>

I feel like everyone has fantasies about being a hero and taking out bad guys like the kid in A Christmas Story, but if it ever came down to it I would do everything i could before actually having to kill someone
This is a friendly reminder to read our rules.
Remember, /r/Showerthoughts is for showerthoughts, not "thoughts had in the shower!"
(For an explanation of what a "showerthought" is, please read this page.)
Rule-breaking posts may result in bans. >

Insurance is something you have to have and hope you never have to use >

Insurance is a boring financial instrument. A gun is a cool toy that makes insecure nerds feel powerful. Slight difference. >

I don’t feel anymore powerful while shooting than when I’m not shooting. >

I actually think a responsible owner will want to use it at a range or something to stay familiar and confident with the firearm >

IDK, I don't like shooting but I feel like need to know how how to use one in order to to defend myself.
They're really loud and I hate using them, still needed to learn how. >

Good way to help with the noise find some nice active ear protection or double up with passive with those ones that go in the ear and around, outside ranges on a slow day with very few ppl would be best too. Also heavier guns have less recoil than light ones. >

Not a very big gun person. How does the recoil work so that bigger guns have less recoil? Is it compensated because of the size of the gun itself? >

Is the weight of the gun cancels out the recoil >

Can confirm.  My 50 bmg kicks less than my 308.  One gun is 36lbs and the other is 8lbs.  50 bmg is around 15,000 ftlbs of energy vs 2700flbs for the 308. >

Yeah my buddy had the 32 pound m82 with a 29inch barrel 50 And I can confirm that thing had less recoil than a 308 >

I'm not sure if people are missundertanding the post on purpose, but at least for me it is obviously implied that OP meams "use it against someone". >

I own lots of knives, I don't day-dream about the possibility of using them on other people. I dream about using them on rib-eye steaks. >

It’s okay to have like, anime level daydreams about fighting with knives and stuff. The difference is if you think you could actually do that. It’s the delusion that you could actually do that that’s questionable. >

Dude I can absolutely win a 10v1 home invasion with my chefs knives >

All gun owners I know love using their guns. Hunting/Shooting range, etc. >

Well Tbf a responsible gun owner practices to be a proficient shooter because it eliminates the risk to shooting anyone else that you don’t want to >

Or they use it every hunting season, plus maybe off-season at the range. >

Yeah, probably more like this >

unless it's subsistence hunting and they hunt wild game for food >

Or any kind of hunting. >

Man, I grew up in a rural community with guns in living room display cases. For hunting and for bear protection. >

Careful now, I got downvoted for mentioning hunting. OP clarifies later in the comments that they meant against another person, but that was unclear from the post. >

Well, Rickety Cricket didn't seem amused by hunting. >

I just watched that literally an hour ago >

Like nukes?  Wtf?  Or a fire extinguisher, or an epi-pen, or a life raft, or a car jack, or road flares, or a tourniquet, pet waste cleaner, or a hundred other things people have but hope they don’t have to use? >

A responsible gun owner can't hope to go shooting on the weekends? >

How is this a shower thought? This just a thing that reasonable people say >

At a range absolutely want to use it, in a life or death situation then yes I would hope to never use it. >

Like insurance
Like seatbelts
Like a helmet
Like that cop I've been paying
Like an EpiPen
Like a life vest
...what? Nothing! >

A responsible person is one that acts right, not that doesn't have human desires. It's possible to be a responsible gun owner and an insane bastard that wants to kill a person. It all depends on the action >

Gun owners who never practice with their guns are extremely dangerous and should not own firearms. The chance of an accident happening goes up exponentially >

At least know how to properly use it and remember it. Nothing is worse than having to need a gun, only to struggle with how to operate it. >

No, a responsible gun owner more than likely loves shooting their guns all the times. If you don't you wont be as good of a shot when hunting. Or defending your grocery store or whatever some crazies think you need a gun for. >

Depends on how you define what a responsible gun owner is.
In my mind, "responsible gun owner" = Someone who follows safety practices and treats their gun as the dangerous object it is.
It's not an endorsement of a person's moral character or willingness (or lack thereof) to use their gun. There are  people who are competent with their firearm, secure it properly, and are absolutely looking for an excuse to kill someone and get away with it. Responsible gun owners, but not particularly great human beings.
I don't really think the nuke comparison holds up. Nukes are only useful as deterrent if people know you have them. Having a concealed weapon isn't going to stop you from getting into a very bad situation. >

Difference being guns can be used as weapons of personal defense. Nukes would be better of described as weapons of extermination >

Definitely not true. Plenty of gun owners take their guns to a range or hunting >

I see my firearms like epipens for crime.  I hope to never be in a position when I need to use it but happy that I have it on me in case it's needed. >

Blue to the sky, orange to the bad guy >

And like nukes, it’s best if everyone has one. Just in case freedom is worried about their neighbours. >

Only takes a good nuke to take out a bad nuke. >

Love it. Like: 
“The only thing stopping a bad guy with a nuke is a good guy with a nuke” >

Which isn't entirely inaccurate.. >

Who’s the good guy in mutually assured destruction? >

No one is dumb enough to launch a nuke at a country that is allied with someone else who can launch a nuke. That's the point. No one is willing to rob a house If every house had at least two people and two shot guns >

