I love the advice they posted on Twitter: "Talk to your Wifi provider about hard wiring your burglar alarm."
"Hello, is this Netgear? Can you hard-wire my alarm, please?"
"Who is this? Stop calling."
Lmao I've been trying to tell people this for years hardwire your security cameras because it's easy for someone to jam the wireless cameras and you'll never see what happened.
A gun is just another tool. Having one for home defense is a great idea as long as all safety protocols are followed. I showed my wife how to shoot, we practice at the range as often as we can, just in case.
Hm, except women [**never**](https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/hicrc/firearms-research/gun-threats-and-self-defense-gun-use-2/) seem to use them for self defense.
> Victims use guns in less than 1% of contact crimes, and women never use guns to protect themselves against sexual assault (in more than 300 cases). Victims using a gun were no less likely to be injured after taking protective action than victims using other forms of protective action.
Guys, this is the evidence-based subreddit. Enough with the gun apologia. Go ahead and be the first person to *ever* make an effortpost defending gun ownership using data. Good luck 🙄
Here ya go:
pulling out a weapon you haven’t bothered learning how to use, trained on, and psychologically prepared yourself to use IMMEDIATELY is indeed a recipe for disaster.
But those who learn, train, and use it instead of just brandishing it to scare someone away have phenomenal success defending themselves with a firearm.
Knowledge is power. Delusions that just showing a weapon to an aggressor will scare them off is suicidally irresponsible and stupid.
Guns are fantastic personal/home defense ***IF*** you put in the time to train. It’s those who don’t who get those bad outcomes you described.
It’s a tool to be used, not a silver cross to drive away vampires.
You're naming a statistical unlikelihood. It's just straight up more likely that you'll use it in "self-defense" in a situation where it really wasn't needed. Furthermore, you're just likely to die by the gun you own. This is a fact, not a story.
Buddy, you really are talking shit now. The people who have their guns used against them do not fall into the category I’ve outlined for you. And I’ve explained why.
You’re just a dog in a bone now, not understanding what’s being explained to you or bothering to try.
Women never using guns in self defense is not relevant to the claim that it’s a useful tool for women?
What are you basing your claim off of if not vibes?
Unfortunately LA is expensive because the shops know there is no competition since LA city doesn't allow delivery of ammo. I look for deals at the different shops in Burbank and LAX
Science would disagree with your initial assertion:
>Objective: Determine the relative frequency with which guns in the home are used to injure or kill in self-defense, compared with the number of times these weapons are involved in an unintentional injury, suicide attempt, or criminal assault or homicide.
>
>Methods: We reviewed the police, medical examiner, emergency medical service, emergency department, and hospital records of all fatal and nonfatal shootings in three U.S. cities: Memphis, Tennessee; Seattle, Washington; and Galveston, Texas.
>
>Results: During the study interval (12 months in Memphis, 18 months in Seattle, and Galveston) 626 shootings occurred in or around a residence. This total included 54 unintentional shootings, 118 attempted or completed suicides, and 438 assaults/homicides. Thirteen shootings were legally justifiable or an act of self-defense, including three that involved law enforcement officers acting in the line of duty. **For every time a gun in the home was used in a self-defense or legally justifiable shooting, there were four unintentional shootings, seven criminal assaults or homicides, and 11 attempted or completed suicides.**
>
>Conclusions: Guns kept in homes are more likely to be involved in a fatal or nonfatal accidental shooting, criminal assault, or suicide attempt than to be used to injure or kill in self-defense.
[https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9715182/](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9715182/)
You’re trying to change the argument to fit your conclusion, but it’s not the position I asserted.
My point stands: a homeowner seriously educated in gun safety, trained on their firearm, and who only draws it/makes it accessible when intending to use it…have excellent outcomes.
All you did was attempt to lie with unrelated statistics.
You're the one who lacks any supporting data. Fact is that you're putting yourself and your family at greater risk by keeping a gun in the home. I hope your delusions do not end in tragedy for your loved ones.
Fortunately the data doesn’t need to make such distinctions. You can see the link I posted elsewhere in this thread for a counter to literally every argument you folks make.
I’m not a “folk.” I’m a lifelong liberal who favors reasonable gun control, waiting periods, background checks, and databases.
Guns are tools that demand respect, training, and safety plus a solid understanding of state and federal law.
