To gun or not to gun

Of course you should. Free men are armed.

More seriously, I thought your apartment was amply fortified by a single-action over-and-under bullmastiff. Burglars tend to be put off by dogs the size of wildebeests.

Posted by Dave | June 1, 2008 5:14 PM

Don't make a big mistake. A handgun in the hands of an amateur +/or someone who's not absolutely positively prepared to use it on another human) is worthless and extremely dangerous. I'm guessing you know a lot of people; ask yourself: Do you know *anyone* who's ever stopped a robbery by pulling out their own iron?

Posted by qwyu | June 1, 2008 5:14 PM

The deeper question than owning a gun is whether or not you're prepared to use it to kill someone. If you can't answer that affirmatively, then it's a useless and probably dangerous purchase that offers no hope of defending either yourself or your vegan recipes.

Posted by Justin JJ | June 1, 2008 5:25 PM

Two thoughts:

1) Yes, I have actually met somebody who stopped a robbery with a gun. Or more precisely by working the slide on a gun while the robbers where in the next room.

2) The main issue that I have with a gun is the problem of safe storage. It's the same thing that often happens with a bike -- it can be a hassle to store it properly. With the bike the downside is a stolen bicycle. With a gun I worry about kids unless the weapon is carefully stored.

On the balance, I currently live gun-free. :-)

Posted by JD | June 1, 2008 5:30 PM

Should you own a gun for personal protection?

To me, it means you're bringing something into your care that could result in tragedy; whether from accident or from the gun ultimately getting stolen. It's one more worry in your life.

But maybe more important than that, I think you need to ask if you're OK giving money to an industry that makes products intended to kill people.

In contrast, there's no risk or downside in investing in a high-end door lock.

Posted by Erik Marcus | June 1, 2008 6:15 PM

Should you own a gun for personal protection?

To me, it means you're bringing something into your care that could result in tragedy; whether from accident or from the gun ultimately getting stolen. It's one more worry in your life.

But maybe more important than that, I think you need to ask if you're OK giving money to an industry that makes products intended to kill people.

In contrast, there's no risk or downside in investing in a high-end door lock.

Posted by Erik Marcus | June 1, 2008 6:15 PM

Yes.

But don't buy a handgun. You won't hit anything with it. Go to wal-mart or gander mountain and get a $200 pump-action shotgun, 12 gauge, with a box of shells in #4 shot or BB. Go out to a field and shoot a few cans.

Then keep it under bed or your lentil pantry or something, loaded, but with no rounds actually in the chamber. When you hear a bad guy breaking in, go into the hall, and move the pump handle to load the gun. It makes a distinctive sound that criminals know. They will poo themselves and flee and you won't have to shoot anybody.

Posted by albo | June 1, 2008 6:21 PM

Do you know *anyone* who's ever stopped a robbery by pulling out their own iron?

Happens every day. Mostly people just brandish a gun and that's enough. It's often not reported. But here's a story from my area just yesterday:

CARLISLE - Eugene Johnson reacted in a flash when his wife heard someone kick in the back door of their Carlisle home at 2:30 a.m. Friday.

Johnson, 75, a retired Army sergeant first class who fought in the Korean War, grabbed his pistol. He was ready when a silhouette of a man appeared in the darkened doorway of his bedroom.

"He said, 'Don't move, I have a gun,'" Johnson recalled. "I said, 'Buddy, I've got a gun, too, and it's [aimed] right on you.

"Things got quiet then," he said.

They got quiet because the would-be home invader had high-tailed it out of there, police said.
# # #

Posted by albo | June 1, 2008 6:28 PM

Uhm.

They're not toys, you know. If you're this whimsical about purchasing one, perhaps you shouldn't.

Posted by Matt | June 1, 2008 6:29 PM

Pre-emptive request to trolls: please try to make your jokes slightly funnier than a plainly stated hope that I shoot myself, either accidentally or on purpose.

Should you by chance be in a position where you actually have to use your gun, let's just hope your shooting's straighter than your ideology...

Posted by troll | June 1, 2008 6:34 PM

Should you by chance be in a position where you actually have to use your gun, let's just hope your shooting's straighter than your ideology

You're clearly in the running for the 2008 Nobel Prize for Metaphor. .

Posted by albo | June 1, 2008 6:39 PM

Yes, you should own a gun for personal defense ("Warren v. District of Columbia" should have convinced you of that), so now you just need to decide what to get.

For home defense, I think highly of shotguns, especially the Mossberg HS410. It's a 410, which means a quite manageable recoil for people who aren't accustomed to shooting big guns. It has an 18.5" barrel with a spreader choke, so at the expected encounter ranges (within the same room), you don't have to aim all that accurately. It has excellent stopping power without being so penetrative that a missed shot will travel into the next four apartments. Plus it's a pump shotgun, and very few things strike fear into a potential target's brain like the sound of a pump shotgun action being worked.

I would hope that if you ever have to grab your weapon in earnest that working the action would suffice to end the encounter. But if it doesn't, you really need to make sure that you're okay with pulling the trigger afterwards. That mental preparation doesn't come standard with any weapon purchase, but it is a necessary component.

Posted by Mitchell | June 1, 2008 6:45 PM

I'm only commenting on your recent very non libertarian attempts to control your comments. I don't read them, or many of them, so I might be be out of line, but shouldn't you be putting your faith in the free market. For what it's worth, I'm considering arming myself as well because I am constantly hectored by my well armed friends about being unarmed. I should say that my ex-marine friend tells me that in a crisis, your gun will be useless to you, as organization beats firepower almost every time.

Posted by themightypuck | June 1, 2008 7:05 PM

"On the third hand, I'm pretty sure I shouldn't handle a gun when I'm sleepy."
Gripping hand. On the gripping hand.

