you are a cowardly liar Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The fact of the matter is the FBI has not issued the
> advisory you claim they did. Simply put, you are a liar.

The FBI (and all the others) and writes and you fail to read. You fail even to find.

Happy homeowner Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Why would you even need a link? Why were you not
> aware of all these facts to begin with? Why are
> you so attached to your feeble ignorance as to not
> go correct your many errors and misunderstandings
> on your own?
>
> By the way, research shows that feelings of
> personal inadequacy are often what pushes people
> into the purchase of a gun.


Because, as has been very clearly shown above, your "facts" are distorted bullshit which rely on intentional omission and obfuscation.

The "risk" of a gun in the home in the case of a typical homeowner is trivially small. Much less than that presented by many other more common household items. Even on a relative basis as you try to play it in order to disingenuously make it appear more significant, the actual "risk" remains tiny. Even on that same dumb basis the relative "risk" of suicide, homicide, and/or accidental shooting death remains FAR lower than the "risk" of an occupied home intrusion.

Your bullshit has been exposed. Continuing to try the same bullshit just makes you look even more full of shit.

Happy homeowner Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Guns cause increased risk of death and serious
> injury simply from being someplace near them. You
> don't have to own one or touch one. Just being
> near one will do it.

This was true for the abusive boyfriend of this girls mother!

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2018/08/17/da-teen-who-stopped-attack-was-taught-to-shoot-by-late-dad.html?intcmp=ob_article_footer_text&intcmp=obnetwork

I do not think the Run, Hide, Call the Police method would have worked out so well for this family.

Happy homeownet Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> you are a cowardly liar Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > The fact of the matter is the FBI has not issued
> the
> > advisory you claim they did. Simply put, you
> are a liar.
>
> The FBI (and all the others) and writes and you
> fail to read. You fail even to find.

YOU: "This is why the FBI advises homeowners in an invasion-type situation to run away if at all possible, and if not possible for some reason, to hide in as secure a spot as you can find."


No such advisory exists. They've never said that and you can't provide evidence that they did say that.


You are a liar.

NPXP9 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Same with cigarettes and Radon and plenty of other things.

Yes, and we take serious steps to minimize the damage done by those things.

> So what is your point you spineless worm?

You have just made it for me.

Happy homeowner Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> NPXP9 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Same with cigarettes and Radon and plenty of
> other things.
>
> Yes, and we take serious steps to minimize the
> damage done by those things.
>
> > So what is your point you spineless worm?
>
> You have just made it for me.


The "risk" of dying from radon-induced lung cancer is ~1.5X greater than the "risk" of a gun suicide.

+5X greater than being a victim of gun homicide in the home.

+20X greater than being the victim of an accidental gun death.

How much do you fear dying from radon?

Happy homeowner Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> NPXP9 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Same with cigarettes and Radon and plenty of
> other things.
>
> Yes, and we take serious steps to minimize the
> damage done by those things.
>

This is total bullshit you spineless worm, you cannot control second hand smoke or Vape fumes.

So what "serious steps" were taken to minimize the damage to me and my siblings from my moron parents that chain smoked while we were kids growing up??? What rules or laws stop other moron parents from doing the exact same thing to their kids these days??

We spent our life in the "smoking section" on airplanes and in restaurants and the brutal 4-6 hour car rides occasionally with a window cracked but otherwise I grew up in a Biohazard.

And again, rules and laws are only for the few that color inside the lines and actually "follow" the rules & laws.

Guns are bad is all you seem to believe. That at 3 am in the house since there is a gun it will randomly go off and hopefully nobody in the house will be injured or killed. As mentioned it is not the inanimate object that is the problem it is the unstable idiots that are not on their meds or are roaming outside of where they should be locked up.

Is there anything but deranged babble thst you poor suckers can offer? Keeping a gun in the home increases the risks of dying from s gunshot wound, whether that involves homicide, suicide, or just a dumb accident. Them’s the facts. Learn them.

Happy homeowner Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Is there anything but deranged babble thst you
> poor suckers can offer? Keeping a gun in the home
> increases the risks of dying from s gunshot wound,
> whether that involves homicide, suicide, or just a
> dumb accident. Them’s the facts. Learn them.


