We Must Destroy the Myth that Home Gun Ownership Makes You Safer

Originally published Jul 5, 2018

If you had friends who believed that smoking tended to improve their health and diminish their death risk, and who not only smoked themselves, but encouraged their children to, by example or precept, what would you think of this?

Not much, I hope. In fact, you might even be a bit steamed over it. And, as a good friend, you’d probably try to disabuse them of this destructive fantasy.

Well, here’s a myth that is commonly believed, and likewise has destructive consequences.

More Than Six in 10 Americans Say Guns Make Homes Safer
https://news.gallup.com/poll/179213/six-americans-say-guns-homes-safer.aspx

And here’s the reality:

The Accessibility of Firearms and Risk for Suicide and Homicide Victimization Among Household Members: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
https://annals.org/aim/fullarticle/1814426/accessibility-firearms-risk-s...

The key conclusion from this meta-analysis*of studies of health outcomes of home gun ownership is this: if there is a gun in your home, you and your family members are twice as likely to be murdered, and three times as likely to commit suicide.

*an analysis which lumps together the findings of a number of studies examining the same relationships

Some might argue that the higher murder risk simply reflects the fact that people in high crime areas are more likely to purchase guns. But many of the studies included in this analysis compared gun owners with non-gun owners in areas of comparable crime prevalence.

These findings reflect the fact that a number of us who are relatively cool customers 99% of the time, have the potential to snap when stresses become overwhelming. If all we have available to us at the time is a knife or baseball bat or fist, the outcome is less likely to be lethal. Plus a gun makes any wimp into a deadly force — which encourages more violence. And of course many shootings occur when young children somehow gain access to a gun.

With respect to suicide, having a gun makes it too quick and easy and antiseptic. Although some people who commit suicide with guns are suffering from an incurable debilitating illness (these people would benefit from doctor-assisted suicide laws), a high proportion of people who commit suicide are suffering from a temporary mental illness or a bad string of luck, that over the time could be expected to pass. For such people, having a gun in the home serves as a constant temptation for quick suicide.

Pro-gun advocates will of course cherry-pick stories about people whose home gun protected them from home invasion and physical harm. It’s undeniable that, in certain specific circumstances, a “good guy with a gun” can save the day. But what the statistics show is that these positive effects of gun ownership are much more than counterbalanced by episodes in which gun ownership leads to tragedy.

Here’s an essay that provides additional insights regarding risks of gun ownership:

The Myth of the Good Guy With a Gun
https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/10/oregon-shooting-gun-laws...

So, except perhaps in very special circumstances (say, you have strong reason to believe that hit men or gang members are targeting you, or you work as a policeman or security guard), owning a gun makes you and your family less safe. People who believe the opposite — i.e. the majority of the American people — need to be confronted aggressively with the truth. Their position is not that different from believing that smoking makes you healthier.

Common sense gun laws, such as those proposed by Bernie Sanders — abolishing sales of assault weapons, closing gun show loopholes, requiring registration and waiting periods for all purchases, prosecuting or allowing lawsuits against gun shops that knowingly sell bulk quantities of firearms to “cut-outs” who then re-sell them to felons — have the broad support of the American public, but, even if enacted, would likely only cut down marginally on the rate of gun deaths. The way to achieve a much more substantial impact is to decrease home gun ownership markedly — by convincing people, using well documented scientific findings, that owning a gun puts them at increased risk.

Many people own guns, not because they are nursing a fantasy of protecting their family from malicious invaders, but because they enjoy hunting or gun sports. There is nothing irrational about this. I’m a vegan and this wouldn’t appeal to me, but “de gustibus non est disputandum”. However, if people choose to own guns for this purpose, they should be willing to acknowledge that this puts their family at greater risk for homicide and suicide. And they should be encouraged to employ all feasible gun safety measures to minimize this risk. Of course, many responsible hunters — and other gun owners — do precisely this. To the extent that it is feasible to practice these hobbies without keeping a gun in the home — for example, by renting a weapon at a hunting club or gun range — this would be a smart alternative.