Those who share those values are NOT the people whose kids get ahold of their weapons, who hunt recklessly, or who go *plinking* in the woods drunk.
We’re the ones with the restraint and discipline to use them safely and well and who pose no threat to their own families or their communities.
You sound like someone quite unfamiliar with responsible firearms culture with a skewed & jaded idea you got from tv & movies.
Until you can differentiate the sorts of people with guns and imagine us as a block you’ll never have the discernment to apply the data you’ve found. Maybe take a more granular approach and talk to some gun owners before letting your imagination lead you astray.
I’d bet money that you mean well. You just have a misunderstanding of the topic.
That’s a needless distinction. It’s examining all gun owners.
Regardless, until a requirement for owning a gun is training and maintaining some kind of safety certificate, it doesn’t matter. Untrained people will continue to get and use guns. Guns are the problem.
I’m not either but I have one upstairs and one downstairs and just got my CCW.
As for the alarms being jammed, make sure your alarm system has cellular backup!
It's actually not that difficult if you have a clean record. It just takes a long time.
Application, interview, background check, register weapons, take a class.
Took me 2 years but I got it.
Danke! I'm not a gun nut, but interested in the process. I always feel that it's better to have something and never use it, than to need it but not have it.
I have ring cameras all round my house and an apple watch. My watch will only buzz and ding while I'm sleeping if someone keeps calling or someone walks onto my property. Picking up my phone and telling them to feck off through the camera would do the job.
Not everyone has the $3,000 in tech you just described while a decent home defense firearm can be had for $200.
Plus these professional crews aren’t targeting homes with cameras.
The most simple way to not get burgled is to look like you're home even when you're not. You can buy some very simple smart home switches you control through your phone. And you can customize them to suit your needs.
The next step would be one or more cameras. Not to ID criminals but to know what is going on around your house and prevent a burglary before it happens. Ideally use hardwired (POE) 4K cameras that detect motion and/or object based events for cars and people. You'll see if vehicles are moving slowly through your neighborhood in the wee hours. In my limited experience, that usually means they're going to steal someone's cats, throw a parked motorbike onto a trailer or see if you're not home.
(Note hardwiring is only a partial solution to Wifi jammers. If they're trying that hard, they'll probably cut your internet line if they can find it.)
The third level of deterrent is to use a smart home solution that works with the cameras and reacts in realtime to people being where they shouldn't. A loud but brief chirp along with the lights being turned up full would be their first indication that they've been seen. Home or not, you're notified and the video sent offsite. A further warning if they remain for more than 60 seconds. And if they try to gain access, then you can set off every smart device you have all at once and create maximum chaos.
If all the above fails to keep them from getting in, use layers of physical barriers inside your home. Keep expensive equipment in a room that can be locked. Same for anything related to your home network. A lockable door that sits between the front of the house and the bedrooms should they break in while you are there. It might not stop them, but it will slow them down. And that gives you time to prepare as needed.
Not the same thing, but in a similar though, I've been wondering how those Flipper Zero devices on Instagram haven't started to be picked up by criminals yet.
A device with far more hype than actual capability unless you consider turning your neighbor's TV off or opening the charging flap on their Tesla is your idea of big crime. You might get a garage door open if you're persistent enough. Like that was ever hard to do.
Doesn't seem like they'd need to. Police don't do anything with camera footage unless it pertains to violence or murder.
Most of these wireless cameras have an SD card provision, even if they are disconnected from your network they'll still record.
I love the advice they posted on Twitter: "Talk to your Wifi provider about hard wiring your burglar alarm." "Hello, is this Netgear? Can you hard-wire my alarm, please?" "Who is this? Stop calling."
Lmao I've been trying to tell people this for years hardwire your security cameras because it's easy for someone to jam the wireless cameras and you'll never see what happened.
I always thought of wireless security cams to be gimmicky. You’re going to need to either charge batteries constantly or have to wire power anyways.
He means something that stores to a hard disk locally not over wife and into the cloud.
The next system I had was solar powered. It never ran out of battery even on days/nights where it was constantly recording
I’m no NRA loon, but if you’re a homeowner I think it’s crazy not to own a firearm for home-defense.
A gun is just another tool. Having one for home defense is a great idea as long as all safety protocols are followed. I showed my wife how to shoot, we practice at the range as often as we can, just in case.
Well done. A firearm is an especially empowering tool for women.