Is there any evidence you can provide that supports your statement that the FBI advises homeowners in an invasion-type situation to run away if at all possible?


Or, are you content being appropriately labeled a cowardly liar?

Enjoy the depth of your failure.

Happy homeowner Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Enjoy the depth of your failure.


So, you don't have a link to support your contention. It looks like you are the one failing.

As noted, you are a cowardly liar.

Happy Homeowner is just a TROLL!!!

He was the kid everyone hated in school and had no friends.

Has his own delusional views if the world.

We should all be thankful he does not likely have any weapons at easy reach.

Happy homeowner Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Is there anything but deranged babble thst you
> poor suckers can offer? Keeping a gun in the home
> increases the risks of dying from s gunshot wound,
> whether that involves homicide, suicide, or just a
> dumb accident but still works out to be a trivial
> risk on the order of a very few in millions.
> Them’s the facts. Learn them.


^ FIFY

Stomp feet. Clench fists. Turn red in the face. Facts still doom you to failure.

Happy homeowner Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Stomp feet. Clench fists. Turn red in the face.
> Facts still doom you to failure.


Speaking of facts, got a link to support your assertion?

Didn’t think so, lying coward.

They are easily available. No special help should be needed in finding them.

Happy homeowner Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Stomp feet. Clench fists. Turn red in the face.
> Facts still doom you to failure.


Yes, that appears to be what you're doing in your frustration to pass off this same bullshit after it's been shot down in flames. lol

The facts are that no matter how many relative Xs you want to try to put on it, the actual risk of a gun in the home of a typical homeowner is trivial. Living in a home alone as a single person, or living in an apartment, or owning a bicycle, or a large number of other common circumstances/items represent greater lifetime risks of dying than the presence of a gun in the home.

May as well smoke, lay out in the sun all day, and of course never wear a seat belt. All that's up to you. So are guns. I mean, what could possibly go wrong?

Happy homeownet Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> They are easily available. No special help should
> be needed in finding them.


For something that's so easily available, you seem to have a hard time providing them. Perhaps that's because you're a lying coward.

Happy homeowner Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> May as well smoke, lay out in the sun all day, and
> of course never wear a seat belt. All that's up to
> you. So are guns. I mean, what could possibly go
> wrong?


Since the lifetime odds of dying from an unintentional gunshot are about the same as dying from sun stroke.

Lung cancer is waaaay higher though. Like in the range of 2000X or more.

Motor vehicle accidents ~80X. Bicycle accidents about 2X. Pedestrian accidents ~14X! You need to get out there in those crosswalks and warn people! lol Careful! Don't trip on your way! 69X more likely to die in a fall.

Oh... and be sure to chew your food well and eat slowly! About 2.5X more likely to die by choking on food.

Dope. lol

Unlike security cams you can trust your dog to "never talk".

Except to police dog psychics - dogs tell all to them sometimes.

Facts don't change just because dopey people are unable to find them or have been conditioned by propagandists to disbelieve them if they do. Keeping guns in the home increases risk. That is a fact. There isn't any way around it.

In the case of other significant risks, actions have long been taken to diminish their effects. Not the case with guns. Mayhem is instead defended and at times in fact encouraged.

Happy homeowner Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Facts don't change just because dopey people are
> unable to find them or have been conditioned by
> propagandists to disbelieve them if they do.
> Keeping guns in the home increases risk. That is
> a fact. There isn't any way around it.
>
> In the case of other significant risks, actions
> have long been taken to diminish their effects.
> Not the case with guns. Mayhem is instead
> defended and at times in fact encouraged.

How do you suggest we get the guns out of the hands of lawful American Citizens?

Same way we sent smoking rates spiraling downward. Education. It will work with those who are capable of it.

Happy homeowner Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Same way we sent smoking rates spiraling downward.
> Education. It will work with those who are
> capable of it.(easily manipulated)

It sounds like you are suggesting the programming of people with lies and false facts.

Cigarette smoking is not the same as lawful ownership of a firearm.

Happy homeowner Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Facts don't change just because dopey people are
> unable to find them.


Can you provide a link to you our claim that the FBI advises homeowners in an invasion-type situation to run away if at all possible?

You seem unable to find it.

Or, are you out a lying coward?

