Shotgun lock and wall mount

Costco is selling this useful ShotLock Universal Solo Vault Safe for $130, including shipping.

Introducing the ShotLock Solo-Vault universal shotgun mounting system; designed as a shotgun mounting platform with the ability to integrate and secure the greater majority of pump, semi-auto, O/U, side by side and pistol grip shotguns on the market today. Now you can enjoy the peace-of-mind that comes with knowing your personal home defense shotgun is always close, secure and ready. When the first responder is YOU, there may be no time to fumble with trigger locks or enter your combo and open your gun safe. With the ShotLock you're at-the-ready in seconds. Mount your ShotLock Solo-Vault on a wall, or in a vehicle to put the security you need, right where you need it, when you need it.

ShotLock Universal Solo Vault Safe

Mark Frauenfelder is the founder of Boing Boing and the editor-in-chief of MAKE and Cool Tools. Twitter: @frauenfelder. Come and hear Mark speak at the ALA conference in Chicago on July 1.

MORE: Gadgets

More at Boing Boing

Eurovision 2013: An American in London

The technology that links taxonomy and Star Trek

thecheat

Seems impractically long for a home defense weapon… though I suppose it would be great if some clay pigeons were breaking in.
- Xeni Jardin
  
  I, for one, welcome the invasion of our clay pigeon overlords!
- HC66
  
  Length is almost irrelevant. The true beauty of a pump-action shotgun is that everybody knows what they sound like when they’re pumped. And very people are willing to stick around to find out if the owner means business or not.
  - Modusoperandi
    
    I just have a tape recorder that plays that sound. It also has the happy side effect of me not accidentally shooting wife, child or dog, although admittedly it has made them somewhat twitchy.
- Anonymous
  
  A shotgun is great for home defense. If the robber is so close you can’t put a long gun between you, you are doing it wrong. And that’s why you keep a bowie knife in *both* your night-stands.
- siliconsunset
  
  Shotguns, with #9 birdshot, are perfect for home defense. #9 will devastate an unarmored target, but it won’t penetrate two layers of drywall. That means you can liquify the threat and worry *less* about shooting through a wall and hurting/killing your kids/partner/neighbors/pets/service droids.
  
  To all the people who are smugly denouncing guns: let other people protect themselves the way they see fit. If you don’t like guns, that’s fine. I just don’t want to hear about it, just like you don’t want to hear about how I do like them.
arikol

If I ever find myself living in an area where I feel like I need this product I think I’ll just move to some other country!
John Napsterista

This might be worthwhile if it was merged with a fingerprint unlocking system, like the one used here.
Mister44

re: “And you must live in a remarkably rich white neighborhood if you think the cops are going to show up promptly to a call like that.”

Oh I agree one shouldn’t be reliant on the police. Hopefully the guy will just fuck off. There is no reason for me to go out there at that point. If the cops don’t come, you just have to do the best you can on your own.
Gilbert Wham

When you absolutely, positively have to kill every last motherfucker in the room…
unit_1421

With a shotgun you want the long barrel to avoid an unintended head shot or fatal organ hit. The operative thinking is you aim for the legs to disable, not kill as you generally HAVE to do with a hand gun. Rock salt rounds from a shotgun are a good non-lethal defense. You’ll WISH you were dead from the sting…
- iguanoid
  
  I would use sea salt and add some fresh ground pepper. That would pre-season the meat. Mmm, roast burglar!
  - unit_1421
    
    If you’re willing to risk life or the death penalty for murder and cannibalism (assuming you intend to kill and eat the intruder after disabling him), bon appetite!
    
    The Supreme Court ruling on the DC hand gun law affirmed that we have the RIGHT to own a gun, but we DON’T HAVE to kill people with them. There are plenty of type of non-lethal ammunition options for home defense.
- Anonymous
  
  The barrel length of a shotgun is not a statistically significant factor in the shot dispersal, barrel diameter is. In other words, if you sawed the barrel off a shotgun and then machined it to accept full chokes, it would have a tighter pattern than a full 32-inch barrel with an open or improved-cylinder choke.
knoxblox

I prefer the idea of a tiger trap inside the doorway that has to be disabled by the door lock.
neilwalker

Generally in the UK we don’t have guns in our homes (for the most part), the bad guys don’t have guns (for the most part), the cops don’t have guns (for the most part). Maybe I’m just an anti-gun pacifist (possibly Commie) peacenik limey, but I’m surprised to see a gun based article on a life affirming blog like Boing Boing.
- benenglish
  
  Hmmm. For those of us who have been shot at or just plain shot, then the ready availability of a firearm is a pretty life-affirming thing.
  
  Still, if you prefer your gun-related affirmation of life in full-blown unicorn-chaser style, then how about a blind shooter achieving personal goals via formal target shooting?
  
  http://www.flickr.com/photos/41003466@N00/5286119178/
  
  Or how about a cute little girl (I *think* it’s a girl) picking up skills that may someday turn into a college scholarship?
  
  http://www.usashooting.com/news/ppp.jpg
- Anonymous
  
  That’s why I never got the “but if we outlaw guns, only outlaws would have guns.”
  
  I’m certain your average street thief/burglar doesn’t have the resources or money to get guns when they’re that scarce. Here in America, if somebody wants your wallet, you basically have to give it to them unless you have a gun. The old “Don’t bring a knife…” adage applies. The only people that could easily get illegal guns are not your average “steal the jewelry/technology” thiefs, they’re large cartel or mob people.
  
  The 2nd Amendment is a relic from a bygone time, just like the 3rd Amendment. It’s not considered a human right that people should be able to buy guns or refuse to quarter soldiers in a time of war. Those were just reactionary replies to the American Revolution.
fubbs

can you position it so the gun is pointing at the door, with a string tied to the trigger?
Modusoperandi

Antinous / Moderator #46 “All other considerations aside, it does make me quite nervous to think of a gun in the hands of someone who describes a drunk who comes to the wrong door as a ‘home invasion.”
It’s worse than that. You should’ve seen his reaction when The Beatles came over.

ArghMonkey #81 “Tell me shotguns and rifles are for hunting and I agree, I think hunting is disgusting too but for ‘simpler’ people in our society the thought of killing defenseless animals for fun seems to get them off.”
“Simpler”? How insulting. The “Yee hah! Bang bang!” stereotype is just that; a stereotype. Meat you catch yourself is healthier than the feed lot’d, steroid-infused crap you get in a store. Plus, it gets you outside, for some healthy exercise. It’s like a walk in the park, but with a loud noise and a season’s worth of tasty and cheap meat at the end.

“Statistically your more likely to DIE from a gun if you have one in your house then not, that’s a reality check, you endanger your life and the life of your family just by having a gun in your house!”
Actually, I believe the stat is that you’re more likely to shoot a family member than a crook.
Anonymous

A problem with this is that in the more likely occurance that somebody breaks in when you’re not home, your gun is out in the open and the whole assembly can be pried off of the wall. The thief can hacksaw his way to the gun at his leisure when he gets it home.
Anonymous

Having survived a home invasion I am pleased to see this product.