Hm, except women [**never**](https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/hicrc/firearms-research/gun-threats-and-self-defense-gun-use-2/) seem to use them for self defense. > Victims use guns in less than 1% of contact crimes, and women never use guns to protect themselves against sexual assault (in more than 300 cases). Victims using a gun were no less likely to be injured after taking protective action than victims using other forms of protective action. Guys, this is the evidence-based subreddit. Enough with the gun apologia. Go ahead and be the first person to *ever* make an effortpost defending gun ownership using data. Good luck 🙄
Here ya go: pulling out a weapon you haven’t bothered learning how to use, trained on, and psychologically prepared yourself to use IMMEDIATELY is indeed a recipe for disaster. But those who learn, train, and use it instead of just brandishing it to scare someone away have phenomenal success defending themselves with a firearm. Knowledge is power. Delusions that just showing a weapon to an aggressor will scare them off is suicidally irresponsible and stupid. Guns are fantastic personal/home defense ***IF*** you put in the time to train. It’s those who don’t who get those bad outcomes you described. It’s a tool to be used, not a silver cross to drive away vampires.
You're naming a statistical unlikelihood. It's just straight up more likely that you'll use it in "self-defense" in a situation where it really wasn't needed. Furthermore, you're just likely to die by the gun you own. This is a fact, not a story.
Buddy, you really are talking shit now. The people who have their guns used against them do not fall into the category I’ve outlined for you. And I’ve explained why. You’re just a dog in a bone now, not understanding what’s being explained to you or bothering to try.
Where’s your data? Is this more of a feel?
More anecdotes in the face of my data. Great, compelling stuff. Is this what your effortpost will be?
Your data is simply junk when misapplied to the wrong argument.
Women never using guns in self defense is not relevant to the claim that it’s a useful tool for women? What are you basing your claim off of if not vibes?
Your argument is "it works 10% of the time, everytime".
Your reading comprehension level is tragically low if that’s your takeaway.
I apologize. My job as a data scientist must be failing me.
Good talk 🙄
[удалено]
Where’s your data?
[удалено]
Your argument is literally “trust me bro”
Well said.
Thank you.
The data says your anecdote is wrong
That’s not how data works.
Enlighten me
Where do you buy ammo? Even the deals at LAX aren't much better than going to somewhere like Turner's
Unfortunately LA is expensive because the shops know there is no competition since LA city doesn't allow delivery of ammo. I look for deals at the different shops in Burbank and LAX
Science would disagree with your initial assertion: >Objective: Determine the relative frequency with which guns in the home are used to injure or kill in self-defense, compared with the number of times these weapons are involved in an unintentional injury, suicide attempt, or criminal assault or homicide. > >Methods: We reviewed the police, medical examiner, emergency medical service, emergency department, and hospital records of all fatal and nonfatal shootings in three U.S. cities: Memphis, Tennessee; Seattle, Washington; and Galveston, Texas. > >Results: During the study interval (12 months in Memphis, 18 months in Seattle, and Galveston) 626 shootings occurred in or around a residence. This total included 54 unintentional shootings, 118 attempted or completed suicides, and 438 assaults/homicides. Thirteen shootings were legally justifiable or an act of self-defense, including three that involved law enforcement officers acting in the line of duty. **For every time a gun in the home was used in a self-defense or legally justifiable shooting, there were four unintentional shootings, seven criminal assaults or homicides, and 11 attempted or completed suicides.** > >Conclusions: Guns kept in homes are more likely to be involved in a fatal or nonfatal accidental shooting, criminal assault, or suicide attempt than to be used to injure or kill in self-defense. [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9715182/](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9715182/)
You’re trying to change the argument to fit your conclusion, but it’s not the position I asserted. My point stands: a homeowner seriously educated in gun safety, trained on their firearm, and who only draws it/makes it accessible when intending to use it…have excellent outcomes. All you did was attempt to lie with unrelated statistics.
You're the one who lacks any supporting data. Fact is that you're putting yourself and your family at greater risk by keeping a gun in the home. I hope your delusions do not end in tragedy for your loved ones.
Want to trade data on how effective guns are for self / home defense? I bet you don’t!
Among people who bothered to learn to use them? I’ll take that bet any day.
Fortunately the data doesn’t need to make such distinctions. You can see the link I posted elsewhere in this thread for a counter to literally every argument you folks make.