Question 101 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> It sounds like you are suggesting the programming of
> people with lies and false facts. Cigarette smoking
> is not the same as lawful ownership of a firearm.

There are known and significant risks associated with each. We understand the era of outrageous lies and deceits by the tobacco companies of course, but why would anyone else want to cover up such facts?

OK - You are correct, and you win the discussion.

Now start collecting the firearms. Let us know how that works out for you.

Happy homeowner Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Question 101 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > It sounds like you are suggesting the
> programming of
> > people with lies and false facts. Cigarette
> smoking
> > is not the same as lawful ownership of a
> firearm.
>
> There are known and significant risks associated
> with each. We understand the era of outrageous
> lies and deceits by the tobacco companies of
> course, but why would anyone else want to cover up
> such facts?

Speaking of covering up facts, have you found that link that supports your contention that the FBI advises homeowners in an invasion-type situation to run away if at all possible?

Trump will get to appoint 3 to 5 Justices to the SCOTUS, so the 2nd amendment is safe for the next 50 years.

you're a lying coward Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Can you provide a link to you our claim that the FBI
> advises homeowners in an invasion-type situation to
> run away if at all possible? You seem unable to find
> it. Or, are you out a lying coward?

I'm just not willing to serve as nanny hand-holder for clueless** urchins unable to operate that Googler thing by themselves.

** Clueless means completely or hopelessly bewildered, unaware, ignorant, or foolish. Take your pick. Google it if you doubt me. You could clearly use the practice at that in any case.

Happy homeowner Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> you're a lying coward Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Can you provide a link to you our claim that the
> FBI
> > advises homeowners in an invasion-type situation
> to
> > run away if at all possible? You seem unable to
> find
> > it. Or, are you out a lying coward?
>
> I'm just not willing to serve as nanny hand-holder
> for clueless** urchins unable to operate that
> Googler thing by themselves.
>
> ** Clueless means completely or hopelessly
> bewildered, unaware, ignorant, or foolish. Take
> your pick. Google it if you doubt me. You could
> clearly use the practice at that in any case.


http://bfy.tw/JVdl

Hmmm. Your claim doesn't seem to be getting any hits.

Perhaps it's because you are a lying coward.

Rather than keep up this failing charade, isn't it about time you admitted you are a liar?

If at first you don’t succeed...

Happy homeowner Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> If at first you don’t succeed...


We're still waiting for you to succeed in substantiating your claim. So far, you've failed miserably. Perhaps it's because you are lying. Coward.

You’ve claimed falsehood based on a personal inability to do proper research. Some people simply have more skills than you.

So can anyone answer what is the best way to protect a home?

Happy homeowner Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You’ve claimed falsehood based on a personal
> inability to do proper research. Some people
> simply have more skills than you.


I've claimed falsehood based upon the fact that the FBI never issued the advisory you claim they did. You are a liar.

If they had issued such an advisory, you'd be able to produce it. You are attempting to get others to prove a negative because you can't offer evidence to support your assertion. Because you are a lying coward, not much more is expected of you.

A real man would admit his mistake/lie. You, of course, don't meet that standard.

If such an advisory existed (which we know it does not), you'd be able to produce it. Either you don't have the skills to do that or it doesn't exist. Which is it?


You're not at a ballgame now, what's your excuse?

you're a lying coward Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I've claimed falsehood based upon the fact that the FBI
> never issued the advisory you claim they did.

Your claim is based solely on an inability to find it. Incapacity is not much of a thing to go on.

> You're not at a ballgame now, what's your excuse?

I do not need an excuse. I have all the facts on my side. Such as that keeping a gun in the home increases one's risk of injury and death from a gunshot wound. And that if your home is ever invaded, your #1 response is to run away if you possibly can. If you can't manage that, then hide as best you can and keep quiet. There are no circumstances under which one should grab any form of weapon and attempt to confront an intruder.

Oh, and I am indeed getting ready to attend a ballgame, should one end up being played this evening.

Happy homeowner Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> you're a lying coward Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I've claimed falsehood based upon the fact that
> the FBI
> > never issued the advisory you claim they did.
>
> Your claim is based solely on an inability to find
> it. Incapacity is not much of a thing to go on.

You can’t find things that don’t exist, dope. You’re desperation while clinging to this lie is quite humorous though.