I lived in a sketchy neighborhood but my situation could have happened to anyone, in any neighborhood. A very drunk man attempted to push his way through my front door. I woke up, shotgun in hand and leveled at the door. Prior to busting down the door I yelled at the guy, asking him “who is it?” for lack of a better phrase. He was so drunk that he thought he was locked out of his own house.

The fingerprint system is a joke. Analysis takes far too long and can be bypassed. There are also batteries to consider.

No kids so my shotgun is under the bed, loaded and ready. The badguys don’t for you to open doors or unlock safes. The cops wait for backup. One living cop is worth a dead family of four in their mind. When seconds count – help will be there in minutes.
- Antinous / Moderator
  
  Having survived a home invasion I am pleased to see this product…A very drunk man attempted to push his way through my front door…He was so drunk that he thought he was locked out of his own house.
  
  All other considerations aside, it does make me quite nervous to think of a gun in the hands of someone who describes a drunk who comes to the wrong door as a “home invasion.”
  - Mister44
    
    re” All other considerations aside, it does make me quite nervous to think of a gun in the hands of someone who describes a drunk who comes to the wrong door as a “home invasion.”"
    
    What would you call it? “An unwanted home visitation”?
    
    If said drunk manages to kick down your door and becomes violent – what do you do? Stand there? Let him kick you in the nuts? Wrastle with him? It may not warren using a gun – but it may well come to that.
    - Antinous / Moderator
      
      Dude, seriously. This is real life, not the zombie apocalypse. You could yell through the door to tell him that he has the wrong house. You could call the cops. If he’s that drunk, you could blow on him and watch him fall down. This is hysteria.
      - Anonymous
        
        I suspect there’s more to the “drunk home invasion” story than has been presented here. What sort of neighborhood was it (in other words, did the homeowner have a reasonable expectation of a violent criminal on the other side of the door)? What exactly did said drunk do to enter the home? Was the door in fact a suitable barrier against the drunk’s entry? Was the “intruder” angry? Violent? Threatening? Certainly it’s easy to picture a sloppy drunk falling against the front door giggling madly to himself, and react in horror when picturing the armed homeowner just inside, ready to disintegrate the poor sot. On the other hand, it’s similarly easy to picture the angry drunk who, having failed to gain entrance through the front door, breaks through the window instead, and upon finding unfamiliar belongings or family members inside, increases in violence. Certainly it would be unfortunate to kill this intruder for his/her mistake, but when a person’s behavior threatens me or my family with serious injury or death, I’m willing to exert deadly force against that person to stop the attack, whether that person’s behavior stems from violent intent or too much bourbon. If my response proves fatal to the attacker, I will certainly spend much of my subsequent life reliving the experience and second-guessing my response. I prefer that possibility over spending my subsequent life wishing I could see my kid again, or, for that matter, simply not having any subsequent life. The possibility I’ll ever be involved in such an experience is remote, but it’s a situation I prefer to think through and prepare for, rather than pretend it was impossible.
      - Mister44
        
        Hysteria? Maybe you didn’t read what I wrote. I described a rational response to a hypothetical (but real) situation.
        
        Sure – if the guy is outside – call the cops, tell him to fuck off.
        
        If the guy breaks in – is in your house/apt – that is a different scenario. Again you can call the cops and tell him to fuck off. What if instead of leaving he decides to be aggressive? What if he is high on PCP or Meth or what ever is going nuts? You have to react.
        
        Fortunately, brandishing a firearm usually ends a confrontation. Using lethal force to protect yourself or your family is rare (thank goodness).
      - Antinous / Moderator
        
        The commenter to whom I responded described a situation in which a drunk rattled his doorknob as a home invasion. I pointed out the incongruence of the term with the actual incident. Your escalation to PCP and meth is a fantasy. If an alien zombie with a ray gun kicks down my door, you have my blessing to respond in any way that seems appropriate to you, but it really has nothing to do with this discussion.
      - AirPillo
        
        http://art.ngfiles.com/images/2/rubberninja_alien-hominid-zombie.jpg
        
        This fellow, maybe?
Anonymous

One day in the future, someone will repost this on the prodigy of Boing Boing and readers will amuse themselves with the notion that the people of the early 21st century actually had firearms in their homes. They’ll shake their heads with resigned disapproval when they read that these people felt they were an essential component of their safety.
How did these people live with such constant fear in their lives that they felt they had to have a shotgun at the ready.
Anonymous

@Antinous

I don’t think he knew it was a drunk guy before he got his gun. If I lived in a bad neighborhood and someone was jiggling my door’s handle and trying to get into my house in the middle of the night I don’t think it’s wrong to arm yourself and prepare for the worst. It’s not like he popped off 2 shots through the door or anything.

@All
The right to defend yourself shouldn’t be taken away from people. If you want to hide in your closet and *hope* a robber doesn’t find you and kill you, that’s your right. But it should also be your right to defend yourself with lethal force if needed.

@ArghMonkey

1) People who want to do bad things are disgusting. Guns are just something that can be used to do bad things. A can of gas can drive you to school, or burn it down… it’s the actions of the person that will make the difference.

2) Better than what? Showing people a safe way to keep firearms out of the hands of children?

3) There’s nothing ‘wrong’ with people who like guns. 99% of ‘gun’ people are actually nice people who enjoy a hobby. They aren’t bad people because the like the challenge of target shooting, hunting for food/sport or think their life is worth protecting. I’m sure most criminals aren’t ‘gun’ people, they just use them for evil deeds.
- Antinous / Moderator
  
  I didn’t say anything about guns or gun owners. I said that somebody jiggling your door handle is not a home invasion. The airports are not filled with terrorists waiting to blow you up. The streets are not filled with pedophiles waiting to abduct your children. The US is not full of armed home invaders waiting for you to go to bed so that they can rob and murder you. Yes, there are plenty of crimes, but describing this incident as a home invasion is histrionic.
  - Anonymous
    
    You’ve obviously never had a mad drunk try to get in your door at 3 am. Hell, you’ve obviously never experienced anybody trying to get in your house at 3 am. That is not “door handle jiggling” territory. That is banging and kicking on the door, cursing and screaming, eventual banging on the windows. Eventual brick through the window. It is not fun. It is not a scene made for keeping your head. The few times I’ve had something like that happen to me I at stayed cool enough to call the cops before I got my pistol out. Of course, only one of those times did the cops show up before my yelling, “I have a gun! Retreat from the door!” drove off the intruder.
    