People who earnestly want to cut down on gun carnage in this country need to acknowledge that reforming gun laws, to the extent that the broad American public would be willing to accept, will have only a moderate impact on gun deaths. Which is why they should increasingly focus their efforts on debunking the myth that gun ownership makes you safer. This does not impinge on anyone’s Second Amendment rights, does not force anyone to surrender their weapons. We don’t tell people that they can’t sky dive or eat at McDonalds 21 times a weeks — nor should we. But, as Daniel Patrick Moynihan famously said: “You are entitled to your own opinions — but you aren’t entitled to your own facts.”

We should admit that, for some gun owners, owning an arsenal of guns is an inherent good in itself, independent of any utility those guns might provide. Many of these people will refuse to believe the scientific evidence that gun ownership is risky, just as many people refuse to accept the overwhelming scientific evidence supporting man-made global warming. And even if they did believe this evidence — even if they thought that gun ownership increased their risk for being murdered a hundred fold — they would still want to own guns. That’s simply a fact of life. Fortunately, most people who own guns, or who are thinking of buying guns, don’t fall into this category, and hence are potentially persuadable about the risks of gun ownership.

Let’s also acknowledge that “guns don’t’ kill people, people with guns kill people”. People who are insecure, scared, despairing, angry, or mentally impaired are much more likely to commit murder or suicide than people who feel secure and loved. To the extent that we can achieve a more humane society — for example, by electing politicians who will focus on building a government that serves the real needs of people — as opposed to stirring up fears and resentments, fomenting wars, and demonizing groups of people or foreign nations, while allowing vital human needs to go unserved — murder and suicide rates will surely go down. Assuring ready access to mental health care would also help in this regard.

Another thing that all of us can do to cut down on gun violence is to avoid TV shows and movies in which guns or other weapons are integral to the plot. This would decrease the ratings for such shows, motivating producers to offer us more humane fare. It would also be a great example to our children. As long as the American people clearly want to watch gun violence, such violence will be normalized in the minds of many Americans. What would your reaction be if a high proportion of TV shows featured ritual dismembership and cannibalism? You’d probably find this grotesque and despicable — and wouldn’t watch. Why shouldn’t we feel the same way about gun violence? The fact that we don’t goes a long way to explaining our gun problem.

Share
up
0 users have voted.

Comments

Gun Nuts like guns, not for any of the reasons you give above.
They like guns because they feel powerless and disrespected, and guns give them the illusions of control.
This is why it's so hard to reason with these people. It's a form of identity politics.

I'm a gun owner. I keep it locked up.
But I like the idea that I have the option of using it if necessary.

up
0 users have voted.
Deja's picture

I'm sure it could be done, but it'd be way easier to just jump in front of one of the hundreds of thousands of semis that barrel past my road at 70mph yearly. Or to rig a hose to my tailpipe and asphyxiate.

As for self defense, it'd also make a better bat than a close range shot that would likely dislocate my shoulder so I wouldn't be able to get another loaded.

The workmanship of it is more like art than anything else, though I do have rounds for it.

up
1 user has voted.
skod's picture

I won't be near them. I credit my survival into my 60s to that simple fact. I would never shoot anyone else- but there have been too many times in my life that I very likely would have used any gun I owned on myself.

Here in Colorado, that makes me part of a really tiny minority. Everyone has 'em- just read the headlines. At this point, if you have a Pepsi can in your hand when the cops kick in your door, you'll get blown away. They just look for something shiny, or not-shiny, or any excuse, really.

It sucks to be this pacifistic in an open-carry state. When I see someone doing the open carry thing, I leave the premises *immediately* (which has cost me several nice meals, several piles of hardware from Lowes and Home Depot, at least 5 baskets of groceries, and several friends). The way I see it is that I'm one hell of a lot less likely to become collateral damage, if I minimize my exposure to the damage process and the tools of the trade.

There it is: I do in fact have a problem with folks who have such an immense chip on their shoulder that they need to express themselves by sporting death everywhere they go. I think it was James Mattis who said "Be polite, be professional, but have a plan to kill everybody you meet". I'm just not interested in living like that- or in being near anyone who does, for that matter.