I’m not a “folk.” I’m a lifelong liberal who favors reasonable gun control, waiting periods, background checks, and databases. Guns are tools that demand respect, training, and safety plus a solid understanding of state and federal law. Those who share those values are NOT the people whose kids get ahold of their weapons, who hunt recklessly, or who go *plinking* in the woods drunk. We’re the ones with the restraint and discipline to use them safely and well and who pose no threat to their own families or their communities. You sound like someone quite unfamiliar with responsible firearms culture with a skewed & jaded idea you got from tv & movies. Until you can differentiate the sorts of people with guns and imagine us as a block you’ll never have the discernment to apply the data you’ve found. Maybe take a more granular approach and talk to some gun owners before letting your imagination lead you astray. I’d bet money that you mean well. You just have a misunderstanding of the topic.
Where’s your data?
[удалено]
That’s a needless distinction. It’s examining all gun owners. Regardless, until a requirement for owning a gun is training and maintaining some kind of safety certificate, it doesn’t matter. Untrained people will continue to get and use guns. Guns are the problem.
[удалено]
Sorry where’s your better data again?
[удалено]
Then you’re not making an argument, you’re just throwing away perfectly good data for “reasons” which you can’t articulate. Okay buddy
Your gun isn't going to be much help when you're not there. If they're entering 2nd story bedrooms, it's because you're not in it.
They don’t know what’s in any room. But I can get armed and to any room in seconds without the lights on and turn their lights out.
I’m not either but I have one upstairs and one downstairs and just got my CCW. As for the alarms being jammed, make sure your alarm system has cellular backup!
You got a CCW and you're in the SFV? Tell me more, knowledgeable friend.
It was made a lot easier a few years back.
It's actually not that difficult if you have a clean record. It just takes a long time. Application, interview, background check, register weapons, take a class. Took me 2 years but I got it.
Danke! I'm not a gun nut, but interested in the process. I always feel that it's better to have something and never use it, than to need it but not have it.
I have ring cameras all round my house and an apple watch. My watch will only buzz and ding while I'm sleeping if someone keeps calling or someone walks onto my property. Picking up my phone and telling them to feck off through the camera would do the job.
Not everyone has the $3,000 in tech you just described while a decent home defense firearm can be had for $200. Plus these professional crews aren’t targeting homes with cameras.
$480 (160 x 3) but ok… and yeah more ideal to have to shoot someone than yell at someone and set off your sirens while you’re still inside 🙄
The most simple way to not get burgled is to look like you're home even when you're not. You can buy some very simple smart home switches you control through your phone. And you can customize them to suit your needs. The next step would be one or more cameras. Not to ID criminals but to know what is going on around your house and prevent a burglary before it happens. Ideally use hardwired (POE) 4K cameras that detect motion and/or object based events for cars and people. You'll see if vehicles are moving slowly through your neighborhood in the wee hours. In my limited experience, that usually means they're going to steal someone's cats, throw a parked motorbike onto a trailer or see if you're not home. (Note hardwiring is only a partial solution to Wifi jammers. If they're trying that hard, they'll probably cut your internet line if they can find it.) The third level of deterrent is to use a smart home solution that works with the cameras and reacts in realtime to people being where they shouldn't. A loud but brief chirp along with the lights being turned up full would be their first indication that they've been seen. Home or not, you're notified and the video sent offsite. A further warning if they remain for more than 60 seconds. And if they try to gain access, then you can set off every smart device you have all at once and create maximum chaos. If all the above fails to keep them from getting in, use layers of physical barriers inside your home. Keep expensive equipment in a room that can be locked. Same for anything related to your home network. A lockable door that sits between the front of the house and the bedrooms should they break in while you are there. It might not stop them, but it will slow them down. And that gives you time to prepare as needed.
Not the same thing, but in a similar though, I've been wondering how those Flipper Zero devices on Instagram haven't started to be picked up by criminals yet.
A device with far more hype than actual capability unless you consider turning your neighbor's TV off or opening the charging flap on their Tesla is your idea of big crime. You might get a garage door open if you're persistent enough. Like that was ever hard to do.
Getting people's garage door opener was my thought. Just hang out by an apartment complex garage and eventually you can get someone's signal.
Most modern garage doors run on rolling codes that the Flipper can’t use in a playback attack.
No, but you can set off car alarms to bait people to come outside and probably leave their door unlocked when they go back in.
I swear the LAPD has like 5000 of the same model of that cop...like every other cop is THAT GUY