Answer the question please. >

The good guy is the one that's deterring the other one from using nukes. It's an obvious rhetorical question that I didn't think you seriously wanted an answer >

I’ll ask it again. Which one with the nukes is the “good guy”?
A or R? >

If you don't like my answer you can answer it yourself. It's not my job to educate you on your own morality.
Edit: A or R? You think I support Russia based on me saying the ones that's not dropping nukes are the good guys if they're trying to get MAD to happen?
God redditors are a second hand of stupidity and illogical thought processes >

I hope to never need to use it for defense, sure. Nobody wants to shoot anyone. I feel the same way about hoping to never need to use my fire extinguisher. Nobody wants to have to put out a fire but if there is a fire, you need the right tool to solve the problem.
However firearms are also very fun for recreation. In that sense, I look forward to going shooting as often as I’m able! >

Lots of people fantasize about shooting someone. Don't make stuff up. >

A gun is a tool .
I used to shoot regularly and always hoped to use it.
But I was hunting, not worrying about home invasion >

Fully agree, they are tools and intended use will always dictate your motivation to use them.
I’m a farmer and own guns for work(pest control/euthanising livestock). Haven’t fired a gun in a long while and I hope I won’t have to. >

I feel like there’s a lot more situations in which you’d need to use a gun if you had to, than nukes >

I used to be a competitive shooter and professional coach, and I'm still struggling to think a likely situation - little help? >

Hunting >

Those guys walking around in cammo and body armor and semi-auto weapons are just praying for any excuse to use their weapons. >

Nah, we want to practice with it as often as possible. Just not to use it in a actual threat situation. >

I'm not a gun owner, but if I was, i would definitely use it at the range.  
My best bet would be to have a locker at the range and just keep it there.  
Maybe that's what I'll do in the future. Gotta get the ear muffs >

Please don't do that.. Securely store you're firearms at home.... Or rent them >

Thank you. Renting sounds like the way to go for me. >

Make sure you properly load it and have it ready if it's really going to be used to protect your home. When a serial killer(Dahmer) broke into a victims home she grabbed a shotgun from under her bed for defense and it wasn't loaded. >

I mean, if it is kept under lock and key with a trigger lock? The best training that I know of recommends that firearms and ammunition be locked separately. >

It totally depends on your home situation. If you live alone or with just you and another adult, you may need much less in terms of barriers to access. The more people in your home who you need to restrict access to, the more measures you need to take. 
Trigger locks are actually not a great solution because many guns can still be fired with them installed. Keeping guns and ammo separate is good advice for restricting access to guns that aren’t used for defense, but something you intend to use to defend yourself really needs to be in a state that is more ready than that. A threat isn’t going to wait for you to unlock two separate containers and load a gun. That process could take several minutes. 
If you have children in the home, a fast access safe with a gun stored with a loaded magazine and empty chamber is probably the best bet. >

It's not the "responsible" owners we're concerned about though, is it? >

Wrong. A responsible gun owner uses it frequently to maintain upkeep on the weapons and to maintain skill level when using it. 
A responsible gun owner hopes to never need to use it. >

In MD you need to take a class to be able to purchase a hand gun and i whole heartedly think every state should mandate it. Two things I remember him saying are “no matter how in the right you are, if you ever even shoot the gun hit or miss, your well I’ll be changed forever mentally and legally” and “if you ever even so much as being the gun out, you better be willing to use it” >

I like the false idea that most gun owners don’t fantasize about getting the chance to kill someone to prove their manhood. >

I've known a couple of gun owners that I would trust to try to do what they could to have proper gun locks and security around their firearms. 
And then they either killed themselves or their kids killed themselves. 
This includes a 4.0 navy ROTC midshipmen that was hit by a moment of weakness after he was kicked out due to a public intox charge as well as a son of my middle school principle. 
The chances for a firearm you own taking your life or the life of someone you love is greater than the chance for it to defend your family or home. There are better ways to defend yourself, especially given most home break ins are short range, with things like pepper spray. Speaking from personal experience it's a much better day if you don't kill someone but still make sure that folks trying to hurt others stop what they are doing.
Edit: 
I'll get downvotes for this, but fundamentally I've known many people in my life that have committed suicide, both military and civilian. I haven't known a single person who has defended themselves with a gun. The midshipmen is one of the reasons a started an army suicide prevention and awareness group to help teach ROTC cadets how to deal with people in their platoons after they commission. 
It's tough finding the data that says guns make you safer, but it's fairly easy to find the number of suicides. That's not a coincidence. >

This is absolutely just not true. There are countless gun owners just ready and rarin to kill someone ASAP. >

I mean, I would love to teach you a lesson, but bullets and primers are expensive and more valuable to me than your life.... 
So you'll just have to deal with a punch in the face for ignorance? >

A responsible gun owner needs a lot of practice to better use their tool, like nukes. >

There is actually a similar saying in Japanese about Samurai warriors. Forgot the full details. The greatest swordsmen can win battles without drawing swords. They would just intimidate each other one would just concede. >

Not in the least. I own guns to use them. A responsible gun owner uses guns. 
An irresponsible gun owner has a gun for ‘protection’ and they should never use them. >

Guns are something to be used in a last resort. 
NUKES are something that no one should ever use, even in a last resort and never should had been created in the first place.