Anonymous wrote:Gun lovers are by far the most fascinating group. Literally rejecting factual information on how dangerous they are to have in the home just to be a proud guntoting antiwoke freedom fighter. Who needs to discuss with the family? HES the man, his word rules over the women and children. Who cares about them or their massively increased risk of injury or death?

Some of you should really not be allowed around kids.

You're no better. Seriously, I hate both of your sides. Are there any sane people left?

Anonymous wrote:Bringing a gun into a house with small children without any discussion with their spouse is grounds for divorce - for lots of different reasons.

I mean, sure, it's irreconcilable differences, but that's grounds for a no-fault divorce. You're just as annoying as the pro-gun people arguing that a curling iron is just as dangerous.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here. Yes, he brought home a gun safe and ammo safe with it. He told me immediately and didn’t try to hide he purchased it, and I didn’t realize how against it I felt until I saw it in my home. I told him to lock it up and discuss with our kids that they are not to touch it. He’s not irresponsible and I know wont leave it laying around.

Clearly he’s keeping it and he’ll do it safely, but I don’t like it. He is a hobby shooter and I know he enjoys it, I’ve just never seen a gun close up in person before.

So... Your responsible adult partner brought something you don't like into the house, responsibly, and you just don't like it? And since it's a gun, you figured you'd get a bunch of liberal biddyhens up in arms about the "oh HELL no" factor of a gun, when, realistically, this is not any different than any other major purchase, save that you don't feel comfortable around guns?

OP, be a good partner and learn how to shoot. You'll be a lot more comfortable having the gun in the house, and a lot more useful in a bad scenario, and you'll get to spend some quality time with your spouse.

Unless you have some sort of "you must discuss purchases over $___ with me in advance" agreement, this is a non-issue. Deal with your gun phobia and educate yourself. You'll feel better.

Oh, another one comparing buying a deadly weapon and bringing it home to children with a cute lil shopping trip. A gun is not the same as any ole large purchase. It’s a serious red flag that he didn’t discuss this.

Why? Seriously. What is the rationale here? He goes shooting. If "guy touches gun" is a red flag, he has already disclosed it. He now has a legal firearm and a gun safe, and OP knows this because he told her. Why does he need her permission upfront? It's not an out-of-the-blue purchase, and it was handled responsibly. Why the automatic presumption that it means he has a killer instinct and not, you know, rational thinking about "adult buys adult thing adultly" which it is?

Look, we have guns (safely stored, etc, not planned to be use for self defense), but if you can't understand why a gun and a $2,500 espresso machine aren't the same thing, I don't know what to tell you.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That is horrible and downright dangerous. I was in this situation, but I said “either you live with your gun or you live with your wife/kids.”
His family member stored the gun for him. That marriage ended in divorce within a few years.
This should have been discussed with you. Please protect your children. ASAP.

Yep.

NP And how exactly will he live without kids? If they get a divorce, the kid will be 50-50. So this is not a deterrent. There are nuts out there who would value a weapon more than their spouse, but what you are saying does not make sense. It's an empty threat and he would know it.

If he actually divorced and took 50/50 over a GUN- instead of storing at the range or returning it or selling it - then hes probably not a great father and I’d fight tooth and nail for custody. He cares more about his gun than his family? He can f*** right off and we’d all be better off.

Couldn’t it be said that her attempts to control him demonstrate that she cares more about controlling him than her marriage?

Hah. You have no experience in family court. Restricting weapons in the home is very common as part of custody agreements.

You can put whatever you want in a custody agreement. Enforcing it is another issue.

I live in a very wealthy area of Virginia and we called the cops and CPS on a dad who was at home with his three young daughters while his wife was out of town and he had been threatening us via text (including pictures of the gun with taunts of why don't we come over and say his to his little friend) and also threatening his children. The did nothing, including not taking his gun away.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That is horrible and downright dangerous. I was in this situation, but I said “either you live with your gun or you live with your wife/kids.”
His family member stored the gun for him. That marriage ended in divorce within a few years.
This should have been discussed with you. Please protect your children. ASAP.

Yep.

NP And how exactly will he live without kids? If they get a divorce, the kid will be 50-50. So this is not a deterrent. There are nuts out there who would value a weapon more than their spouse, but what you are saying does not make sense. It's an empty threat and he would know it.

Not in many states and having an unsecured weapon would affect custody

Tell me you haven't spent time in family court without telling me you haven't spent time in family court.