Posted by Jacob | June 1, 2008 7:32 PM

There are those who urge you to get a shotgun, others urge pistol. You can have both. There are revolvers chambered for both 410 shotgun shells and .45 long Colt cartridges (e.g., the Taurus 'Judge').

With this weapon, you can mix and match. Say the first two rounds are 410, then alternate with .45 bullets and shotgun shells. The first two shots take down or scare the intruder, the next puts a really big hole in his get-away car.

As for keeping it safe, a pistol is very easy to hide.

If D.C. joins the 48 civilized states, you can get a concealed handgun permit and carry the weapon with you always. That way you don't have to leave it unattended.

Posted by Ymal Brucker | June 1, 2008 7:44 PM

However, I probably will anyway, just because I can.

Mantra of pseudo-libertarians everywhere.

Posted by ed | June 1, 2008 7:47 PM

Megan,

I'd suggest looking at the most recent data on gun ownership with respect to different crimes, looking at the various crime rates in your area, and then determining whether the private benefits of gun ownership are worth it. This paper is still the gold standard, as far as I know.

Posted by Economics of Contempt | June 1, 2008 7:56 PM

My grandfather (now 90) was lifelong military and always kept a gun somewhere in his Tennessee home.

The points several people make are valid in terms of proper safety and being willing to actually shoot someone.

However, owning the gun does not necessarily mean it has to be used and it can give you a second option in all situations. You might opt to handle many situations gunless, but knowing it is there adds an extra level of situational security.

Then too, if society ever collapses and everyone is raiding the local Walmart to arm themselves, you will be one step ahead and can focus on gathering food, gas, a vehicle, and your escape to the mountains away from the hordes (be they zombies, illegal aliens, Russians, actual Aliens, Anti-Christ forces, the Beast, Chinese, U.N. Armies, afro wearing revolutionary blacks, gangs of angry white female Hillary supporters, the Illuminati Youth League, marauding white supremacists, homosexual bands on the loose ala Sodom, animals stampeding, invading French forces (nevermind), or any other likely possibility).

Posted by Finn | June 1, 2008 8:02 PM

In a sense, I'm jealous because you have arguments for getting a gun (something to protect) and none of the big arguments against (children could find it). Also it's not expensive enough to dissuade you, and you'd be contributing to the herd immunity from burglary.

But more importantly, no-one seems to be taking up the joke challenge:
-How is a libertarian like a gun? They're both nice in theory but in practice make a bad situation worse.
Or maybe: If you were a true libertarian you'd leave your defense to the market.

Posted by Dave | June 1, 2008 8:06 PM

I have a couple of handguns. And I also have electronic safes to store them in. Quite frankly if you can afford a decent handgun, you can easily afford a decent safe that takes 2 seconds to open (thus negating the "safe storage" worry that most liberals rally when they feel threatened by gun owners protecting themselves.) Also, just drawing my pistol stopped a robbery at my second job in CT. Do I think I could shoot someone who could harm or kill me? I think I could as a LAST RESORT. I pray that I never find out what it is like to do so. The real purpose for the pistol isn't looking for trouble though, it is being prepared when trouble finds me.

Posted by Michael J | June 1, 2008 8:21 PM

You might try the Heckler and Koch pistol dicussed here. If I recall correctly, I believe the Special forces hasve settled on a rapid fire rifle by the same manufacturer on lieu of the M-14.

Posted by Michael | June 1, 2008 8:25 PM

Unless you're willing to spend a lot of time practicing, don't get one. If you are willing to do that, I second the shotgun recommendation for many reasons. One is that if you have to use it and miss, the shot probably won't go through a wall and kill a neighbor. A pistol is probably a bad idea: It is very hard to learn to shoot a pistol well, even under ideal conditions--good light, plenty of time, calm shooter, etc. A shotgun does present a safe-storage problem, however.

Posted by Alan Gunn | June 1, 2008 8:50 PM

While I agree that a shoulder-fired weapon is better under stress than a handgun, I don't know about a shotgun in a crowded apartment. Overpenetration is a worry. That's true with a handgun, too, but at least you're not slinging a full once of lead. Consider a compact pistol-chambered carbine as a compromise, but be sure to shoot before you buy as your spindly frame will be a challenge to fit (I'm an cheefully the median male, so of-the-rack shotguns mount perfectly).

But don't buy it if you can't get out to practice at a minimum several times a year.

I second the no-round-in-the-chamber advice, on the grounds that if you too sleepy to remember to put one in, you're too sleepy to be taking shots.

I would highly recommend a powerful flashlight, such as any number of SureFire or Streamlights, as either 1) a first line of defense (they are bright enough to be incapacitating for a moment or two, so they're my weapon of choice on aircraft or when traveling abroad) or 2) as an aid to target identification. You shouldn't be shooting at shadows, ever, for any reason.

While I realize it goes somewhat against my unchambered-round advice, I don't think that audibly revealing your position is necessarily the wisest move. Better to stay low and motionless. Let your flashlight announce you if necessary. Break his OODA loop and keep it broken until the encounter is over.

Posted by Rob Lyman | June 1, 2008 8:54 PM

I would say to go for it. Having a gun provides you with security that simply cannot be matched.

The issue of safe storage is easily addressed: http://www.learnaboutguns.com/2008/04/19/safe-and-responsible-gun-storage/

Learning to use a handgun effectively is not that difficult, and instruction is available.

Posted by LearnAboutGuns | June 1, 2008 9:00 PM

You'll put your eye out!

http://tinyurl.com/4sarn8

:-)
(sorry, couldn't resist).

Go with the shotgun. Few people can hit the broadside of a barn with a handgun--in the dark, in a panic. Don't get slugs or buckshot, stick with some sort of birdshot. It won't go through your wall, floor, or ceiling & kill your neighbors should you ever have to use it (hope not, but just in case).

