On 7/20/2015 10:39 AM, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Mon, 20 Jul 2015 09:50:34 -0700, Rudy Canoza
wrote:

On 7/20/2015 8:47 AM, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Mon, 20 Jul 2015 10:21:19 -0500, "David R. Birch"
wrote:

On 7/20/2015 9:21 AM, Ed Huntress wrote:

It's a fairly foolish comparison. People wanted to drink. It's not
true that many people want to shoot and kill each other.

More likely we want to be able to defend ourselves.

Right. Paranoia runs deep.

Cut the ****. Maybe the man who was murdered by the thug black
teenagers in Philadelphia - you know, the guy whose murder is at the
root of this thread - should have been a little more "paranoid" when
walking his dog.

Everybody has a right to self-defense. And, after 67 years, many of
them working in big cities and walking home at night, never having
seen an altercation bigger than a shoving match, I'm glad I haven't
wasted my money or my time lugging a gun around, on the chance that my
one in a million number might come up.

If I lived or worked in some stinking pesthole, I'd behave
differently. I'd probaby carry a gun. It would give me some comfort
until I was shot by someone who knew he wanted to shoot before I knew
that he did.

Which is to say, all but a few. But such comforts, like paranoia,
aren't very rational.

I wonder about your "two handguns in a safe." I hope you remember the
combination in time, should you ever need it. d8-)

I don't have them for the possibility of getting to them in the middle
of the night if I hear the window break. They're a precaution against a
more foreseeable risk. A friend once pointed out that in the event of a
truly huge disaster like a magnitude 8.5 or higher earthquake, there
could very likely be a period of 48-72 hours during which civil
authority is basically non-existent. In that event, the gun safe will
remain open and the trigger lock will be removed from the pump shotgun.