You are completely. Guns are designed to kill.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My Dad was both in the military and a physician. He'd both had extensive firearms training and treated bullet wounds, including those in children. He was extremely firm on proper gun safety. You do not leave it assembled. You do not leave it loaded. You do not leave it unlocked. You lock ammunition separately from the gun with separate codes, so it a kid cracks one, they don't Crack another.

Your husband is an idiot. An unloaded gun that's disassembled and stored in separate safes with ammo in separate safes is useless. And it's unnecessary to go that far for the purpose of supposed "safety".

Fun fact: kids can be taught gun safety at an extremely early age.

PP was talking about her dad, not her husband.

And a gun kept unloaded, disassembled, and separate from its ammo is not remotely useless for the exact purpose OP's husband bought one - to go shooting at the range. It is basically useless as a self-defense mechanism, but that's not why he bought it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If someone bought a gun, without talking to me, into our family with young children, he would be sleeping on the street with his precious weapon. I am quite avidly anti gun and would not want this in my home.

Living with a hand gun owner makes you 7x more likely to be shot by your spouse. 84% of those victims are women. As for protection, no difference in homocides by strangers - living with a gun does not make you safer, and some studies showed gun owners actually more likely to be killed by strangers. Women are 50% more likely to die by suicide than gun-free neighbours and are 4x more likely to die by suicide from gun.

No thank you.

Learn the difference between correlation and causation.

Bad/stupid people in general are more likely to own guns. This doesn’t mean that guns are making people bad, they already had issues to begin with. Give an intelligent and responsible person a gun and they won’t become any more dangerous than without one.

So you’re saying OPs husband has issues and that’s why he decided to buy a gun? I don’t disagree, and this is extremely impulsive decision made with no thought to anyone else. Sounds bad/stupid I agree.

That's not exactly what I meant.

I'm saying that gun ownership is correlated with certain character traits that increase the probability of violence in the home. A guy who has anger issues and beats his wife is probably more likely to own a gun than a guy who doesn't. This means that someone who is already predisposed to domestic violence, now has a gun, and will more likely use the gun on his family members than someone who isn't predisposed to violence is less likely to own a gun to begin with.

If you average this over the entire population you can easily draw the conclusion that "gun in house = higher chance of shooting family members" without taking into account the nuances of it.

If 50% of domestic abusers own guns, and 35% of non domestic abusers own guns, the statistics will show that having a gun makes you more likely to shoot your wife, while ignoring the huge population of gun owners with a next to 0% chance of doing so.

What I'm saying is these broad statistics aren't very useful in trying to determine the risk of an individual person owning a gun. This is why insurance companies in other situations, ex: car insurance, try to gather as much data as possible about a person to better profile them and determine how dangerous they are vs relying on broad averages over the whole population.

I just feel like you’re agreeing with the whole premise here. Car and home insuramce absolutely use aggregate and statistical data, it’s hardly customized to each and every person. That’s why (at least historically) red cars has bigger insurance prices. Not because rhe color red is inherently more dangerous, but bc their data showed people who bought red cars were more likely to get into accidents. Thus, raising the rate on all.

If 50% of domestic abusers own guns and 50% domestic abusers don’t own guns, the family of the 50% is at a much much higher risk of death (I believe it was 7x). The only difference being simply having a gun at home. That terrifying to me.

Domestic abusers shouldn’t even be allowed to own guns imo, but they get around that all the time.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You are being unreasonable. He’s already said he would lock it up. Many things can harm children in the house. Do you discuss anything that can harm children before you bring them in the house? Should he discuss purchasing a power drill? Should you discuss buying a curling iron in advance?

You’re really comparing a gin to a power drill or curling iron?

For some people, like my in-laws, it's normal to have them around. That doesn't make it less weird for affluent, educated people who grew up in gun-free homes. But it is normal for some.

You're missing the point. The PP asked if they discussed all things that can harm children and then listed power drills and curling irons, as if they're as deadly as guns.

Anonymous wrote:You are being unreasonable. He’s already said he would lock it up. Many things can harm children in the house. Do you discuss anything that can harm children before you bring them in the house? Should he discuss purchasing a power drill? Should you discuss buying a curling iron in advance?

Look, we have guns, but how many kids are killed annually by power drills or curling irons? I'll wait for the stats.

Anonymous wrote:Niether of you is necessarily unreasonable in your opinions, but the lack of discussion - given how far apart you are on the topic - is alarming.

This.

And I would say the same thing if one of you decided to quit your job when you needed both salaries, if one of you brought a pet home and the other had always been against it/allergic, etc. There are lots of things you should discuss first, and this is one of them.