A .410 is for killing snakes. I don't know if it will drop a very determined man, although a direct hit at close range should. The tiny barrel isn't very intimidating, either.

12 guage Pump action for the deterrent effect. The sound of chambering a shell + the look of that really big opening at the end of the barrel *should* end the confrontation. If it doesn't, not much would.

Yes, there's recoil, but it isn't that bad. I've watched a 65 year old, 5'3", 120lb woman go through a box of shells on a quail hunt no problem.

Get the shortest barrel and least amount of choke available. You want it to spread--so that when you are uncoordinated as hell (from the small amount of blood left in your adrenalin stream) you can still hit the bad guy.

full disclosure: I haven't owned a gun in years, but I am proficient with handguns, rifles, and shotguns (grew up with them, shot thousands of rounds of each). My home defense weapon is a deadbolt and a cellphone.

...but I don't live in DC so I wouldn't have to depend on DC police to help me. (also, not female, don't live alone).

Posted by Anon and on | June 1, 2008 9:07 PM

reply to ed, re: the pseudo-libertarian comment

Perhaps Megan is just pro-choice...and not in the narrow "liberal" sense.

Posted by Anon and on | June 1, 2008 9:15 PM

Lots of shooting ranges in NoVa. And anyway, at the ranges you'll use it at (i.e., ten feet or less), a ten round familiarization will be enough. You just aim center of mass, hold your breath, squeeze, repeat. At close quarters, there's not much need for aim. The greater need is to keep the other guy from grabbing it and wrestling it out of your hands. Avoid a Beretta for that reason - the alert and ballsy criminal can grab it by the barrel and jerk the slide right off the receiver.

And remember, they DO examine the guy afterwards, so make sure the shot in the forehead doesn't enter at too acute an angle, or they're going to know you decided to make sure the coroner only got one story.

Posted by Nanonymous | June 1, 2008 9:22 PM

Lots of shooting ranges in NoVa. And anyway, at the ranges you'll use it at (i.e., ten feet or less), a ten round familiarization will be enough. You just point center of mass, hold your breath, squeeze, repeat. At close quarters, there's not much need for aim. The greater need is to keep the other guy from grabbing it and wrestling it out of your hands. Avoid a Beretta for that reason - the alert and ballsy criminal can grab it by the barrel and jerk the slide right off the receiver.

And remember, they DO examine the guy afterwards, so make sure the shot in the forehead doesn't enter at too acute an angle, or they're going to know you decided to make sure the coroner only got one story.

Posted by Nanonymous | June 1, 2008 9:22 PM

Economics of Contempt: I'd suggest looking at the most recent data on gun ownership with respect to different crimes, looking at the various crime rates in your area, and then determining whether the private benefits of gun ownership are worth it. This paper is still the gold standard, as far as I know.

This Cook and Ludwig paper was bought and paid for by the Joyce Foundation.

With D.C.'s crime rate, I suspect the private benefits of gun ownership are quite worth it.

Posted by Kevin P. | June 1, 2008 9:31 PM

I'm a DC resident, and I'm not unilaterally opposed to possessing guns in the home for defense against robbery. But really, once you consider the cost of the weapon, safety training, and regular practice, isn't the cost/benefit analysis just much more favorable for buying high-quality locks and a couple of security system yard signs and stickers? After all, it's never necessary to be perfectly defended against robbery, only to be better defended than the next-best available target.

On the other hand, I am definitely opposed to concealed carry laws. As someone who likes the ability to walk around the city at night, I understand the need to feel safe, and I understand that the threats of mugging are real. Nonetheless, I have a hard time envisioning many situations in which brandishing a concealed weapon would be safe, appropriate, and effective, and the potential for a mishap with a concealed weapon in an unexpected situation on the street seems far too high.

Posted by Lee | June 1, 2008 9:48 PM

Ms. McArdle: The next time you get out west, try to catch a gun show in Boise, Reno, Bozeman or somewhere else reasonably civilized. Just go in and check out the booths, talk to the people and be up front about your novice shooter-status. At the end of the day, I bet you walk away thinking "Wow, I've never actually felt safe before today! This is a completely new sensation"

The secret is that, though none of the people you talk to will likely be armed at the moment you talk to them (being armed at a gun show is usually considered poor form), everyone will be comfortable with guns and will have a plan to 'cowboy up' in seconds, should the grim specter of injustice suddenly rear its ugly head.

This is how it feels to grow up in a town where every pickup has a couple of rifles on a back window rack, and no one even considers driving on by when trouble erupts.

I bet a lot of the stupidity in DC evaporates if Heller is decided correctly.

Posted by Richard | June 1, 2008 10:00 PM

Ms. McArdle: The next time you get out west, try to catch a gun show in Boise, Reno, Bozeman or somewhere else reasonably civilized. Just go in and check out the booths, talk to the people and be up front about your novice shooter-status. At the end of the day, I bet you walk away thinking "Wow, I've never actually felt safe before today! This is a completely new sensation"

The secret is that, though none of the people you talk to will likely be armed at the moment you talk to them (being armed at a gun show is usually considered poor form), everyone will be comfortable with guns and will have a plan to 'cowboy up' in seconds, should the grim specter of injustice suddenly rear its ugly head.

This is how it feels to grow up in a town where every pickup has a couple of rifles on a back window rack, and no one even considers driving on by when trouble erupts.

I bet a lot of the stupidity in DC evaporates if Heller is decided correctly.

Posted by Richard | June 1, 2008 10:02 PM

S&W Military & Police Compact (3.5") 9mm would be a good weapon for you with a 12 round mag. Pretty small, reasonably low recoil. Go with the hollow point rounds -- more expensive, but more stopping power, but less penetration (travelling through a person and through the wall, etc).

