to have occurred)...

The Siege of Leningrad (@ >1 million killed and ~2.5 Million wounded on the Soviet side alone) is certainly one of the 'deadliest mass shootings'....

Do I really have to spell my point out?

I'm honestly not sure what your point is. Yes, more people died in the Siege of Leningrad. That isn't relevant to what I was saying at all, partly because that was a battlezone, and partly because you seem to be arguing semantics. If you'd like I could've qualified my statement with 'deadliest shooting perpetrated by a single person'?

 

[Jarsh82]

First off, it's not common for people to carry a gun in the US. I havn't seen it where I live and I live in a very pro gun region. I would imagine that most people who do carry guns don't really carry guns for protection even though that's what they may claim. I've never felt the need to carry a gun for protection though I do own a shotgun as an heirloom. I don't keep it in the house because I have kids. It seems odd that you were less afraid of an assault rifle in the middle of a civil war than you were of a handgun in a stable nation. I think you let your imagination run wild on this one.

 

[manaman]

What I really don't understand is how somehow people still feel more unsafe with a hunting rifle in a redneck's hands than a pistol in an inner-city gangster's hands. That's just beyond me.

Depends on the redneck. I had one such individual pull his handgun and hold it up near his chest as he made threats, trying to indimidate us off easement land he was the owner of. Clearly drawing the handgun as a show of force. We left the property and called the cops.

That particular redneck was very nearly injured or killed by the sheriff, giving in at the last minute. It was like he finally snapped and filled himself up with stupid.

 

[corvuscorrax]

I wouldn't say people are too afraid to walk around without protection.

I've lived in the US my entire life and never had the luxury of walking up and down the street with a concealed gun and I can say I'm not scared to do so.

What you observed is average people practicing their constitutional rights which to someone not from around here could be somewhat frightening and unusual.

 

[Imthatguy]

...As several others in this thread, I live in Australia. We never really had a gun culture, and there were always some restrictions on firearms. But the tipping point in favour of pervasive gun control came about due to the Port Arthur Massacre [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_Arthur_massacre_%28Australia%29], wherein one well-armed man gunned down 35 people and injured 23 others (and is to date one of the deadliest mass shootings to have occurred)...

The Siege of Leningrad (@ >1 million killed and ~2.5 Million wounded on the Soviet side alone) is certainly one of the 'deadliest mass shootings'....

Do I really have to spell my point out?

I'm honestly not sure what your point is. Yes, more people died in the Siege of Leningrad. That isn't relevant to what I was saying at all, partly because that was a battlezone, and partly because you seem to be arguing semantics. If you'd like I could've qualified my statement with 'deadliest shooting perpetrated by a single person'?

I was drawing attention to the fact that people make arbitrary distinctions between state violence and criminal violence and nudging people toward the realization that they are one and the same.

EDIT: I'm sure during that whole sorrid afair at least one individual 'scored as many kills'*.

*If English allowed me to use inflection in written text that phrase would be used with much disgust.

 

[742]

you came to the united states and its the guns that scared you? youre either completely mad or an upper class straight cisgender christian white guy.

its not so much that were paranoid, as we have the idea that carrying guns around with us somehow makes us safer. like noone can sneak up behind you if you might shoot them, or that making a firefight two sided makes it so much fucking safer for you. its insane, but then we are collectively somewhat off over here. that being said, there *is* a certain contingent in american politics that believes that any day now the gay femninist communist nazi muslim mexican immigrants are going to rise up in overwhelming numbers and overthrow the good christian values we i guess base our lives on. i cant quite comprehend it, but theyre a pretty significant chunk of people; enough that politicians find it profitable to pander to them even at the cost of alienating other groups. they carry firearms constantly.

also: most of us (not myself) seem to see the right of every american citizen to carry guns around as a more important thing than the right to free speech or not be held against your will for more than 24 hours without a trial. baffling, but there it is.

 

[DugMachine]

The amount of hyperbole in this thread is quite amusing. "I was absolutely terrified!" Really? You saw a police man or some cowboy dude just standing there minding his own business with a gun on his waist and you started getting scared?

Bottom line is, yes, some places are not the safest and if I have the right to carry a weapon to stop someone from endangering my life then i'll use it. I don't care if you have a knife and I have a .45 magnum, you better drop that knife before I start shooting.

 

[userwhoquitthesite]

knowing that everyone around me could be concealing a gun does not make me feel remotely secure. It makes me feel like I'd prefer to be back in the Sudan, where at least they tended to carry the guns out in the open

Until this line, I was very annoyed at this thread.

I realize this isn't how you meant it, but I agree that concealed carry is pointless.
If the gun can't be visible, it fails to deter violence, but rather can only act as an option to RESPOND to violence.

If you can carry a gun, you should be able to wear it openly. Hiding the gun just makes it suspicious

 

[Slayer_2]

Do you feel scared walking along the road? If you don't, but are worried about guns, you should reconsider your priorities. A car is a more deadly weapon and you are far more likely to be killed by a motor vehicle than a peaceful gun owner (and no, that's not an oxymoron). For the record, I'm not American, I just hate the guns = violence debate. If you give guns to sane, well trained, rational people, nothing bad should happen.