    I never felt like a bad-ass or Rambo after wards. I was was scared shitless. I don’t like the idea of killing another human being. I like the idea of being killed even less. Also, I was never defending my ‘things’. If I was defending my ‘things’ I’d booby trap my house when I was gone. Steal my shit: I have insurance. No. I was defending myself from a goddam immediate potential threat. There is a strange person trying to get into my home (or in my home) and I do not know their intentions towards me. Since they have they are already trying to force themselves into my home I have to assume the worse.
    
    Being able to adequately protect yourself from violence and murder are a basic human right. I fear that some of our fringe left and most western Europeans have forgotten this.
    - Antinous / Moderator
      
      You’ve obviously never had a mad drunk try to get in your door at 3 am.
      
      You obviously didn’t know my father.
      
      Hell, you’ve obviously never experienced anybody trying to get in your house at 3 am.
      
      Just because I can react to things calmly doesn’t mean that I’ve never experienced an emergency. Coping skills > shooting at anything that scares you.
      - Mister44
        
        re: “Coping skills > shooting at anything that scares you.”
        
        OMG – are you reading the same text I am? This Anon is not some trigger happy wannabe – he IS using rational and appropriate action.
      - Beefmalone
        
        Your “coping skills” aren’t going to count for a damn thing if some nutcase comes busting through your door wanting to rape you. Nobody here WANTS to have to resort to using a gun in self-defense. However, it is comforting to us to know that, in the unlikely event that something like that happens, we will be prepared to defend ourselves and our family. Think it can’t happy to you? Ask those shopkeepers who were in L.A. during the riots or Katrina survivors in NOLA. I’d rather have a gun and (hopefully) not need it than need it and not have it.
Anonymous

For those not in the USA — the idea of “banning guns” does not work in the USA. Reason is — drug gangs who smuggle drugs can (and do) smuggle guns as well. Guns are then sold to other criminals. The USA has a huge and loose border with Mexico. If, hypothetically, somehow guns could be banned, they would flow across that border just as the hundreds of tons of drugs flow across the border today– and they would all go to criminals.

Not to mention having to get 3/4 of state legislatures agree to repeal the 2nd amendment. Never will happen.

So the USA is not comparable to other countries with other cultures.

On topic — a shotgun is a good home defense weapon — as the shot will not go through walls and injure others.
im1

These comments are truly sickening. Do you americans have any idea at all how appalling your society appears to the rest of the world, that you can have this sort of casual conversation about ways to kill and injure other people? And then to top it off you delude yourselves that everyone wants to be like you?
- Ito Kagehisa
  
  Everyone dies. Why is that sickening to you?
- narddogz
  
  What makes you think the comments are made by “americans”?
  
  Since you have apparently identified the society that is creating these comments, please identify your society as well so we can contrast and compare.
  
  AFAIK all societies have dangerous criminals and home invaders, and these people tend to not sit down when they enter your home and listen to reason. Criminals in your society do, though?
  
  Or if the do not, please enliten us on how people in your society successfully and safely handle a home invasion.
- ArghMonkey
  
  Totally agree.
  
  As a Canadian I find the attitudes to be downright disgusting, human life apparently has little value for many americans, just seems to be the reality of the way they think.
  
  Glad im not the only one pointing out how sick this whole post is.
  - Mister44
    
    re: “As a Canadian I find the attitudes to be downright disgusting, human life apparently has little value for many americans, just seems to be the reality of the way they think.”
    
    How is that? In fact the views have been nothing BUT pro-life – the preservation of life. No one has endorsed turning into a one man vigilante. Everyone has said they wouldn’t want to have to use lethal force, but to protect themselves and their families – the option is there.
    
    re: “This whole “guns are just tools” argument is ridiculous.”
    
    If you think knives, axes, and bats (clubs) weren’t first made to kill, then you are deluding yourself (though knives had other uses too.) It doesn’t matter what the original purpose is for. If we didn’t use technology originally developed for war – we would have jack and shit – and jack left town.
    
    re: “There is no argument, weak or not, for handguns and other assault guns.”
    
    Sure there is. Aside from defense and the various forms of competition and rec shooting – we want them? Just because you don’t want them doesn’t mean you get to take mine away.
    
    Should we ban motorcycles and fast sports cars because they pose a larger hazard? Lets all dive 40mph so we have less fatal wrecks. Lets wrap the whole world in bubble wrap with out causing suffocation.
    
    re:”Statistically your more likely to DIE from a gun if you have one in your house then not, that’s a reality check, you endanger your life and the life of your family just by having a gun in your house! ”
    
    And? You are even more likely to die if you have a pool in your house. You are even MORE likely to die if you have stairs in your house. You are even MORE likely to die in a car wreck. Somehow I bet those examples you and most others find as acceptable risks. It is like ‘stranger danger’, media blowing things out of proportion to make things scarier than they are.
    
    re: “Lets use some intelligence here… how DISGUSTING guns are but obviously ethics and morals have little part in many yank lives… if the comments are disgusting and weakly trying to support a sickening stupid tradition in a barbaric backward country, then I will call it out.”
    
    You implore the use of intelligence, yet your tools are insults and emotions. You haven’t made a case that gun owner ship can neither be moral nor ethical. Nor have you made the case of the absurd idea that I don’t have a right to protect myself and my family. In fact you haven’t made a case against guns – other than you find them silly and ‘disgusting’ and you don’t want people to own them. Too bad, buddy. What are you into, lets ban that.
merreborn

The true beauty of a pump-action shotgun is that everybody knows what they sound like when they’re pumped. And very people are willing to stick around to find out if the owner means business or not.

Can I just buy a device that makes a pump action sound then?
- imag
  
  You can. Most gun owners will tell you that you’re endangering yourself that way as well, as you do not have the weapon to back up the sound.
  
  The folks who are not deterred by that sound, in other words, are not people you want to face without a weapon.
  
  I actually think this device might encourage safer gun practice. A lot of people don’t lock their guns *because* they don’t want to have to go to the safe in the middle of the night. This device provides a reasonably happy medium.
- Silent_Guru
  
  There is an App for that ;)
V

This practical and thoughtful gift is endorsed by the zombie-slaying housewives of the Team Unicorn PSA.

http://www.boingboing.net/2010/12/23/zombie-apocalypse-ad.html
Anonymous

I have to agree the better option is hiding quietly. You might lose some things, but that’s way better than being dead or disabled. You only need a gun if they come for you, and at that point, a shotgun doesn’t do much.
Mister44

Mine is just put up and needs to be racked to load.

re: “Can I just buy a device that makes a pump action sound then?”

Yes – but you need the shotshells stupid, drunk, high, and/or hard of hearing bad guys.