Just practice with regular 9mm ammo. It's my concealed carry gun and works well.

You can also get it in a .40 cal, which is bigger, more expensive ammo.

Or just go with an ultra small 22. I think more people die from 22 injuries than anything else.

Posted by sam | June 1, 2008 10:05 PM

Hi there,

My vote - pump action shotgun, 12 gauge preferably although a 20 gauge will do. The one comment/advice I'm surprised I haven't seen is this.

Ok, you're home and someone breaks in. You get your gun and, rather than confronting this bozo, you hide and you yell:

"Take whatever you want. Stay away, I have a gun."

Then you pump a round into the chamber and you're good to go.

P.S. A few years back, my next door neighbor heard noise one morning and found a guy in his backyard. He told the guy to leave and when that didn't work, he fired a shot into the ground to chase him away. And, no, he didn't call the police so it never showed up as an official statistic.

Posted by MarcInSeattle | June 1, 2008 10:10 PM

To everyone says that you shouldn't own a gun because it could result in "tragedy"......owning a car or an iron could result in a tragedy, grow some balls

Posted by DJK | June 1, 2008 10:15 PM

Lee, you're not thinking hard enough then. There are MANY MANY cases per year where brandishing and possibly using a concealed handgun was the safest, most appropriate, and by far the most effective course of action. By the way...the possibility of 'mishap' i

Posted by DJK | June 1, 2008 10:30 PM

Lee, you're not thinking hard enough then. There are MANY MANY cases per year where brandishing and possibly using a concealed handgun was the safest, most appropriate, and by far the most effective course of action. By the way...the possibility of 'mishap' in a car is far greater than that of a handgun.

Posted by DJK | June 1, 2008 10:30 PM

a gun in the hand is worth two in the bush. Keep it handy but don't let the little kiddies or the big kiddies get careless with it. Take them to the range with and teach them to shoot. Teach them gun safety too.

Posted by sol vason | June 1, 2008 10:51 PM

You should buy a big, glistening, throbbing, rigid gun. One comparable to the magnificent **** brandished by that manliest of men, John R. Lott.

I doubt you can find such a magnificent, powerful specimen, but you should try.

Posted by Mary Rosh | June 1, 2008 11:03 PM

Every person who exercises their firearm rights responsibly creates another data-point where handgun ownership did not lead to a crime or tragedy. Do your part. The only concern is that firearms are foolishness-intolerant mechanisms.

I'm unqualified to offer a specific opinion on the make or caliber of defensive weapon other than to say that I too have heard the shotgun spoken highly of for home defense. A female range-owner once berated me for trying to guide a female acquaintance's gun-search "never let a man buy you a gun, or a pair of shoes," she said "the only gun you should buy is one that you are totally comfortable with."

Posted by K. Larson | June 1, 2008 11:29 PM

Kevin P.,

The Cook & Ludwig paper was published in the Journal of Public Economics, which is one of the top economics journals. This is the reason these journals are "peer-reviewed," have anonymous referees, etc. Cook & Ludwig also published a paper with similar findings in the Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, which is associated with the American Enterprise Institute (a fervent opponent of gun control).

Showing that research for a paper was done with money from an interest group isn't the same thing as discrediting the paper, especially when it was later published in a peer-reviewed journal. I've actually read the Cook & Ludwig paper, and I'm quite confident in it.

Posted by Economics of Contempt | June 1, 2008 11:31 PM

Megan, once you've made your decision, if you decide in the affirmative, spend some time getting to know different guns. Try them out -- it's possible to rent guns, some gun shops might let you try them out gratis if you're a serious purchaser. Don't know what options will spring up in DC when we get the Heller victory, but if you contact the Virginia Citizens Defense League, I'll bet they'll be happy to help out a newbie.

If you get a shotgun, don't use BB shot. IMHO, a .410 shotgun isn't enough gun -- go with a 20 gauge if you don't want a 12 gauge. Also, you can purchase lighter 12 gauge loads -- you don't need 3-1/2 inch magnums for home defense.

If you get a pistol such as a .45 long colt, don't mix loads in the cylinder. Differing recoils will be yet another variable thing happening when you're already at a high stress level, should you actually need to use your gun.

I disagree with those saying to keep the gun unloaded. In a stressful situation, having to rack the pistol slide, shotgun pump, or whatever mechanism, is one more thing to remember to do when you've already got enough on your mind. If you're going to use a gun for defense, it should be ready to go. Yes, this puts the burden on you to learn safe gun handling. With the right gun, it's not a problem. You just learn the correct habits.

Don't be put off by comments saying it's too hard to learn to shoot a pistol well. If you want to do it, then you can.

The best gun for you isn't the gun that the most people are recommending (well, it might turn out that way). It's the one you feel the most comfortable shooting. To paraphrase an old saying, the .380 in your purse is more useful than the .45 in your gun safe.

There are lots of good people out here in the gunblogging community who can give you good advice. Just ask us. The NRA will help you find a certified instructor in your area. If you'd like to get feedback from women shooters, that can be arranged. I'm not in your area, but if you e-mail me, I'll ping a few folks, and with that 6 degrees of seperation thing going, I'm sure I can get few referrals for you.

Posted by jed | June 1, 2008 11:39 PM

The comments section here is Exhibit A as to why the U.S. leads the universe in gunshot deaths. Christ, what a bunch of bedwetting psychos you've got here, MM.

Posted by quase | June 1, 2008 11:41 PM

In considering the issue of overpenetration, you might look at Vengeance wherein an Israeli counterterrorism solution is dicussed. The book reads as a fascinating mystery novel as well; too bad it may be real life.

Posted by Michael Haas B. | June 1, 2008 11:48 PM

Lee:
Nonetheless, I have a hard time envisioning many situations in which brandishing a concealed weapon would be safe, appropriate, and effective, and the potential for a mishap with a concealed weapon in an unexpected situation on the street seems far too high.