- a gun owner

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He's taken up shooting as a hobby in the past few months and recently decided to purchase a gun. He came home with it without discussion. We have elementary age kids, and I just don't want it in the house. He doesn't care, says it's for his hobby and he'll keep it locked up. Am I unreasonable? Is he?

Not discussing it with you is a major red flag. What was he hiding. He may be planning to eliminate you.
You should be concerned about your safety. Keep your eyes open.

Oh for the love...

It's not like he snuck it in. He goes shooting. She knows this. It's kinda hard to have shooting as a hobby without a gun. This is a reasonable, hobby-linked purchase that he disclosed.

You sound unhinged.

You don't understand why someone wants to discuss a significant and dangerous purchase BEFORE he brings it home?

I know all you gunphobic types are gonna find this hard to believe, but guns are inanimate objects. They don't get up and walk around, shooting people. The gun, in and of itself, isn't dangerous. How it's treated, how it's stored, how the kids are trained to address it... these things create (or negate) the potential harm.

The gun is inert until acted upon.

Yup, like by toddlers shooting other toddlers or themselves.

Like toddlers stab themselves? Or electrocute themselves?

The objects are fine. The lack of parental supervision is the problem. I'm sure you live in a house without knives or electricity though, right? Just in case?

Are toddlers electrocuting OTHER toddlers? If so, I’d think there is a serious problem. Luckily (?) it seems like they’re just shooting each other 🙄

I'm sorry... Is there some sort of epidemic of toddler-on-toddler gun violence? You're a mess, and your "argument" is garbage. Log off, reset your head, and maybe don't bother trying again, just suck less somewhere else.

Actually, yes? Maybe look at some of the stats posted instead of whining about curling irons.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If someone bought a gun, without talking to me, into our family with young children, he would be sleeping on the street with his precious weapon. I am quite avidly anti gun and would not want this in my home.

Living with a hand gun owner makes you 7x more likely to be shot by your spouse. 84% of those victims are women. As for protection, no difference in homocides by strangers - living with a gun does not make you safer, and some studies showed gun owners actually more likely to be killed by strangers. Women are 50% more likely to die by suicide than gun-free neighbours and are 4x more likely to die by suicide from gun.

No thank you.

Learn the difference between correlation and causation.

Bad/stupid people in general are more likely to own guns. This doesn’t mean that guns are making people bad, they already had issues to begin with. Give an intelligent and responsible person a gun and they won’t become any more dangerous than without one.

So you’re saying OPs husband has issues and that’s why he decided to buy a gun? I don’t disagree, and this is extremely impulsive decision made with no thought to anyone else. Sounds bad/stupid I agree.

That's not exactly what I meant.

I'm saying that gun ownership is correlated with certain character traits that increase the probability of violence in the home. A guy who has anger issues and beats his wife is probably more likely to own a gun than a guy who doesn't. This means that someone who is already predisposed to domestic violence, now has a gun, and will more likely use the gun on his family members than someone who isn't predisposed to violence is less likely to own a gun to begin with.

If you average this over the entire population you can easily draw the conclusion that "gun in house = higher chance of shooting family members" without taking into account the nuances of it.

If 50% of domestic abusers own guns, and 35% of non domestic abusers own guns, the statistics will show that having a gun makes you more likely to shoot your wife, while ignoring the huge population of gun owners with a next to 0% chance of doing so.

What I'm saying is these broad statistics aren't very useful in trying to determine the risk of an individual person owning a gun. This is why insurance companies in other situations, ex: car insurance, try to gather as much data as possible about a person to better profile them and determine how dangerous they are vs relying on broad averages over the whole population.

Anonymous wrote:You are 100% in the right. No household should have a gun when there are kids in the house. Guns should only be in the hand of police/military.

Interestingly, police and military would tell you otherwise. Not that you'll listen.

Anonymous wrote:Did he also come home with a gun safe and proper gun locks. Because absolute NO way a gun goes into a house with children without proper safety storage. That is 100% NOT a "deal with it later" thing.

My Dad was both in the military and a physician. He'd both had extensive firearms training and treated bullet wounds, including those in children. He was extremely firm on proper gun safety. You do not leave it assembled. You do not leave it loaded. You do not leave it unlocked. You lock ammunition separately from the gun with separate codes, so it a kid cracks one, they don't Crack another.

But statistically speaking, yes, the presence of a gun in a home significantly increases the chance of death, from suicide, homicide, or accidental shootings. If anyone in the house experiences mental health issues, the gun has to go immediately.

+1