It appears you can’t find it either.

Old grade school homily (sometimes called argument from ignorance) that you may well have missed out on...

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

I'll admit it.

I've just been being a dick as long as possible just to see how long you guys would keep going. Of course you need a gun (or four) in the house. Unless you're a fucking idiot.

Glad to have wasted all of your time.

So shamelessly weak!

Happy homeowner Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Old grade school homily (sometimes called argument
> from ignorance) that you may well have missed out
> on...
>
> Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.


In some circumstances it can be safely assumed that if a certain event had occurred, evidence of it could be discovered. In such circumstances it is perfectly reasonable to take the absence of proof of its occurrence as positive proof of its non-occurrence.


That translates to you being a lying coward.

Nevertheless, whoever makes a claim carries the burden of proof. you made the claim, and the burden is on you. However, you seem incapable of meeting that burden.

you're a lying coward Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Happy homeowner Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Old grade school homily (sometimes called
> argument
> > from ignorance) that you may well have missed
> out
> > on...
> >
> > Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
>
>
> In some circumstances it can be safely assumed
> that if a certain event had occurred, evidence of
> it could be discovered. In such circumstances it
> is perfectly reasonable to take the absence of
> proof of its occurrence as positive proof of its
> non-occurrence.
>
>
> That translates to you being a lying coward.
>
> Nevertheless, whoever makes a claim carries the
> burden of proof. you made the claim, and the
> burden is on you. However, you seem incapable of
> meeting that burden.


Dumbass does this same stupid shit all the time. Gets called on his bullshit and then goes into an endless loop of nonsense.

He knows that he's full of shit.

Everyone knows that he's full of shit.

Happy homeowner Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> So shamelessly weak!

Just settling into the old club seats again here on White Flag Day. Little tough with Murphy and Adams traded away, but the club can hardly look as bad as Google-Spaz Boy.

Happy homeowner Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Happy homeowner Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > So shamelessly weak!
>
> Just settling into the old club seats again here
> on White Flag Day. Little tough with Murphy and
> Adams traded away, but the club can hardly look as
> bad as Google-Spaz Boy.



You should wave it since your dumb ass has been destroyed in this thread.

Babbling idiots don’t know the risks they face nor what to do when problems strike. Pretty pathetic show by the brain dead side.

Not exactly... Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Babbling idiots don’t know the risks they face
> nor what to do when problems strike. Pretty
> pathetic show by the brain dead side.


^ The brain dead idiot continues to babble.

Just making fun of you during a long ballgame. You’ve of course been way out of your league all along.

Nats are pouring it on. Phils must feel like the brain dead side...

Question 101 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Happy homeowner Wrote:
> How do you suggest we get the guns out of the
> hands of lawful American Citizens?

the way all facists do: by prying them out of dead hands then cleaning them and selling them, which was their original plan

you're a lying coward Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Happy homeowner Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Facts don't change just because dopey people
> are
> > unable to find them.
>
>
> Can you provide a link to you our claim that the
> FBI advises homeowners in an invasion-type
> situation to run away if at all possible?
>
> You seem unable to find it.
>
> Or, are you out a lying coward?

who would trust FBI with gun ownership information?

they'd sell it to the cartel, a cartel member would shoot you with your own gun, and leave with it

a large government agency which has spread out to creating offices in foreign countries should be trusted with personal information?

i disagree

they don't even use computers that are secure

the f'ing master's of the universe generation never got one, never made one

this moat looks like it would keep burglars at bay

(tip: if you regularly ransack the local towns, rape or hire whores there, you probably need a moat to keep villagers from clawing back their shit)

"Turn your (old) iPod into a security camera for free - CNET" (URL)

has anyone turned their old iphone into an internet connected security camera?

(it would be expensive if new, but if its' your old iphone and you used wifi ...)

a new iphone does: 4K video recording at 60 fps

that's like NASA quality there - incredible

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UDvzMjJuLos

"Turn your old iphone into a security camera"

can anyone say what if any drawbacks are to this as opposed to picking up a security cam at the computer store

(pleases, no computer store salesmen invited to answer)

Happy homeowner... Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Nats are pouring it on. Phils must feel like the
> brain dead side...


Maybe you could pour on some links that the FBI advises homeowners in an invasion-type situation to run away if at all possible.