Also – don’t use bird shot, salt, bean bags, etc. That shit won’t guarantee they stop attacking and will not incapacitate. It may only escalate the situation. Buck shot and/or slugs are the only solution. If you feel you must use less than lethal, invest in a Taser. IIRC, they were working on shot gun fired Tasers, I dunno if they worked that out or not yet.
GaryP

Correction to my earlier post: Chamberlain NOT McMillian (sorry, wrong PM).
Point still stands for countries and for individuals. Being willing to defend yourself is the only protection against bullies and criminals.
Fortunately, the need to use deadly force is rare (I hope I never have to) but to reject the possibility of effective self-defense (and unless you are a martial artist fighting only unarmed criminals a gun is the only effective self-defense available)is either saintly, stupid, or, as noted earlier, childish. I don’t want to be any of those things.
imag

There are also a few reasonably legitimate reasons many gun-owners would recommend shooting to kill in an intruder situation:

1. You don’t know if the intruder has weapons of his or her own. If you just disable the person, s/he could still shoot back at you. In fact, they are going to now be very angry at you. Drugs may also allow them to overcome pain.

2. This kind of situation is likely dark and confusing without factoring in careful targeting of nonvital parts. In other words, why take chances with your life for someone who means to do your family harm?

3. If burglars know they are risking death in burgling, they are less likely to burgle than if they think homeowners will simply make gun noises or shoot rock salt at them. Say what you will, but that’s proven to be true.

For the record, I don’t own a shotgun and these points wouldn’t necessarily guide my decision-making in a home defense situation, but I do see the rationale for each of them. I personally would allow a slightly elevated risk to myself to avoid killing other people, but I understand why others wouldn’t.
- Artie
  
  3. If burglars know they are risking death in burgling, they are less likely to burgle than if they think homeowners will simply make gun noises or shoot rock salt at them. Say what you will, but that’s proven to be true.
  
  This is actually the reason that most burglaries happen during the afternoon, when no one’s home, rather than at night, when they’re liable to be shot at (at least in America, where that’s a deterrent).
  
  Of course, that means that if someone has the guts to break into your house at night, you probably are in immediate mortal danger.
benenglish

I don’t know why I try. My earlier attempt to bring attention to heartwarming, big “Awwww!” moments related to firearms have clearly gone for naught.

There are some things – abortion, guns, and “My God can beat up your god”, mainly – that just aren’t worth discussing online. I think I’ve seen one mind truly changed via an online discussion about guns and I’ve been slinging words online since BoingBoing was on paper and before the WWW existed.

FordPrefect’s long post just above this one is what prompted me to drop a note, here. You might think that ArghMonkey’s post would spur me to write but, no, not by a long shot. Trolls who so completely leave reason behind are transparently trolls. No one could *actually* be that stupid.

FordPrefect, on the other hand, gets pretty much everything wrong but seems to do so out of an honest ignorance of the subject.

Words on a blog won’t sway him, of course, but perhaps action might.

Some years ago, I was at a multi-week training session for my employer and one of the others there was a young lady from Chicago. She’d grown up in the city and thought guns were just weird. I think she put it as “I just don’t *get* guns.”

One Saturday, I took her to an indoor range and rented a couple of submachine guns. I selected an HK MP5 for her, given that, in my experience, it’s a pretty easy gun for a beginner to shoot. I sprang for the whole private instructor thing and after a safety and procedures lesson, the instructor and I stood by while she picked up, learned, then fired the first firearm she’d ever approached closely enough to touch.

It was amazing to watch. The smile on her face started out faint, forced, and with traces of dread. Within 10 minutes, she was loosing full mags of 9mm and grinning so wide I feared for a facial injury.

In just minutes – seconds, actually – she had learned for herself that firearms are good, clean, safe fun when used properly. I swear, she was giggling all the way back to the hotel. Along the way she said, “NOW I get it!”

It was thus that I learned that people who are unfamiliar with and negative toward firearms are generally not evil, just ignorant. Ignorance, thankfully, can be cured.

FordPrefect – if you ever find yourself in or around Houston, Texas and you can find a way to contact me (There are enough clues herein to make that possible without me having to post an email address), consider yourself invited for a little range time. I guarantee you’ll enjoy yourself and you’ll learn something.
- Mister44
  
  Your story reminds me of a tale I saw on my Aliens Quadrilogy.
  
  Sigorne Weaver was talking to James Cameron about if she really had to use a gun in the new Aliens Film. He said yes and that the character definitely would to protect Newt. Weaver was anti-gun and having second thoughts when he got one of the wranglers to bring out a Thompson and took her out back to shoot it. I don’t know if it changed her overall view – but she too was all grins.
Mike_K

ArghMonkey is almost a parody of the effete city dweller who thinks guns and hunting is just awful and only barbarians would kill a “defenseless animal.” Then, after posting his disgust, he sits down to a steak dinner never thinking about the truly defenseless cow that was killed to provide his meal. Some of us, even those with doctorates, think nature includes such things as hunting and eating the game you collect. We think it is part of the human experience and pity the poor wuss who thinks it is some sort of animal abuse. Become a vegan and come back so we can talk.

As far as home defense, I don’t expect the police to come if someone attacks my home and family. I have a loaded pistol in the bedside stand. My shotguns are locked up but I am ready to defend myself and my home. I spend quite a bit of time in England and have noticed the declining safety of the streets, especially in some midlands small cities. I would no longer walk through London late at night as I did 30 years ago. A wealthy businessman was murdered by home invaders in Chelsea the last time I was in London. The breakdown of civil order is sad. The criminals don’t have guns because they don’t need them. A homeowner was arrested for trying to drive off boys who were throwing rocks at his windows. He was armed with a piece of wood but it didn’t save him from the gaol. The rowdies were not prosecuted.
Mister44

re: “Your escalation to PCP and meth is a fantasy”

Fantasy? It happens. Your mention of zombies and aliens is fantasy. I have stayed within the realm or reality, and I don’t understand why you think I am coming up with some fanciful impossible scenario.

Worse yet there are cold sober people who are intent on doing you harm. My mom knew someone who, along with several others, were victims of a home invasion. Glossing over the details, they were robbed, forced to perform sex acts on one another and raped, driven around to drain their ATM, and taken to a field and executed. My some miracle one of the women survived being shot in the head and was able to stumble to a farm house in the distance.

I don’t jump up with every knock or sound – but I would like to think I have a fighting chance should I become a victim.
stevew

Amateurs like to think that the sound of a pump action racking a round into the chamber will be sufficient to ward off an intruder. Consider that the sound also gives away your position, and that the pros wait until the gun is at their shoulder, aimed and ready to fire and then they rack a round. My father was a cop for a while and his advice was to play possum if an intruder wakes you from sleep and live, versus being a dead hero.
noneofyourbusiness

@im1

Americans forget that other people in the world don’t live like them, with guns readily accessible at the nearest strip mall. Violence, in order to protect our material possessions, is considered acceptable behavior.

Our frontier mindset, imagining enemies around us 24-7 trying to hurt us or steal our possessions, is alive and well, showing no signs of abating anytime soon.