There's no need to speculate regarding the potential for mishaps--most states have had shall-issue laws for more than 10 years, so there should by now be statistics available regarding the frequency with which these mishaps occur.

For some reason, I have never once seen any such statistics cited in opposition to concealed-carry liberalization--it's never anything more than speculation. I wonder why that is.

Posted by Brandon Berg | June 1, 2008 11:59 PM

"Avoid a Beretta for that reason - the alert and ballsy criminal can grab it by the barrel and jerk the slide right off the receiver."

Been watching Lethal Weapon 4, have we? But seriously, no. Unless he's a skilled magician-type who's been practicing that act, you can't do that.

Posted by Peter | June 2, 2008 12:05 AM

DJK and Brandon,

I'm not trying to directly dispute anyone's statistics, but the fact of the matter is that selection bias is rampant. The demographics of the average gun owner are substantially different from those of the average Megan McArdle, not least because Megan and all other DC residents are currently subject to the handgun ban. Those demographics matter because the types of situations in which one might use a gun depend significantly on the locations and situations in which one might be threatened. The fact that guns are generally useful in Peoria does not imply that they are similarly useful in DC.

I walk the same streets in the same neighborhoods as Megan on a daily basis, and I cannot imagine a situation in which carrying a concealed weapon in this city would be to my significant benefit. Most DC residents feel the same way, which is why the handgun ban has been allowed to stand for so long with relatively little opposition. The merits and drawbacks of a citywide ban notwithstanding, I think that's a potent argument against getting a gun, even if it's one that this blog's gun-loving populace is all too eager to disregard.

For the record, I grew up in a very rural area, on a farm, with a gun in my home, and in such a situation I think you'd find that my suggestions might be quite different.

Posted by Lee | June 2, 2008 12:48 AM

Echoing other comments:

Personal self-defense is too large of a topic to cover in a blog comment, but just a few points:

1. Before you buy a gun, you should first make the mental decision that your life is worth saving, even if you must kill your attacker. Personally, I think this moral decision is easy to make, but you should think about this decision until you are comfortable with it. Then, once you're in a situation, just remember the decision you made and don't second-guess yourself.

2. For home defense, get a dog first (if practical), then a shotgun. A short-barreled weapon is only preferable if, for some reason, you must move around your house during a attack. If you live alone, you should have no reason to be moving around.

3. Practice. A shotgun blast indoors, without ear protection, will definitely be disorienting. You can't practice inside your house, and you shouldn't practice without ear protection, but you can practice everything else. You should be able to load, chamber, check for a chambered shell, and shoot by touch alone. Over-practice, so that even when panicked, you can operate the shotgun by muscle memory, and after the stun of the first shot, you can chamber another round and fire again.

What buying a gun for self-defense really means is giving yourself a difficult moral choice. Being a helpless victim is morally simple, being armed and responsible is morally challenging. Create personal rules-of-engagement, think about the possible outcomes, and make sure you can live with those outcomes. Then, have the technique to implement those rules.

Posted by altoids | June 2, 2008 12:51 AM

Lee,

For your peace of mind, I sure hope you stay in DC and never wander over to Arlington or any of those other horrible Wild West spots in VA where concealed and open carry is the law! The murder rate over there is much higher--oops, I mean lower than yours, too.

Posted by Kirk Parker | June 2, 2008 1:07 AM

And Lee, your assertion about Peoria vs DC is just that--an assertion. How about adding some actual exposition and reasoning to it, so we can see if we buy it or not?

Posted by Kirk Parker | June 2, 2008 1:12 AM

Forgot about concealed carry in my previous comment (12:51 AM):

Concealed carry is even a bigger moral challenge, since the situations will be fluid and unpredictable. It's even more important here to establish your own rules-of-engagement to live by. Personally, I don't think concealed carry is for everyone - you should be very comfortable with owning a gun before considering it.

As far as the hardware, advice here is pretty good. Go with a comfortable gun you will actually carry, every day. Exactly what to carry is a question of lively debate among gun nuts. I would recommend a double-action revolver, with the hammer resting on a empty chamber.

Why a revolver? Maintenance. The springs in ammo clips can weaken. The powder residue in in semi-autos is harder to clean. Gun hobbyists like doing this stuff, but everyone gets too busy sometimes. A revolver is simple to use and maintain, which makes you more likely to practice. And it will work even if you neglect it.

Posted by altoids | June 2, 2008 1:51 AM

with the hammer resting on a empty chamber...

That advice is at least 30 years out of date; anything you buy today will have a transfer bar, so why not load it to the top?

I'll reemphasize my point again: you need a flashlight, preferably a powerful compact, to go with your gun. Or even if you decide not to get a gun.

BTW, anyone who says that a shotgun's spread will make your target easier to hit should spend some time at the patterning board. DC apartment dimensions are such that the pattern will never be more than a few inches across: the difference between a kill and a "merely" crippling severe injury, but not the difference between taking aim and spray-and-pray. The shotgun is superior because it has a stock and is therefore easier to shoot well, not because it relieves you of the need to shoot well altogether. Hence my recommendation of a pistol-chambered carbine.

you don't need 3-1/2 inch magnums for home defense.

Unless your home is beset by criminally inclined wild turkeys. In which case, you should definitely post a video.

Posted by Rob Lyman | June 2, 2008 2:13 AM

Buy the gun, you may need it when society collapses. Honestly, if you learn how to use it properly, your car is probably more dangerous to your life.

Also, I hope you don't shoot yourself, instead I hope that the bullet intended for you, ricochets off a nearby metal object and into the lung of an unsuspecting NASCAR fan close by.

