Quote:
|
Originally Posted by fatty
Forgive my ignorance on the topic of firearm ownership, but isn't deterrence part of the point of owning a gun? From what I know about deterrence theory in warfare, clearly communicating your capability to back up your threats to your opponent is usually necessary for success. Doesn't it follow that a gun is most useful for keeping people out of your house if they know you have it?
I think it makes less sense to be stealing a gun from an armed man than to be stealing more profitable computers, televisions, and cameras from an unarmed man. But then again, we are talking about criminals here  |
Not necessarily. First, the pattern of burglary in the United States is that burglars tend to go after homes that are unoccupied, simply because they fear being shot. That doesn't mean that they avoid houses known to have guns, indeed knowing that is an incentive to burglarize the house: Guns have a certain value among criminals, more so than televisions, computers, and cameras.
Secondly, while it is definitely a good thing for you personally if everyone knows that you are armed, it doesn't help those who are not (unless, of course, you happen to in the vicinity during an incident). Not knowing who is armed and who is not adds an uncertainty in the mind of the criminal contemplating an attack: He has to measure the likelyhood of success against the possibility that the person he is attacking will kill or injure him.
Think of it this way: Militarily, if you are thinking about bombing a city, knowing exactly where all the Anti-Aircraft sites are allows you to avoid them. If you do not know where they are, you are likely to run up against them sooner or later. That is why the military spends so much money to camoflage things, to preserve the element of surprise.