I am not from the US, why isn’t it safe? Doesn’t it have a safety where you can turn the gun off?
I believe proper gun safety teaches people to treat every gun as loaded and safety off. Same reason it's extremely unsafe to point a supposedly empty gun at someone.
'Never point any firearm at anything you are not intending to destroy' is like rule one of any gun range or weapons safety course.
This is taught not only to instill fear and respect, but because weapon malfunctions and user errors happen, and they maim and kill people.
I have had squib rounds on the range, and shitty .22 ammo go off 4 seconds after i pulled the trigger. Had I just assumed it was immediately a dud and gone to clear it without waiting, I could have shot the person in the next stall.
Many pistols have safeties and/or hammers that can be easily set to an unsafe when carried like this, if you bump into something or even lean the wrong way.
Theres also the chance of blowing your genitals off or shooting yourself in the hips, upper legs, in a way thats fairly likely to paralyze you or kill you from blood loss from shooting your genitals or femoral artery, if you manage to disengage the safety and also pull the trigger, or draw the weapon improperly in a state of basically threatened panic. Statistically this is rare, but it has happened more than once.
Imagine sitting and then standing and then sitting again with your gun like this.
Ok, now imagine walking or jogging or running and then stopping suddenly. Or even leaning over to reach something.
In addition to being just very uncomfortable with a gun digging into your stomach and crotch, probably the actual main reason this is stupid is that it just is not actually secure, the gun is likely to accidentally fall out and not go off, but scatter across the floor and scare the shit out of everyone nearby.
In ... most (?) of the US, its probably accidentally a crime (brandishing) to even accidentally reveal a concealed weapon without an imminent threat to your person, though this will vary greatly by state, locality and the situation.
Holsters exist to solve this problem.
The closest thing to this that people actually are Appendix Inside Waistband Holsters that clip onto a belt, and go under an overshirt, but over an undershirt, or what are called Belly Bands for non belted people, those are basically underarmor style waistbands with shaped pockets.
In reality these are generally fairly uncomfortable for most people I've ever known that carry a gun on a regular basis.
Many/most guns don't have a safety. It carried, they should be in a holster that covers the trigger. When you draw it, it's ready to fire.
Basically, imagine every gun has a laser beam coming out the end. If that laser lights something up, that something is in danger.
It's drawn for comedic effect, but ideally it should be in a proper holster (it can still be in that area, like an appendix holster), that covers the trigger and protects the hammer - prevents it from falling out - and also ensures the weapon is always pointing slightly away from the body towards the ground
•
Fuck me, hold tight. There’s a gun in your trousers. What’s a gun doing in your trousers? What's to stop it from blowing your bits off every time you sit down?
Hi there from !armedqweers@lemmy.blahaj.zone
A proper carry holster is designed to protect the trigger/trigger guard to prevent the pistol from firing.
Should never rely on a safety for that, though a gun in a proper holster should be impossible to discharge.
Guns should never be tucked into a waistband without a proper holster.
Of course. But if you're the kind of person who would carry a gun in their waistband you probably have a looser definition of gun safety than most people
Just like a sword is protective against another sword, a gun is protective against another gun.
Someone swings a sword at you? Simply parry the blade.
Someone shoots at you? Simply shoot the bullets out of the air.
Nah, but the honest response is that guns are relatively commonly referred to as 'protection' (at least where I am) and I thought the word bit would be funny here, and also because it was my first thought. For what it's worth, I agree with you that guns aren't protective as a whole.
Based on their pin their gender is Bottom and their pronouns are Sussy/Baka
If the left would stop trying to disarm the powerless, it would be a lot easier to get on board.
Here's some left for you:
"Under no pretext should arms and ammunition be surrendered; any attempt to disarm the workers must be frustrated, by force if necessary" Karl Marx
Note that just because Marx said something doesn't mean you should treat it as a gospel.
Marx lived from the early 19th to the late 19th century and didn't witness WW1. Since then, the military has become almost infinitely more powerful compared to Marx's days, where armed workers stood an actual chance against the military. Nowadays though? Not even remotely. Shut off the internet and electicity in a region, ban the press from reporting, send in the military and wipe out any protest, regardless of how many arms there are. Just take a look at Chechnya and how well they've been doing after declaring independence.
The US is an exploitative capitalist country despite having an awful amount of guns.
Northern European countries are significantly less exploitative, while still capitalist, countries without nearly as many guns.
The amount of arms in worker's hands and the severity of capitalism has no relation anymore. Hell, by having so many guns, the US can reasonably argue for ever greater police budgets without much backlash. You wouldn't want children to die in school shootings, would you, you monster?