Posted by Andy | June 2, 2008 3:26 AM

When Mark Twain's brother was appointed Secretary of the Nevada Territory, Mark decided to join him and try his hand at journalism. His account of their trip was recorded in the book 'Roughing It.' In one passage, he and his brother decide to buy a pistol. Naturally, they decide to try out their new purchase with a little target practice. Mark notes that the safest place to stand while discharging the weapon is directly in front of the barrel. Now modern weapons are a bit more accurate, but some of the above advice seems quite reasonable. If you don't want to learn to shoot a pistol and practice regularly, then purchase a shotgun. Buck shot might be a good choice. Practice is still necessary, as a shotgun might kick a bit and be difficult for you control without experience. You wouldn't want to shoot someone you didn't intend to.

Posted by wGraves | June 2, 2008 3:44 AM

Should you decide to become a shooter, you should join the National Rifle Association and use their shooting range in Fairfax. It's the nicest indoor range I've seen and my wife and I go there weekly. It's not that far from the District, and the range is just off I-66 near the Fair Oaks shopping center.

You should also take one of the NRA's Introduction to Pistol classes. These are run by several organizations in the DC area, generally on weekends. It takes a full day but is well worth the time. You will have classroom instruction and a chance to shoot several pistol types in practical instruction.

My wife took the class to learn about self-defense but found she greatly enjoys recreational shooting.

As far as the personal decision to own a handgun, I would only add that the police are pretty good about showing up and drawing a chalk outline around your body, but they sure are not going to be there in time to stop the crime from taking place.

Jack

Posted by Jack Smith | June 2, 2008 7:37 AM

I don't understand why so many people seem to believe that "entitled to" implies "ought to."

Posted by Harold Jones | June 2, 2008 8:26 AM

I"m a second amendment absolutist, but I've got to agree with some of the commenters here: Don't buy a gun just because you can, if you get one, commit to real time learning to handle it, and if you're planning on using it for self defense, do some serious introspection and be certain that you're willing to kill someone with it.

You should never point a gun at anything that you're not willing to shoot.

Posted by TW Andrews | June 2, 2008 9:10 AM

TW: "Don't buy a gun just because you can."

In my mind, "Just because I can" is a fine reason to buy a gun. You do not need any reason or excuse to exercise a right, particularly one protected by the Constitution.

Oh, absolutely, as I've said in an earlier reply which appears to be still pending, take lessons and think hard about how you will use the thing.

However, do not let the training process daunt you. We're talking about a couple of hours of classroom instruction and a couple of hours on the range, at most. You probably spent more time learning the far more complex task of driving.

And with no training or introspection at all, I trust you -- Yes, YOU, Citizen! -- with a gun far more than I trust the government with so much as a paperclip. A file cabinet is a far more dangerous weapon than any bomb.

Owning a gun is the only way to truly understand the rights and responsibilities appertaining thereto. Buying a gun is the best way of learning just how radically that right has been infringed.

Buy the gun, Megan. Join the free.
===

Dog people: yes, a dog is a fine companion and a pretty good goblin alarm. Do not, however, delegate your security to a critter who can be bribed with a piece of steak or a belly rub, or who can be repeatedly tricked into chasing after a ball that was, in fact, never thrown.

What is the deal with thinking that dogs can be trusted with life and death decisions but humans cannot?

Posted by DJMoore | June 2, 2008 9:49 AM

Echoing what others have said:

1.) Don't buy a gun unless you are *really* certain that you could bring yourself to kill a [bad] human being without hesitation.

2.) If the answer to #1 is 'yes,' then buy a pump-action 12-gauge with the shortest legal barrel plus 1/2 inch. (Federal minimum length is 18 inches, but some States are higher.)

3.) Practice! Practice! Practice! (with reduced recoil ammo, if necessary)

4.) Store the weapon with the magazine fully loaded with "personal self defense" ammo, the chamber empty, the slide halfway open, and the safety OFF. That way, you just have to rack the slide back and forth once and you're ready to fire. An LED flashlight under the barrel might be a good idea, too.

5.) Aim for the center-of-mass unless you think the Perp is wearing body armor; then go for the head or the crotch.

Posted by john w. | June 2, 2008 11:15 AM

"the next puts a really big hole in his get-away car."

Don't ever shoot at someone if they're fleeing the scene. It's a great way to injure an innocent person by accident, and even more likely to earn you a trip to jail. You should only shoot when your life or the life of someone else is in direct danger. People have gone to jail for shooting fleeing criminals.

Posted by sam | June 2, 2008 11:15 AM

P.S. (as an afterthought)>

6.) When the Cops finally arrive, tell 'em that your objective was to 'stop the attack' ***NOT*** to 'kill the bastard' !!!!!!

Posted by john w. | June 2, 2008 11:48 AM

Megan,

Congratulations on beginning to grapple with the challenge of providing for your own safety. It's every adult's responsibility, but DC has preferred to treat its residents as children for over 30 years.

Unfortunately, even if the Heller case is a victory, it's unlikely to turn DC's laws into a pro-gun utopia. The city is likely to immediately follow a Supreme Court decision with the most restrictive laws short of a total ban that they think will pass muster -- repeat until the courts become sufficiently bored.

Expect the city to try requiring licensing, registration, safe storage, training, possibly even magazine capacity silliness... all with as many roadblocks put into the process as they can come up with. What you get is likely to be determined at least partly by what they will allow you to have. The courts may strike down some or all of whatever requirements they pass, but it may well take years for that to happen.

Bear in mind that if you're willing to put up with that, it's already legal to own a shotgun, if you jump through all the hoops. Some would argue that a shotgun is better suited for your intent anyway.
I wouldn't, but some would. To get an idea, read The So-Called Capital of the Free World.