Unfortunately, because there are now so many violent and thieving methamphetamine addicts now living in rural areas throughout this country who do engage in home invasions and theft, guns are considered necessary when living far from metropolitan areas. Everyone I know who lives out in the boonies of California, owns a gun or shotgun. Everyone of them has had a run in with a methhead camping somewhere out on their property or stealing something.

For my job, I travel from the Bay Area to the Oregon state line and eastbound all the way to Reno and south to Visalia and Santa Maria. There are some towns that are just plain scary to drive though because you can tell by the faces of the residents how prevalent meth use is. Talk about zombies…
- Ito Kagehisa
  
  Over here on the Right Coast (small joke there) we haven’t got a lot of meth addicts, but as the economy crumbles more people are getting more desperate.
  
  My sister’s house got tossed last week, the burglars ignored the TV, PCs and other electronics and took several containers of small change.
Space Monkey

I love all the stereotypes about Americans and guns that come out here. For the record, I don’t have any guns, and have never felt the need to own or carry one for safety, but I like to go out shooting with my friends sometimes.

Funnily enough, none of the other Americans in my extended family have guns, but almost all the Canadians do.

Also, I’ve lived in some bad neighborhoods in America, and I’ve only seen a fight in public once in more than 30 years, and it didn’t involve guns. I’d be surprised if many of those self-righteous brits weighing in here could say that, since I saw more street violence on each of the three nights I spent in Glasgow than in all the years I’ve lived in America, and the locals I was with didn’t seem to think it was anything exceptional.

If you think tightening the gun laws would fix those problems, perhaps you should take a look at Mexico, which has far stricter gun laws than the US. Those laws obviously don’t do anything to keep guns out of the hands of a lot of horrifically violent criminals.
Modusoperandi

I modified one to hold a chainsaw…for the zombies.
GaryP

One comment to FordPerfect:
Accidental shootings are not under reported, if you seek medical care for a gunshot wound it is reported, so no accidental shootings are missed.

To all that think non-lethal force is good (rock salt, shooting at legs, etc.):
The only reason for using force to defend your home is because you fear for your (or your family’s) life. If you do have this fear, you are foolish to do anything but shoot to kill. If you don’t have this fear, don’t shoot at all. Anyone thinking that they can pull off a shot to the arm or legs (and that the assailant may not return fire–they won’t be shooting to wound) is living in cloud cuckoo land. Retreat, if possible, as far as you can while still protecting your loved ones, and then use deadly force if the intruder still advances.

Frankly, that any adult would refuse to use deadly force to protect their loved ones is to me an indication of how infantile our society has become. I am sure that if I killed an intruder that I would have nightmares for the rest of my life, but if I didn’t act to protect my family I would be deserving to rot in hell for all eternity. If you are an adult you have the responsibility to act to protect others around you, if possible. When you family is involved, there is no limit to this responsibility.

To refuse to act because killing an aggressor is unpleasant (if it isn’t unpleasant you are “different”, in my view) is childish (in the sense you have not accepted adult responsibilities).

To refuse to contemplate the (unlikely) need to act, and prepare accordingly, is childish. This is on par with those that support unilateral disarmament so that we can have “peace in our time.” Stupid and childish is the kindest thing I can say about Mr. Macmillan. A favorite author wrote in that era: “You don’t have to carry a sword to die on one.”

I keep guns (and know how to use them) because I cannot be sure of defending my family any other way (even with them, it is not certain but it is the best I can do). I am older and in poor health. I cannot be sure that I can fist fight a younger, stronger assailant (much less multiple or armed ones). To assume that “it can’t happen to me” is childish, to refuse to prepare is childish (sorry to overuse that word but it describes exactly the mindset of so many–let the police be the adults who will come to my defense when I cry “Mommy!”)

Those of you who take the “high moral ground” that you would never use deadly force to protect your family, I feel sorry for the innocents under your care. You prefer to protect your view of yourself as a “good” person more than fulfill your responsibilities to protect them.

My suggestion is “GROW UP.” The world is filled with bad people. I don’t want to kill them but I will if they force me to choose between them and the people I love, I will kill them even if it costs me my life, or my peace of mind. That is what adult people do. They defend the innocent despite the cost to themselves. To do anything else is to try to remain a child, without responsibilities. Remaining a child all our lives is obviously the path our governments want us to follow but fortunately, some of us have the constitutional right to be an adult if we choose to.

Remember: When seconds count, the police are only minutes away!
- siliconsunset
  
  This. All of it. A thousand times.
  
  Thank you GaryP, for so eloquently stating that which I could not.
RabelRabel

I truly like the handful of Brits I’ve known and have a great respect for England and its critical, positive contributions to the world’s history.
But some of you fellows could profit from a consideration of history. European monarchs largely disarmed the commoners in the middle ages, before firearms were invented. And correct me if I’m wrong, but just a few centuries ago possession of a longbow was punishable by death. So British culture has a long tradition of an unarmed populace.
America, on the other hand, was still a largely unsettled frontier nation just a little over a century ago. The native population didn’t take too kindly to that settlement and guns became an an ingrained part of our culture.
We’re not going to change and neither are you.
I will say that if you had had a few Apache or Cherokee warriors back in the day, you wouldn’t have had all that trouble with those pesky Vikings. Or the Normans for that matter.
FordPrefect

Hi, I created an account just to say this.
BoingBoing is amazing. This post is not.
Anyone who thinks he/she is safer when carrying a gun , or having a gun around at his house for “protection” when living within the confines of a relatively advanced society/nation is a potential threat. Almost as much as any small time crook/burglar running around with one.
You may think you can restrain yourself and fire only when you re absolutely sure you re facing an immediate death threat. You may believe you re a Zen Master. And I don’t care. Almost everyone can become mentally unstable under stress, which leads to poor judgement/decisions. In every developed country around the world, bar the US, you have to go through hell to get a license for a hunting weapon, or a 9 mm for shooting practice. And guess what, the “accidental” shooting numbers are lower. Less people are wounded/dead. There are still ways a psycho can get hold of a firearm, but it s way harder and way more expensive. In the US, he just drops by the local gun store, and voila!
Also, the whole “home protection” argument is by default invalid, since, while it is legal to own a gun, it is illegal to shoot someone with it, even for home protection. You will still be prosecuted in most states (except where the Case Law is in effect), and you may be subject to severe penalties yourself.
Odds are, the burglar / drug addict / whoever invades your house doesn’t want a fight. They just want to take whatever they can , as quick as they can, and get the frak outta there.
So instead of giving them a valid reason to think you re a threat to them, do yourself a favour and be a little chicken. Let them take what they want. make sure your house is insured. That type of behavior will protect you more effectively than any gun.

