In my 40 years, there was exactly one time I needed to defend myself, and a gun probably would have made the situation worse. I would have had too little time to draw it, and likely it would have been wrestled away from me and used against me. The people who attacked me had no weapons (or at least none they felt they needed to show me), so a gun would have escalated things.
I walked away from that with a black eye and stolen phone and laptop, but if a gun had been in play I might not have walked away at all.
I wonder if the mugger's lack of a gun is WHY you got repeatedly punched in the face?
I've never mugged anyone, but I would guess that the first step is to establish control over the victim. With a gun against an unarmed victim, the mugger gets control easily. With neither armed, the mugger might need to actually attack and force submission before the victim decides if he should fight back or not.
Really? Because pretty much the only situation in which I'd be tempted to shoot another person is if they also had a gun (otherwise they're pretty likely to shoot me).
If I'm unarmed, then I'm likely to be safe, even if I do get robbed.
I definitely agree. A gun on your person isn't going to stop the bullets you don't see. The robber or psycho will always have the drop on you. If you watch the Youtube channel "Active Self Protection", he goes over tons of scenarios caught on camera and a lot of them DO NOT end well even if the victim is armed. And THEN if the victim does manage to defend themselves they can end up dealing with legal issues afterwards even if they never fire their weapon. Even pulling a pistol is technically assault with a deadly weapon in most cities and if you don't follow the rules you can go to jail for a long time.
It all depends on what the situation is. Some people get mugged by people without weapons or who only have a knife or are bluffing about having a gun. But yeah I wouldnt have it somewhere I couldnt reach for the gun immediately.
Peh. I've been a victim of violent crime five times.
I was punched in the chest on my way to school age 11. I was chased by a gang of kids and punched several times in the back aged 16. I was pelted by eggs while crossing a park twice aged 22 and 23, and was fairly badly mugged aged 25.
Not one of those would have worked out better had I been armed. The first time I was surprised, and the best that would have happened would have been that some guy got shot in the back walking away. Satisfying, but unhelpful. The second might have been stopped if I'd brandished, but then again I might have dropped the gun getting it out and been shot, or overpowered before I fired. I was shit scared and vastly outnumbered. The third and fourth I was both surprised and outnumbered. And anyway, who the fuck pulls a gun in retaliation for an egging? The final and most serious time, I was attacked without warning from the back, and was knocked down to the floor trying to protect my head against my assailants' kicks long before I could have thought to draw a firearm.
Shittons of violent crime is like this: it mostly neither justifies nor provides opportunity for gun use.
Of course, I live in England, so at no point did I have to fear being shot. But I don't think that's in favour of owning firearms just-in-case either, frankly.
Nothing like that has ever happened to me. In fact, I have never been in a situation where I would have been better off with a gun on me. Funny how people who own guns seem to end up in dangerous situations so often.
You shouldn't have a gun except for things you care about more than your and others' lives. Having one makes it far more likely for a violent encounter to escalate into a lethal one.
> The person mugging you surely realises there is a possibility you have a gun and will shoot the moment he/she thinks you are pulling a gun out.
There's a study bearing this out:
> Results. After adjustment, individuals in possession of a gun were 4.46 (P < .05) times more likely to be shot in an assault than those not in possession. Among gun assaults where the victim had at least some chance to resist, this adjusted odds ratio increased to 5.45 (P < .05).
If you are robbed by someone with a weapon, escalating the confrontation by pulling a gun out dramatically increases your chance of getting hurt. It doesn’t make you safer.
I'm glad that situation worked out well. Could you not have done exactly the same even if you'd had a gun though? And that way had he not responded to your excellent de-escalation technique, and had instead attacked you with a bottle, the deterrent of the weapon might have saved you from injury.
I feel the need to again emphasize that in general I am in support of gun control and that I don't personally own guns; I can see how a person might want to though.
My feeling (being a European) is that I would feel much more threatened by the fact than people I can see in the street can have a gun than I would feel safer because some random strangers could protect me with their guns.
From time to time there are some news that someone get stabbed because for having allegedly had a bad look on someone else. With guns, you don't even have the option to run.
In fairness, you would likely be more of a danger to yourself and other innocent bystanders than the shooter if you had a gun in that position than not.
edit: to clarify - most people in that situation would likely be more of a danger than a benefit. Carrying around a loaded gun on you at all times doesn't mean you're mentally prepared or well trained enough to be able to effectively engage in urban combat at a moment's notice.
I don't have a gun, in fact I believe that having a gun for self defense may increase your possibilities of getting killed, let me explain it.
Where I come from people are not trying to kill you, they are trying to steal your wallet or something, and if someone points a gun on me, i would prefer to give that person my wallet than to take out a gun.
Its just my opinion and I don't want to take the risk of someone shooting me because I pulled out a gun.
reply