Oh wait, you can't because you're a lying coward.

Interesting who now self-identifies as “the brain dead side.” LOL!

Happy homeowner..: Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Interesting who now self-identifies as “the
> brain dead side.” LOL!


^ And the brain dead idiot continues to babble.

Happy homeowner..: Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Interesting who now self-identifies as “the
> brain dead side.” LOL!


Have you found the link yet?

Didn’t think so.

anybody? Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> "Turn your (old) iPod into a security camera for
> free - CNET" (URL)
>
> has anyone turned their old iphone into an
> internet connected security camera?
>
> (it would be expensive if new, but if its' your
> old iphone and you used wifi ...)


Completely worthless. OK, maybe not completely but 99.9% worthless. It will kinda-sorta work maybe sometimes if you just want to see your dog while you're at work now and then or something like that.

Here's how it goes from someone who actually knows WTF they're talking about...

If you want a real camera system that's actually useful, reliable, and secure, then you're going to have to drop some money and spend substantial time setting it up properly. For cameras, you want wired POE cams. Wireless and battery powered cams suck for lots of reasons and are not dependable enough. That means running cables to each location and you'll need a POE switch or POE NVR on the back end of that and you'll need to properly secure all of that within your own network and as far as outside access. That means VLAN or physical isolation of the camera network internally and blocking outside access from the cams and setting up a VPN for incoming access. And you'll need a router and network infrastructure to support that the knowledge to set that up properly. You'll also need a computer or other system to run and manage events generated by the cameras (motion detection and other triggers) and sufficient storage for the video captured.

And as far as security goes, it's not a matter of someone spying on you as most tend to think of it. Although that's obviously possible, other than in some specific unusual cases, nobody is particularly interested in watching you. But the cameras are essentially full little Linux computers which are just tailored more toward capturing video. They're capable of doing basically anything. They're also full of various vulnerabilities to exploits as any other computer is. Which is why they're very actively sought out by automated bots which continually scan essentially the entire Internet daily for them for use in bot networks, for mining, as access points for hacking, and other uses. Years ago you could get away with just hanging a camera off of a forwarded port but not now. They definitely will be found and relatively quickly. As a result, there also are "white hat" bots on the other side which actively scan for accessible cameras and IOT-type devices to shut them down. P2P-type services where you rely on an outside third-party server have their own failings.

Bigger is not necessarily better in this case. There's no need in most cases for 4K or 8K cams. You're not making feature films. High-resolution cameras just push a ton more data that's not particularly useful and requires more expense on the back end to handle that traffic and vastly greater storage. Rather than resolution (at least beyond a point) what you really want in a camera is the proper lens angle for that location, very good low-light performance, the needed features, and reliability. Some 2MP cameras will far out perform 4K cameras in low light.

I’d like to believe that the brain dead side might somehow survive intact in its mindless predilection for keeping guns in the home. But the risks of establishing such easy access to lethal weapons are well known and publicized, as are the elevated risks involved in resort to anything other than escape and hiding in the event of becoming entangled in a home invasion situation. That such facts are dismissed by some does not bode well for their future health and well-being.

Happy homeowner... Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I’d like to believe that the brain dead side
> might somehow survive intact in its mindless
> predilection for keeping guns in the home. But the
> risks of establishing such easy access to lethal
> weapons are well known and publicized, as are the
> elevated risks involved in resort to anything
> other than escape and hiding in the event of
> becoming entangled in a home invasion situation.
> That such facts are dismissed by some does not
> bode well for their future health and well-being.


And just think, you could have provided links to support these assertions and possibly save these lives.

Too bad you're too incompetent to provide those links. If you weren't so stupidly incompetent, you might have done some good. Alas, you'll just have to settle for being a bumbling boob.

I’ll have to settle for victory by default over a mindless stumblebum.

Happy homeowner... Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I’ll have to settle for victory by default over
> a mindless stumblebum.


You lost. Big time. You failed because you got fully exposed as a liar. Well, it is possible you're too stupid to find a link to support your claim.

So, which is it? Stupid or a liar? Pick one. Those are your only two options.