On a totally unrelated note, its interesting how I only bothered to make an account and comment when a post bothered me, while I ve read so much great stuff here.
Anonymous

Mister,
I have been in many an argument on the best rounds for home defense. I am an avid bird hunter, and anyone who argues birdshot doesn’t have stopping power has never seen what bird shot can do at closer ranges (like say the distance across a room. For a demonstration of its devastating affects, here is a video. Enjoy.

http://www.fieldandstream.com/blogs/gun-nuts/2010/10/bourjaily-bird-and-buckshot-vs-walls
- Mister44
  
  re: Anon #29 and bird shot.
  
  I am going to have to respectfully disagree.
  
  Can bird shot kill? Sure.
  
  Will it reliably stop someone? No.
  
  Of course shot placement is key, but it lacks penetration, making an ugly, but shallow wound. In short – use the right tool for the job. You wouldn’t use birdshot on a deer. You wouldn’t keep a bucket of water around instead of a real fire extinguisher.
  
  If you fire on someone it is because you fear for your life or the life of someone else. If that happens you don’t get a redo. Failure may result in death. How much do you want to gamble by using the wrong tool?
  
  Here is one of my favorite sites showing the effect of various rounds:
  
  http://www.theboxotruth.com/docs/bot3_2.htm < -- penetration tests
  
  If nothing else read the summary on that page.
  
  http://www.theboxotruth.com/docs/bot33.htm < -- Rock salt
  
  http://www.theboxotruth.com/docs/bot35.htm < -- load of dimes
  
  http://www.theboxotruth.com/docs/bot14_4.htm <– rifle vs shotgun – includes birdshot and buckshot

Anonymous

Speaking as someone who has been both shot at and actually shot, I can tell you that it ain’t no picnic. During a robbery of my field equipment, while on-the-job, I took three 9mm hollow-point bullets in a IIIA vest, with a trauma plate, at point-blank range.
It is not like what you see in a Hollywood movie. I did not get up, until four days later, in the hospital.
I will never be without a firearm again. If you don’t want to carry one, or keep one in your home, that is just fine with me, and the criminals.
If you have the luxury of choice, don’t chose victim-hood.

neilwalker

I live in a fairly large city in the UK. We had a death by shooting quite a few years ago. It was a big thing because of its rarity. We had a guy go crazy with guns recently (not in my city, but it was the main national news story for about a week). In the UK that happens about once every ten years or so, and each time, the gun ownership laws get tightened a little bit more. Now, I’m not disputing the nobility of being able to defend the homestead against home invading meth heads, but I like a country where owning a gun is highly unusual, gun crime is still very rare and home invasions aren’t common enough to put them on a standard list of eventualities to prepare for. But, thats just a cultural thing.

Mister44

re: “while it is legal to own a gun, it is illegal to shoot someone with it, even for home protection.”

This is incorrect. I mean – wildly so. If you are in fear for your life, you have the right to protect it.

Now most states don’t make it legal to shoot someone over property – such as stealing your car. Each state has their own rules, but I can’t recall a single one where protection of life wasn’t a justifiable reason for lethal force. Texas has a pretty broad law, as long as they are on your property. Missouri and others have a “Castle” law that spells out a persons rights.

You are right that is unlikely for most people to ever need a gun for protection. But not all of us live in nice neighborhoods. I have lived in some pretty shady places, and there are still people living in places where a murder a week isn’t uncommon.

So while it is unlikely you will need a gun in self defense, that doesn’t mean you shouldn’t have one or that it is crazy to do so. It is the same reason we lock our doors at night and have a fire extinguisher.

re: “do yourself a favour and be a little chicken”

If it is only you in your house, fine, I guess. If there are others such as your wife and kids, are you going to gamble with their well being as well? An intruder may just want to take something. Then again – maybe they are there for another reason. There have been many cases of simple gas station robberies where the criminal shoots the clerk for no reason at all. I personally am not going to sit quietly and pray that he takes my laptop and goes on his way. I will fight tooth and nail if I have to.

I wouldn’t fret too much about accidental shootings – they are even more rare. In fact, you are more likely to have an accidental death if you own a pool, yet no one seems to be too worried about pool ownership.

For too many people all they know about guns they see on TV or movies. They have no idea that what they see is unrealistic. They have been conditioned to see guns are something the bad guy uses. That they are used for war and crime. In reality nearly all guns in the US won’t take a life, and are used to shoot paper, maybe hunt a little, participate in a Bullseye or IPSC competition, or just look nice in a collection. There are millions of peaceful gun owners who have never tried to rob a bank or over throw a Central American country.

TheCrawNotTheCraw

Wouldn’t a few properly placed Claymore mines be better?

travtastic

I have a hatchet and a machete next to my bed (legitimate backpacking tools!). I’m not sure where I fall on this issue, then.

Anonymous

I neither own a gun nor have even fired one. The primary reason is that I choose to live in a small suburban American city on a well-trafficked, well-lit street that is subject to 24/7 police patrols as the municipal police station is less than ten minutes away, by foot. This aspect of American life is often overlooked by Europeans: police protection is not omnipresent. American police do not make regular patrols of their cities. They instead spend their shifts responding to calls or sitting in their patrol cars. In exurban and rural areas, response times often can be measured in hours. One more important consideration is that gun laws are not uniform across the United States. Crime rates tend to be extremely high in locales with strict gun control that are close to areas with lax gun control. In this situation, it makes sense to make gun laws more uniform. Given the United States’ cultural disposition, this means making gun laws more permissive. I only hope we Americans can follow the Swiss example as this comes to pass.

travtastic

I’d also add that in America the cops can be just as harmful as the criminals.

Anonymous

What really makes me sad is:

It’s a sad indication of the country you live in if you feel the need to sleep with a shotgun in your room. Or even own a gun for defense.

Anonymous

@Mister44: Sure – if the guy is outside – call the cops, tell him to fuck off.

And you must live in a remarkably rich white neighborhood if you think the cops are going to show up promptly to a call like that.

In my relatively middle class part of California, they’ll tell me it’s a civil matter, to stop wasting their time if nobody’s dead, and hang up.

mikey p

Seems clear a bunch of you genuinely feel like you need a gun to be safe, given where you live. Not having lived where you live, I don’t feel like I have the right to judge that. If you don’t feel safe where you live without a gun, then you don’t.

I am very glad I don’t live somewhere like that though. It’d get to me in a big way.

This isn’t meant to be patronising, and I hope it doesn’t sound that way, but: I just hope, if it ever starts to get to you, that it’s clear there’s a whole bunch of places you can move to where hardly anyone feels like they need a gun to be safe.

Sorry if I sound like a patronising dick. I just hope you know it can be different. Maybe not where you live now, but somewhere else.

Mister44

Oh – sorry – one last statement.

When it comes to just about anything – why should my freedom and liberty be limited because of a small number of abusers?

OK – I am off my Libertarian soap box.

ubarch

In regards to the people here that are making broad judgements about their personal and national superiority based on gun ownership, I think this is just thoughtless ideology that can be ignored without consequence.

