> Frankly if the grandma next door needs to use a weapon, I would hope that she is not limited by regulations such as that - I would like her to have as good of a grip and sighting options as absolutely possible. I'd rather her have an easily controllable SBR type of weapon, expandable stock and maybe 30 rounds of 22 winmag - this would be much safer for her and for the neighbors I think if something went down... JB's double barrell shotgun suggestion would not be the best protection for many grandmas, imho.

Is this a real risk in parts of the country where old people need serious fire power to defend themselves? Maybe it is and I just haven't been exposed to it. For me, I'd feel more nervous with someone with deteriorating memory and eyesight handling a lethal weapon next door.

> Is this a real risk in parts of the country where old people need serious fire power to defend themselves?

I don't think the way to reason about this is based on "serious fire power" vs some other kind of weapon that you feel is more acceptable. All guns can be lethal.

If grandma feels unsafe, she might get a gun. I can understand how older people might want firepower when they know they can't physically fend off an attacker.

If you accept grandma's right to be armed, would you rather she use a more or less dangerous gun?

Most gun controls make the weapon less safe. It's similar to how people think sharp knives are more dangerous, but they're actually much safer than dull knives.

The way to think about it is that the round is doing most of the work. The gun is just a delivery system for the round, and besides fully automatic weapons, every other weapon choice is about safety, accuracy, and reliability.

A "Short Barrel Rifle" or "Short Barrel Shotgun" is easier to operate, and therefore more safe than a non-NFA rifle. They were regulated to make people feel better, not to add safety. The velocity of NFA SBRs is actually lower than the velocity of a bullet leaving a non-NFA 16" barrel.

A silencer is not silent, it's just hearing protection, but also requires an NFA tax stamp. They don't sound like they do in the movies, and there's no mistaking it's a gunshot.

Expandable stocks and foregrips are scary looking, but the whole point of them is to gain accuracy, which makes the gun safer. These are usually legal, but there are silly regulations around these too.

Larger magazines allow you to focus on your threat instead of counting your bullets. For now, these are legal, but banning magazines with large capacity is a common talking point.

The reason all of these items look scary is because we see military with them. But even in the military, they're not to make the guns more lethal. The whole point is operational safety.

If you don't think anyone should be allowed to have a gun, that's actually a more defensible position. If people are allowed to have guns, they should be allowed to have any gun and any gun attachment that improves their safety.

I suppose it depends on what type of grandma you have :)

Maybe with training, your grandma could enjoy plinking targets and also be safer in her home?

There are grandmas that love hunting and spending time at the range.

It'd be nice to live in a world where nobody ever commits acts of violence. Unfortunately, we banned violence long ago, and it seems that criminals are still doing it anyway. The next best thing we can do is be prepared.

Then again, comparing New World statistics to Europe ans Asia, it seems pretty clear that personal gun ownership isn't the only option for staying alive.

Which gun ownership stats are you using for Europe? IIRC there's a ton of unregistered literally military guns lying around over there from the various wars.

Guns don't go bad, after all.

(And if you count things like the Holodomor, Holocaust, Cambodian Genocide etc as murder, I think the correlation between 'murder rate' and 'civilian gun ownership rate' takes a decidedly different slope)

We can not compare America to Europe or Asia - there are too many differing factors.

A lot of people want to compare because money or gdp is similar or whatever - but they are all totally different.

I'd love to have the same kind of social safety nets that many Euro countries have, I think much of the US violence in related to the lack of stability in families that is a reflection of financial insecurities honestly.

Other things like the value of the drug markets here, and the quick access of Latin countries to here ( https://www.businessinsider.com/latin-america-is-the-worlds-... ) - make a huge difference. comparing stats about any other place is just apples and oranges.

You know your grandmother better than I, so I have little doubt that you may be right. Certainly there are plenty of senior citizens that do not have the physical or and mental abilities to properly wield a weapon. I'd like to think that all of those are well taken care of with others protecting them in one way or another.

I have about a dozen grandmas in my neighborhood that are all physically and mentally doing very well. They don't need walkers or wheelchairs. some still work, some run businesses. They garden, the go out. Every single one of them can wield a shovel or a firearm if need be.

Sadly there is advice out there that puts them in more danger in a similar way that you describe with yours - I've heard popular advice repeated like 'you need a revolver that don't jam' - best thing is 'a double barrel 12 ga shotgun' - quite frankly I think that is terrible advice for most of them.