Even if they don't try to mandate a training requirement, plan to get some if you're a first-time gun owner or first time handgun owner. If you go to the appropriate NRA training course you won't have to try to sort out which of your commenters knows what they are talking about and which are just trying to convince you it's a bad idea for political reasons.

I don't mean to be discouraging but this is not likely to be a settled issue that can be treated casually in the District for some time.

All that said? The answer is YES, get a gun. Because it's your life, not theirs, and the government often needs to be reminded of this.

Posted by TriggerFinger | June 2, 2008 12:09 PM

"So if Heller, as libertarians devoutly hope, legalizes gun ownership in DC, the question immediately arises for those of us who live here: buy one, or not? On the one hand, they are expensive, and shooting ranges far away."

If the Supreme Court does its job right in Heller, there will come to be shooting ranges in town [although they may still be pricey, like all land-intensive activities in the District].

-dk

Posted by Dick King | June 2, 2008 12:21 PM

"So if Heller, as libertarians devoutly hope, legalizes gun ownership in DC, the question immediately arises for those of us who live here: buy one, or not? On the one hand, they are expensive, and shooting ranges far away."

If the Supreme Court does its job right in Heller, there will come to be shooting ranges in town [although they may still be pricey, like all land-intensive activities in the District].

-dk

Posted by Dick King | June 2, 2008 12:22 PM

Indoor shooting ranges are not at all land intensive.

Posted by Rex | June 2, 2008 4:07 PM

Whether you should get a gun for self defense depends on whether you are nervous or scared at home or in your neighborhood.

I spent 28 years in the Marines, so I feel somewhat qualified in the area of guns. But where I live, I don't need a gun for self defense, so I don't have one. When I worked in NYC, I carried a knife with a lockable blade that I could open one-handed (and it was a legal knife; not a switchblade). If NYC allowed concealed carry (they do, but only a VERY restrictive basis), I would have carried a pistol.

But, as I said, I don't feel the need to carry or even own one now. So I don't. But I'm not scared or nervous in my neighborhood.

If you're the least bit nervous in your neighborhood, you should get a gun and learn how to use it. It's easy to learn how to shoot a pistol, especially anything in the range from a .22 to a 9 mm. It took me less than an hour to teach my wife how to shoot a .22 Ruger target pistol, at which point she could get all 10 rounds on the target at 50 yards. (NRA match shooting style, i.e., one-handed.) Then I let her try the .45 once, so she would know what it was like, and she hit the dirt about 10 yards in front of us. She stuck with the .22 from then on.

As for the comment from that yo-yo quase above, just how many of those gun deaths came from legal, registered weapons, and how many were by criminals? I had a discussion with my local judge about the tedious procedures for getting a pistol registration here, and he said he was against concealed carry because in his 20 years of judging he had seen evidence of too many guns used in deaths. I asked him how many deaths had been from registered guns, and he thought for a moment before replying, "None."

Posted by Rex | June 2, 2008 4:21 PM

Rex,

My rule is always that if I don't feel comfortable in a place without a gun, I don't go there with a gun--because frankly, the last thing in the world I want to do is shoot somebody. OK, second to last, but you get the idea.

I'm all for concealed carry and self-defense in the home, but if your neighborhood's that bad, move out.

Posted by Rob Lyman | June 2, 2008 4:39 PM

I must respectfully disagree with the commenter above who suggested the use of birdshot for self defense.

Birdshot will not reliably stop an attacker. This is because birdshot will not penetrate deeply enough to reach vital organs. More information about this can be seen here: http://www.learnaboutguns.com/2008/05/10/pros-and-cons-of-using-birdshot-for-self-defense/

Posted by LearnAboutGuns | June 2, 2008 4:56 PM

It's interesting that everyone assumes McArdle is a novice...

Posted by Jacob | June 2, 2008 9:27 PM

Trust me, if you are in a situation where you need to go for your gun in the middle of the night, there will be so much adrenaline pumping through your veins that being sleepy will definitely NOT be an issue.

To counter a few of your points...

"[guns] are expensive"...What is your life worth?

"shooting ranges are far away"...There are at least three ranges that I know of just outside the 395 loop in VA. Gilberts in Lorton, NRA in Fairfax, and Blue Ridge Arsenal in Chantilly.

Posted by Soloban | June 2, 2008 9:30 PM

Dear Megan:

Whether you decide to own a handgun, or other type of firearm, is a personal decision. It's your right to do so, of course, just like it's your right not to do so.

But it's a serious decision, one that should not be taken lightly. It is perfectly clear from criminological research that defensive gun use is far better than any other response to crime, at least as measured by property loss and personal injury. Why? handguns are effective. That is why the people protecting Obama, Clinton, Pelosi, Daley, Bloomberg, McCain, etc. all carry firearms.

But anyone with a lick of sense understands that owning one and the ability to use it effectively are two very different things. The NRA has been teaching responsible, safe, and effective gun use for generations. Find an NRA certified pistol instructor, approach them with an open mind, and see what happens.

I happen to be pretty heavily trained in the use of handguns, shotguns and semi-auto rifles...so I might be biased. But be smart about it and take it slow. There is a lot of illogical rhetoric on both sides of this issue...particularly the side that claims handguns are useless for defense. Just be smart and you will make the correct decision for yourself.

Posted by Carl in Chicago | June 2, 2008 10:05 PM

Rex,

Your current home area may be far safer than NYC, but I'm willing to bet the violent-crime rate is not zero. Sometimes trouble goes looking for a person, and as Jeff Cooper wrote, "Statistics are a cold comfort after you discover your case is the rare exception."

Which is not to say you've made the wrong decision, but I wouldn't necessarily be comfortable holding it out to others as a piece of advice for their own lives, either. Just to pick a few examples at pseudo-random: neither the Dartmouth Murder victims, nor the concealed-carrying man who successfully defended himself against an assault in Seattle's high-end Westlake shopping area recently, were in high-crime areas when disaster struck. But only the one who prepared himself for trouble is still with us.