I have a gun in my home, and the “living in constant fear” remarks always sounded absurd to me. A gun isn’t expensive, even for those that aren’t wealthy– you can purchase a gun of decent quality for one or two hundred dollars, so it isn’t a huge sacrifice to take up shooting or hunting as a hobby. They can be fun to shoot; I’ve been going to ranges since I was eleven. If people are willing to purchase a gun for recreational shooting, then there are virtually no additional costs associated with keeping that same gun for home defence. Really, if I already own it, why deny myself that particular contingency? Fear never enters into the equation.

In fact, I rarely hear the argument even framed in terms of cost/benefit. Even if you disagree in this context, at least both sides are assumed to be rational, and we’re objectively debating the merits of gun ownership. It’s much more common to hear someone begin their objection (like a few of the posts above) by loudly asserting that gun ownership is clearly caused by some sort of psychological flaw. In other words, just narrow minded ideology.

Stranger

Those who tout England’s draconian gun laws should consider these facts. Polls find both England and the US have some 11,000,000 crimes a year. The US has almost five times greater population than England so the US crime rate is essentially one fifth England’s.

European gun laws? England’s crime rate is the highest in Europe, while relatively well armed Bulgaria is the lowest, with a 40% spread between them. But the US crime rate is only 40% of Bulgaria’s. And it would be far lower, if the US had the rational gun laws the Founders intended.

Antinous / Moderator

You seem to have forgotten to include the link to that fascinating set of statistics. I’m particularly intrigued to see that we’re now getting our crime stats from polls.

BlackPanda

So does that mean the UK would be a _less violent_ place, if we had as many guns as you guys, do you think?

ArghMonkey

This whole “guns are just tools” argument is ridiculous.

Sure a knife can cut a steak and stab someone to death but a gun is designed to kill!

Tell me you just shoot targets for fun and I say a laser toy can do the same thing, without the side effect of sudden death if you hit someone.

Tell me shotguns and rifles are for hunting and I agree, I think hunting is disgusting too but for “simpler” people in our society the thought of killing defenseless animals for fun seems to get them off. There is no argument, weak or not, for handguns and other assault guns.

Lets use some intelligence here.

Tell me human life doesnt have much value to you.

Tell me you like that guns make you feel powerful, the ability to control other peoples life or death.

Tell me you loved John Wayne movies and wish you could shoot people without consequence cause its a rush.

Just be honest, cause the other arguments here dont hold water.

Statistically your more likely to DIE from a gun if you have one in your house then not, that’s a reality check, you endanger your life and the life of your family just by having a gun in your house!

I would attempt to appeal to your humanity, ethics and morals to show you how DISGUSTING guns are but obviously ethics and morals have little part in many yank lives.

Btw, sorry for sounding harsh but I can only deal with whats infront of me, if the comments are disgusting and weakly trying to support a sickening stupid tradition in a barbaric backward country, then I will call it out.

pupdog

Too far from the bed, you’d have to get out and actually take like, 2 steps to get to that thing…

millrick

and then you’d have to unlock it…
…seconds count, dammit!
- Anonymous
  
  and of course you left the keys in the front door.

Anonymous

At home defence ranges, birdshot and buckshot are as one with deer slugs: devastating, especially when aimed at the centre of mass (torso region). The short (typically under 3m) ranges encountered in a home situation mean that the shot has essentially no time to spread out. A hit anywhere between the neck and belt buckle will drop your attacker almost universally. To ensure effectiveness, though, buckshot is probably a safer bet.

+1 to the people who’ve pointed out that an intruder in the occupied home has made his intentions clear. No time to screw around when someone’s looking for blood. No reason to kowtow to the criminal element, especially in one’s home.

Anonymous

Seems like a good product. Is the lock child-safe?

oh2

I think that a set of 16 strategically placed claymore antipersonell mines would be more efficient. Just add a few security cameras and a terminal at your bedside with the ability to selectively fire them. Heck, you can probably design a system that lets you use multitouch on an Iphone to fire them!

FordPrefect

@Mister44
You re probably right about the US laws. I m not a US citizen, and quickly googling something rarely gets you the truth! So thanks for the clarification on that.
However, I find your pro gun arguments flawed.
“You are right that is unlikely for most people to ever need a gun for protection. But not all of us live in nice neighborhoods. I have lived in some pretty shady places, and there are still people living in places where a murder a week isn’t uncommon”

I myself live in a pretty dark neighbourhood, and I regularly walk through the city centre during night, which is flooded with desperate immigrants. Dozens of robberies/shakedowns take place on a daily basis there. But very few of the victims end up physically hurt. Its not that robbers here are nicer, its just that guns aren’t readily available to neither villains nor victims. Its easier to run from a guy with a pocketknife, and he is less likely to actually try and hurt you with that weapon, because it s much harder, and louder. Let alone melee range only!

“If it is only you in your house, fine, I guess. If there are others such as your wife and kids, are you going to gamble with their well being as well? An intruder may just want to take something. Then again – maybe they are there for another reason. There have been many cases of simple gas station robberies where the criminal shoots the clerk for no reason at all. I personally am not going to sit quietly and pray that he takes my laptop and goes on his way. I will fight tooth and nail if I have to.”

That s my point. I consider pulling a gun on a guy that s probably armed already more dangerous than giving him what he wants. For me, for my family, for everyone around me. Firstly, because, no matter how good a shooter you are, the average villain has probably handled a similar situation before, while the average citizen hasn’t. Now, if he s a perv of some sort, or a psycho who ll beat us up or shoot anyway, I ll try to stop him,
But i have to admit, in that case a gun owner will be better equipped than a guy with, say, his baseball bat. However, you can’t know beforehand, and until then, you re safer not pulling a gun on the majority of villains, who want your belongings. And I ll take my chances. Plus, again, if people don’t have easy access to guns, neither do the crooks. It s no accident that on most break-ins in countries with a strict anti-gun posession policy, the burglars don’t carry handguns. If they are unlucky enough to find the victims home, they either incapacitate them using chemical means, or they act silently and quickly, and get out the moment they see/hear anything indicating the home owners are awake. Now, if the burglar wants my laptop, or any of my physical belongings, I d rather let him have that than risk my life.

Accidental shootings seem rare, because a large percentage of those is never reported. But that was a google thing as well, so I might be wrong :P

And I m sure the vast majority of gun owners in the US use their guns to shoot paper, hunt, or compete in a shooting contest. My point is, guns are readily available to everyone. Including those few sick souls that might walk to a public building and start shooting people. Or criminals of any kind. That, along with the tendency to “preemptivly” draw a gun against home intruders or street thieves, results in more shooting, ergo more injuries/deaths.

You, or a percentage of gun owners may be well-balanced people with the ability to judge when the use of their gun for protection is necessary, and little to no tendency to flip out and go berserk on someone . However, the majority of gun owners are not. And were I optimistic enough to assume they are, we have no way of knowing. Because there are virtually no restrictions to buying a gun in the US. You want the right to defend your life? Fine by me, I won’t argue with that. It s your life, after all. But the state needs to make sure that those who own guns are at least capable of knowing when to use them ( on an immediate life threatening situation ), how to use them, and that they are mentally stable.