However, this sentiment applies only to me, and should not be taken as advice or instruction to anyone else. Your mileage may, as they say, vary.

up
0 users have voted.
snoopydawg's picture

@skod

but there have been too many times in my life that I very likely would have used any gun I owned on myself.

I took mine to a friend's house when I kept thinking it would solve my problem. I didn't think about what I was asking her to do by bringing it into her house with two small kids but I didn't take the bullets with it.

I guess in an open carry state you can't ask them to leave huh? Utah is probably just as bad as your state when it comes to guns and gun rights. In the comments on the story about the recent school shooting people think that kids should have to accept armed goons in their schools. How can they not see why this would be a problem in a country that is supposed to be free? Getting people used to armed authorities is not my idea of freedom. It's bad enough that cops get to get away with killing anyone they please.

But Detroit has it right. People should only have to give up their guns after the police and military do. Kinda like countries not giving up their defense weapons.

up
1 user has voted.

Which AIPAC/MIC/pharma/bank bought politician are you going to vote for? Don’t be surprised when nothing changes.

skod's picture

@snoopydawg of even trying such a thing. Asking an obviously armed open carry person to leave any location simply gives them an excuse to freedom you on the spot (in self defense, of course). The point of my approach is to avoid involuntary ventilation, not make it more likely. I simply make tracks, immediately, and without further thought.

up
0 users have voted.
detroitmechworks's picture

But know enough about them to want them gone. Problem is that to do it right, you also have to disarm the cops. Far as I know, they don't want to give up their right to kill us, so...

[video:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g609VcZ9psQ]

up
1 user has voted.

I do not pretend I know what I do not know.

but the government doesn't send someone to clean up the mess. that job most likely falls to:

A sister or brother
A mother or father
A son or daughter
A husband or wife

I know someone who had the obligation of sponging away and mopping up after her younger sister took the handgun route.

up
0 users have voted.

The earth is a multibillion-year-old sphere.
The Nazis killed millions of Jews.
On 9/11/01 a Boeing 757 (AA77) flew into the Pentagon.
AGCC is happening.
If you cannot accept these facts, I cannot fake an interest in any of your opinions.

snoopydawg's picture

@UntimelyRippd

I doubt most people think about how much work they are leaving their family or friends. Most just want what they are going through to stop and don't see any other options.

Just my opinion of course.

up
0 users have voted.

Which AIPAC/MIC/pharma/bank bought politician are you going to vote for? Don’t be surprised when nothing changes.

skod's picture

@UntimelyRippd A friend of ours committed suicide very efficiently by shooting himself and hanging himself, in that order. He climbed up into the rafters in the garage, put a noose around his neck, tied it off to the beams, and then shot himself in the head- so that his pretty much already dead body fell to the end of the rope and dangled there. His wife found him and had to clean it up after the cops cut him down.

Suicide is not rational, period- but humans are not rational creatures, in times of extreme stress.

up
0 users have voted.
Alligator Ed's picture

@skod For proof, just look at who people vote for. To paraphrase Thomas Edison, "humans are 90% irrational and 10% rational."

In many cases this estimate is overly optimistic.

up
0 users have voted.
snoopydawg's picture

for example, by electing politicians who will focus on building a government that serves the real needs of people — as opposed to stirring up fears and resentments, fomenting wars, and demonizing groups of people or foreign nations, while allowing vital human needs to go unserved — murder and suicide rates will surely go down. Assuring ready access to mental health care would also help in this regard.

This is exactly what is needed to combat gun violence here. With people constantly being stressed out by economic problems and our not having access to mental health care it's no wonder people are killing themselves and others. This country's life expectancy is going down every year and it no longer should be called a first world country. Not when it's dying from the inside because congress won't allocate funds for us wee people. While our military is killing and rampaging across the Middle East and elsewhere we're suffering too because of its giant maw sucking everything out of the country. But there still are too many people who have their heads stuck in the sand. Wish I knew how to wake people up to how bad things are going to get. Meanwhile the PTB laughs while they continue to get richer and corporations get away with killing the planet. And yes I'm grumpy today..

up
0 users have voted.

Which AIPAC/MIC/pharma/bank bought politician are you going to vote for? Don’t be surprised when nothing changes.