Happy homeowner... Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I’d like to believe that the brain dead side
> might somehow survive intact in its mindless
> predilection for keeping guns in the home. But the
> risks of establishing such easy access to lethal
> weapons are well known and publicized, as are the
> elevated risks involved in resort to anything
> other than escape and hiding in the event of
> becoming entangled in a home invasion situation.
> That such facts are dismissed by some does not
> bode well for their future health and well-being.


Yes, the risks are well known. They're trivial. Which is why you can't present any actual numbers to support your case and have to rely on attempts at obfuscation using bullshit like "elevated."

Facts are that there is near zero risk of a gun in the home for a typical homeowner. Your dumb "elevated risk" is based on disingenuously and inappropriately attempting to apply aggregate statistics for all gun deaths across the population on a level basis and ignoring the key controlling factors which influence actual risk. Which obviously is bullshit and in the same category of nonsense as presenting lung or breast cancer risk as being the same for nonsmokers/smokers and men/women. Which no honest analysis would ever do. Which is the case for virtually all anti-gun "stats" since the objective data don't support the desired anti-gun narrative. You have to. But then you just look even more dishonest when your bullshit gets called out and exactly how you're attempting to deceive is very clearly exposed as I have.

YW!

Your concept of “zero” is frighteningly off the mark. Even as gun-related deaths have been spiking in America.

Happy homeowner... Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Your concept of “zero” is frighteningly off
> the mark. Even as gun-related deaths have been
> spiking in America.


Traffic deaths have been spiking too. In fact, we've had two years of sharp increases followed by a year of roughly the same amount of fatalities.

If you like, I can provide a link to substantiate that claim. Why are you incapable of doing the same?

Happy homeowner... Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Your concept of “zero” is frighteningly off
> the mark. Even as gun-related deaths have been
> spiking in America.


My concept is right on the numbers. Which I can provide based on objective, accepted sources like CDC. You can't.

Gun deaths have only "spiked" (more accurately increased slightly) in recent years above what has been a large long-term decline number over the years and among the same groups of individuals who are the primary groups affected to begin with. Which doesn't include a typical homeowner.

Unless you are a middle-aged white male with a history of depression or other mental health and substance abuse issues, there is a near zero risk that you will ever commit suicide with a gun (or any other way). Which is 2/3rds of the total 35,000!!! gun deaths that you love to cite. Most of what increase there has been is not related to guns as a driver but to the large increase in opioid abuse and an increasingly aging population resulting in more middle-aged white males available to off themselves as they tend to do with guns simply being the most common method chosen.

Unless you are a young black male aged 15-24 involved in gang, drug, and associated criminal activities located in one of a relatively few urban locations, which accounts for ~3/4 of gun homicides, then your risk of being the victim of a gun homicide are very low and N/A with respect to the matter of a gun in the home. Especially since the large majority of gun homicides don't even happen in a home to begin with. The increase in the last several years is almost entirely restricted to this same group and furthermore largely restricted to a few specific urban locations (where typically more strict gun control exists and involving illegal guns). So you're left with a couple 1,000 which might be applicable to the risk of a gun in the home of a typical homeowner. Which is near zero in terms of risk.

Unintentional deaths are a very small number in the range of less than 500/year. Even lower among children at less than 100/year. So near zero to begin with no matter how you want to count it, who or where, or in the home or not.

And both homicides and unintended deaths are far lower than they were in the 80s-90s despite 100s of millions of more guns added and present in 10s of millions more homes.

Those are the facts that you're attempting to hide within your bullshit "elevated risk."

Happy homeowner Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Your odds of your killing yourself go up once a
> gun is in the home. The odds of someone else
> doing that job for you go up once a gun is in the
> home. The odds of your dying as the result of
> some "Darwin Award"-type accident go up once a gun
> is in the home. The odds that you will ever use a
> gun at all in a break-in sort of scenario are next
> to zero, and the odds that you would be able to do
> that successfully are much, much smaller than
> that. This is why the FBI advises homeowners in
> an invasion-type situation to run away if at all
> possible, and if not possible for some reason, to
> hide in as secure a spot as you can find. The
> last thing you want to do is go all Clint Eastwood
> loco. That's just another way to get yourself
> killed. Better that the TV gets boosted.
> Insurance will bring back a nice TV after all.

How the fuck do you look in the mirror? Damn pussy.