But guns are so widely spread in the US, that implementing some sort of serious testing for individuals who currently own a gun, or aim to get one in the future is, at best, a huge project that will require an enormous amount of human resources and money. Which is part of the reason why its not happening any time soon. And I m not seeing too many US citizens asking for it…

I hope I ve shown that I have no grudge against you or your opinion. But laws, especially gun laws, should not be made with rational , stable people in mind. They should be made to protect these people from those who will use them to harm. And a virtually uncontrolled gun market certainly does not help in that direction. Make people take psychic evaluations, tests, whatever is needed to determine whether a person should be able to buy a gun or not. Make it hard. Make it relatively expensive.
Less guns = less deaths. Which is a fact I don;t think you can dispute!

cheers!

penguinchris

Others have already mentioned that most of your ideas about guns in the US are wrong, but one thing that the others didn’t mention – and a key part of your argument – is the easy (legal) availability of guns in the US.

It’s really not a case of driving to the local strip mall or wal-mart and walking out with guns. There’s a background check, you have to get registered and licensed, and other things depending on the state. Before I go too far I’ll say I’ve never purchased a gun myself (or even fired one for that matter).

They’re obviously not insurmountable deterrents, and judging by the intelligence of many US gun owners there isn’t much realistic barrier to entry, but it’s something – and it does deter many, many people.

And yet, all the violent gang members and inner-city criminals have guns. We can hopefully presume that no reputable gun shop would sell to them, so we must assume they’re all illegal. Here is where there may be some bit of truth to what you’re saying – if the total quantity of guns was much fewer, there would be fewer illegal guns. I’m not sure the numbers actually add up, but anecdotally it seems reasonably true.

But then there’s the saying, “If X is outlawed, only outlaws will have X”, which seems painfully true as well. And as others have mentioned, it can be quite scary traveling through many parts of the US, including major cities. I don’t think having a gun would really make me feel safer driving through the back streets of e.g. East Los Angeles (honestly it actually takes a heck of a lot to scare me – when I’ve gone to places like that I’m more worried about someone stealing my car than being shot or otherwise attacked), but you can’t lose sight of the fact that the place is filled with violent criminals who *do* have guns. Many innocent, peaceful people also live in those kinds of places, and often don’t have the ability to move someplace nicer. They can reasonably expect to be attacked in some way at some point. It’s almost a catch-22.
Mister44

re: “You re probably right about the US laws.”

No problem, man. If I was thinking, I could have guessed that from your user name.

Others touched on most of what I would say, but I have a little bit to add.

re: “Less guns = less deaths. Which is a fact I don;t think you can dispute!”

Well – yes and no. John Lott went in with his assumption as well when he was doing research for a book. He came out with the opposite view, as firearms save more lives than they take – being used with out being fired.

But lets just assume that is true – so? You can say that about a lot of things. Pools was one example I had. Cars is a definite one. Stairs are the most dangerous area in a house, IIRC. Should we all live on one level houses? You can only bubble wrap the world so much before it becomes absurd.

re: “You, or a percentage of gun owners may be well-balanced people with the ability to judge when the use of their gun for protection is necessary, and little to no tendency to flip out and go berserk on someone . However, the majority of gun owners are not.”

I would have to disagree because of the very low percentage of gun owners ‘flipping out’.

re: “And a virtually uncontrolled gun market certainly does not help in that direction. Make people take psychic evaluations, tests, whatever is needed to determine whether a person should be able to buy a gun or not. Make it hard. Make it relatively expensive.”

First off, there are age restrictions and residency restrictions. You can’t buy a gun with felony on your record, and domestic abuse will often prevent you as well.

But your suggestions, IMHO, are horrible. First off – make it expensive – that just creates an elitist class of users. The people who would most benefit from it would be less likely to have them. So much for equality. In the US you would be called a racists because of the number of poor blacks.

As for all this suggestions for evaluation – what the hell for? It is an over reaction. It is why we have this TSA security theater. You are trying to weed the handful of crazies out of millions of people? Seriously? What about car ownership? Or knife ownership? If a person has had mental problems, should they be locked up for life for fear they do something crazy? Should we evaluate everyone on a child’s playground to insure they aren’t getting their jollies off on watching little kids.

With all of your gun restrictions the UKs violent crime is up, and knife crime is up to the point they are working on banning them. As you note, no one has guns, so 3 or 4 yobs can kick down your door with bats and do what ever they want. Rob you. Beat you. Rape your wife while singing “Dancing in the Rain”.

You can’t stop the crazies. It isn’t possible to weed out everyone. To try to is folly. As a whole it seems boingboing readers value privacy and liberty – yet your proposed ideas are basically giving your lives to the state and letting inept, out of touch politicians dictate what is and what is not good for you.

When did the UK stop taking Orwell’s 1984 as a warning and start using it as an instruction manual?

Julien Couvreur

Nice for decoration, isn’t it ;-)

Sep

To those who assert that gun ownership = ‘living in fear’:

It is not fearful to understand the potential threats and take reasonable precautions.

Am I fearful or paranoid for equipping my home with fire extinguishers & smoke detectors? Do your children know what to do about Mr. Stranger Danger? Do they know “Stop Drop and Roll”? How about a DNA sample someplace? Have you applied “Mr. Yuk” stickers to common household toxins?

Why are you living in fear? Why do you force your children to live in fear?

Do you drive in constant fear? If you answered no, then I can assume you don’t buckle up, use airbags, or carry insurance on your car. You certainly don’t need any of those things if you’re not afraid.

It appears that many of you elect to go through life blissfully unaware that anything could ever happen to you – your choice; more power to you. I understand that life does not always go as planned, and I try to be prepared to minimize the impact on me when that happens. My guns are no more the product of fear than my fire extinguishers.

ArghMonkey

1. Guns are disgusting
2. Thought boingboing was better than this
3. People who like guns have something wrong with them, sorry, they are designed to kill people (or to hunt).

So a drunk picked the wrong house and you were ready to kill him for it?!!!?! …

Reason # 74758596561 that I am SO GLAD to NOT be from the USA

Mister44

1) Why is that?

2) Dunno.

3) 99% of guns out there are used to punch paper or hunt. Have you tried it?

re: drunk – I don’t think a drunk has the wherewith all to actually BREAK into a house, but your scenario is a strawman. It isn’t a computer program where “if intruder then arm.gun” – discretion and prudence are required.

Anonymous

Nice tie-in with the Zombie Christmas tips from earlier today.

unit_1421

Those ceiling based drop-down turrets from The 5th Element would be better, but they’re still working the bugs out of ED-209. Dick, I’m VERY disappointed…