 

[Jarsh82]

you came to the united states and its the guns that scared you? youre either completely mad or an upper class straight cisgender christian white guy.

its not so much that were paranoid, as we have the idea that carrying guns around with us somehow makes us safer. like noone can sneak up behind you if you might shoot them, or that making a firefight two sided makes it so much fucking safer for you. its insane, but then we are collectively somewhat off over here. that being said, there *is* a certain contingent in american politics that believes that any day now the gay femninist communist nazi muslim mexican immigrants are going to rise up in overwhelming numbers and overthrow the good christian values we i guess base our lives on. i cant quite comprehend it, but theyre a pretty significant chunk of people; enough that politicians find it profitable to pander to them even at the cost of alienating other groups. they carry firearms constantly.

also: most of us (not myself) seem to see the right of every american citizen to carry guns around as a more important thing than the right to free speech or not be held against your will for more than 24 hours without a trial. baffling, but there it is.

I just don't know these people that you're talking about and I really doubt that the caricature you describe exists as a significant population. I've met a lot of stupid people who believe in a lot of stupid things but never all the stupid things. Most pro gun people I know are pro gun because they hunt.

 

[Olas]

For those of you that won't bother reading further than this, I went to the United States for the first time recently and, basically, have never felt more scared in my life. 'cos of the guns. Yeah, it's going to be that kind of topic.

It's simple logic. If everyone has guns, fewer people will get shot. What is so hard to understand about that?

 

[Agayek]

also: most of us (not myself) seem to see the right of every american citizen to carry guns around as a more important thing than the right to free speech or not be held against your will for more than 24 hours without a trial. baffling, but there it is.

Not gonna comment on whether or not I agree, but the general argument is that the rights of free speech and speedy trial (and in fact everything else in the Bill of Rights) are derived from the right to bear arms.

The general zeitgeist is the belief that our freedoms must be protected through the use of violence. It's a remnant of the Revolution, believe it or not, and shapes the majority of American gun culture. Owning a gun is less "I intend to shoot something with this" and more "I am now able to fight against any possible oppressors".

I doubt most gun owners actually think in those terms, but that's the cultural drive behind it.

 

[Jarsh82]

The NRA is a pretty affective lobbyist group but that doesn't mean that all NRA members are active in the politics side of it. The NRA offers a lot of perks to its members to keep its membership up. I do believe that the majority of guns in the US are for hunting and not protection.

 

[Dirty Hipsters]

It's pretty late into the thread, but I felt like I should post this:


The part I want people to see starts at around 2:53.

I would say that this guy is a great example of the average mindset for prolific gun owner in the US. He sees shooting guns as an activity for fun first, and the actual protection that said firearms offer as more of a secondary reason for having one. He carries a gun, not because he expects to get attacked, but because it's his legal right to do so, and in the unlikely event that he does get attacked he figures it's better to have one than not. As he puts it, it's basically the same as having a fire extinguisher in your house. You don't necessarily expect your house to catch fire, but it's good to be prepared. On top of this he is respectful of the power of guns, and knows how to properly handle them. This is the kind of person in America that owns a lot of guns, not some crazy jackass who expects that one day he's going to need to fight off an army by himself, or anything similar as some of the people in this thread have claimed.

 

[Jarsh82]

I would compare gun ownership to owning a sports car. It's unnecessary and has the potential to be dangerous but most people wouldn't argue against a responsible person owning one.

 

[Wyes]

I was drawing attention to the fact that people make arbitrary distinctions between state violence and criminal violence and nudging people toward the realization that they are one and the same.

EDIT: I'm sure during that whole sorrid afair at least one individual 'scored as many kills'*.

*If English allowed me to use inflection in written text that phrase would be used with much disgust.

Arbitrary or not, there are expectations that people hold. As the OP said, people expect others in a warzone to be armed and willing/capable of killing with said firearms.
In a country such as Australia, the people expect to be safe to go about their daily lives without people around them being armed and capable of killing them at a moment's notice (moments notice? I suppose it's a shortening of 'a moment of notice', which may justify the 's).

If you really want to get down to it, all safety is an illusion; at any moment, all life on the surface of the planet could be wiped out by a Gamma Ray Burst, which there is no way to predict. That doesn't mean that we should all live in lead-lined bunkers deep underground.

 

[Bertylicious]

I've never understood the worry people have about guns. I'm a Brit and even I can appreciate that guns are enormous fun!

I mean, have you ever actually used one? They're REALLY loud!

 

[Zack Alklazaris]

snip

What does that say about me that I would be far more scared of a militant bursting into a food restaurant than a guy with a hand gun in a gas station?

-----

It is more of a just in case type of thing and can be mainly used for intimidation than actual action. For example:

I had a friend who was staying at a hotel with his wife. Next door he could hear a woman screaming. Being ex-military he never felt comfortable without having a gun so he got the permit to carry one. Anyway, he pulled out his 44 longslide and broke down the door to find a man raping a woman. The man stopped dead in his tracks when he saw the gun.

---------

The United States is no more violent than other countries, however, its weapon of choice in robberies, muggings, and murders is the gun. Brittan I've heard its the knife. Just a different weapon class for the same purpose. Now while a gun can be over matched by a knife at close range not everyone knows that or knows how to defend themselves with a knife. So they buy a gun. (or you end up like me and learn self defense)

America does have its bad areas. I wouldn't go wander around Detroit in the middle of the night, but generally its a safe place.