Rob Lyman,

Good advice. I've heard it put this way: "I carry a pistol, not so I can get into situations I wouldn't get into if I didn't have it, but so I can get out of situations that I couldn't get out of without it." But by all means, the best way to win a gun fight is to be somewhere else when it happens.

Posted by Kirk Parker | June 3, 2008 1:22 AM

If you don't, that's fine. If you do buy a handgun or other firearm, PLEASE do all 3 of the things listed below:

1) Learn how to use your weapon well, clean it and what signs it may give that something is wrong with it.

2) Select your weapon based on recommendations of someone you know is truly knowledgeable on the subject.

3) Don't decide to move it haphazardly around. By that, if you are going to keep it in your bedroom, it should stay there in one location unless you are transporting it to the range, gunsmith or cleaning it. The only thing I can think of to say here is imagine what it would be like to suddenly need it and forget where it is because you don't keep it in the same place!

Real advice aside, if you are the least bit uneasy or reluctant to shoot to save yourself or others; you don't need a firearm for protection. Could I show you something in say a Louisville Slugger?

Posted by Dan | June 3, 2008 2:24 AM

Is this for home defence, or concealed carry? If only the former, I'd actually recommend forgoing the gun and investing in a bladed weapon, preferably something with a decent reach that can still be wielded one-handed, such as a rapier. Jokes about bringing a knife to a gunfight aside, in the small dimensions of an apartment, you will always have sufficient proximity to an intruder to have the upper hand over anyone who doesn't begin the encounter by pointing a gun at you, in which case you're scrod no matter what's in your arsenal. A sword is easier to learn how to handle, is much easier to maintain, is never unloaded, and if, heaven forfend, there should ever be a tragic accident involving your weapon, it is much harder to have a lethal accident involving a sword than a firearm of any sort. And any of the less-used lower tech weapons brings with it a psychological intimidation factor.

I'm in favor of gun rights, but I believe in having the right tool for a job. For home defence, in any home where the maximum sightline is less than 15 feet, that's a blade.

Posted by Michael | June 3, 2008 2:49 AM

Good for you Megan!

If you do buy a firearm, I recommend a handgun. Despite the advice recommending a shotgun, a handgun is more suitable for home defense because it can be easily handled while simultaneously doing such vital things as switching on a light, operating a phone, or opening a door. A shotgun is more suited for hiding behind your bed and staying put.

Fast access lock (push-button combination) handgun storage boxes are available, so safe storage shouldn't be a problem.

Don't let anyone talk you into a handgun you don't like just because they think they know it all. A handgun which fits properly is a very individualistic thing. Before you buy, try and find a shooting range which rents handguns. That way you can try many different types before settling on a choice. There is no adequate substitute for first hand experience. Besides, the secret of firearm ownership is that target shooting is lots of fun, so have fun!

Posted by Brad | June 3, 2008 4:43 AM

Dan,

I think your #2 leaves out a vital point. Yes, recommendations from knowledgeable folks are quite helpful as a way of narrowing down the field, but there's absolutely no substitute for trying out some choices and going with the one that suits you best.

Also, your "Louisville Slugger" alternative may have the benefit of seeming less lethal. However, it probably requires more training, not less, to be effective against a skilled or determined opponent, has all the same drawbacks as a shotgun when you're trying to wield it in a confined space, and is easier to disarm than a handgun.

Posted by Kirk Parker | June 3, 2008 10:40 AM

For starters, realize that you can open carry your handgun in plain site (e.g., in hip or other holster) in Virginia and most states without any permit at age 18. Further, you should apply now for your mail order concealed handgun permit from one of the emany states - PA is the easiest, no fingerprinting or training required - go to http://www.co.centre.pa.us/sheriff/license_application.asp and apply today!! The PA "License to Carry Firearms" is accepted in Virginia and many states to CONCEAL your gun.

Posted by Mike Stollenwerk | June 3, 2008 10:43 AM

I like the way Ted Nugent sums it up:

"To my mind it is wholly irresponsible to go into the world incapable of preventing violence, injury, crime, and death. How feeble is the mindset to accept defenselessness. How unnatural. How cheap. How cowardly. How pathetic."

--Ted Nugent

Posted by Bart | June 3, 2008 10:48 AM

Megan,

There is a lot of good advice here. However the decison to arm is one that takes some thought. What you shold get is based on what you want the gun for. DC law does allow longarms or a shotgun which can be used for self defense. The ability to legally purchase a handgun is not available in DC and may not be even after Heller is decided affirmatively.

There are no gundealers in DC, The only one that has a FFL is the VPC and they do not sell guns. Since you are a DC resident you are not allowed to cross state lines and buy a handgun. But the federal laws are different for longarms. You may be allowed to buy a shotgun in VA and have it in your home in DC. The best home defense weapon is the shotgun. The shooter does not need to be as accurate and a shotgun blast at short range will put down an invader. Best size for a small woman is 20 gauge. Larger women are comfortable with 12 gauge. You can practice a shotgun at various ranges in VA or MD. The PG Trap and Skeet range in Greenbelt is a good place for practice.

Many shotgun shooters perfer semi automatic guns. Others love the pump shotgun. The popular Remington 870 pump is used by police and civilians. The Remington 1100 is very good also. Shop for a used shotgun since they are cheaper.

I applaud you for thinking about this issue.

Posted by RAH | June 3, 2008 11:29 AM

Megan,

There is a lot of good advice here. However the decison to arm is one that takes some thought. What you shold get is based on what you want the gun for. DC law does allow longarms or a shotgun which can be used for self defense. The ability to legally purchase a handgun is not available in DC and may n

Comments (91)