For many with the kind of physical limitations in our area, something like a GSG-16 .22 , a Mossberg 715 Pistol .22 , even a Walther Arms Uzi Tactical Rifle Semi-Auto .22 - these things would be easier to use, less fear of recoil, easier to keep on target of bad guys and less chance of inuring self, or bystanders / neighbors..

yet some of the GC ideas would limit access to exactly these kinds of safer features all in the name fear mongering 'military assault accessories' -

the grandma next door would be less safe being forced not to have access to these options and instead forced to use something will less control and options. That's simply truth.

again, it may not be true for every grandma in the world, but a majority of them (that are not bedridden / incapacitated etc), I think so.

a mag full of 22 win mag is not really 'serious firepower' - I mean it is, but I think people would consider like a SCAR or M60 to be serious - and lots of people chuckle at someone using '22'...

I think it depends on where you live, and how valuable you are in terms of theft and attractiveness.

For examples - the super rich in Miami probably need more security than the richer in Beverly Hills. If you are attractive / sexy in Miami you are probably not more in danger than if you are that sexy in like St Louis or Newark NJ / Detriot.

There was a country girl in the news a couple years back, she was young and very pretty. The whole town knew her husband had died / had a funeral - a couple weeks later she needed firearms to stop bad things happening at her house.

I've been in Nashville (TN) and the suburbs of it for many years, and I will say that you won't need weapons everyday, but the crime, especially with violent younger people is increasing at a rate that is kind of shocking. We have multiple armed robberies all around us. Last week someone put a knife to a convenience store customer;s throat in order to rob the gas station.

People and places are being robbed left and right around here these days - and many of them get extra violent without reason. Some have been caught on door cams lately. With the 'gentrification' that certain places are bringing - it's not going to get any better.

I spent more than a decade working the nightshift downtown. It was during those times it became clear to me, when you need help, if you have time to call the cops - it will take a long time for them to get to you.

My neighbor who is grandma age has had her house attempted to be broken into multiple times throughout the years. Partially because it is off the main road enough to be secluded for privacy in attacks.

People around her are busting into cars, jacking mail from mailboxes a lot.. that is not usually violent, but when you catch these people doing these things, sometimes they pop off with all kinds of crazy, sometimes with stolen guns.

I don't know what it's like in the part of the world you are in, but around here it's not everyday you in the thick of it - not like SE DC was in the 80s.. but everyday there is lots of crime all around us (like within a 1/2 mile and lots within 5 miles) - it's just a matter of time before you are in a normal place at a bad time.

Hopefully you can run / drive away and maybe just use a pepper spray and whistle.. but the criminals around here have really stepped up the violence and guns the past few years. There are signs it's getting worse. I would suggest the possible need for weaponry during the daylight hours is much more often now than it was a decade ago I'd say only those who worked at night needed to really be extra aware of surroundings and such.

  lots of people chuckle at someone using '22'

President Reagan very, very nearly died from one ricocheted .22 round.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attempted_assassination_of_Ron...

I had not known that, appreciate the reference. Indeed I think a 22 or 22 win mag is probably good for most grandma situations - it could certainly stop a couple of bad guys that are not wearing plate armor.. easy to control recoil, so they won't be afraid of it going off, and they can focus on sending multiple rounds towards targets to stop them.

From what I've seen in the news and videos most of violent criminals around here have been tshirts and hoodies, generally 1 -4 people, although the group of kids that took a musician out recently over a van I think was 5 maybe 6 at once. 30 rounds of 22 would be better than trying to swat them with a heavy purse.

If your threat was high value target, or some kind of state entity, I would not count on a 22 to be the best choice. Some people have suggested winter coats and layers of cloth can impede a 22, maybe if it's hollow.. for grandmas in Minnesota and such I'd probably suggest training with and getting used to something that can run critical duty or critical defense ammo through it instead maybe.

Most of my older neighbors would do well with any low recoil round if the platform was easy to handle.

Which is one reason this assault style banning talk bothers me so much. It literally makes them more dangerous and puts them in more danger by regulation, which is not silly.

It gives the strong criminals an advantage and the weaker citizens a disadvantage in life threatening situations.

again, not an expert, doctor, lawyer, etc.. just been doing some research and trying to share some things I have found that may be surprising for those who have not. There is certainly more to know, ymmv.

An "M16" shoots a 22 caliber bullet. Its called a 223, but its a 22 caliber diameter bullet.

What's the plan for when grandma develops dementia? The paranoia will make her unwilling to part with her beloved firearm...do we just wait until she murders a family member or home health aid?

That seems like a much more important question than bickering over precisely which firearm grandma should have as she slides into dementia.

https://khn.org/news/dementia-and-gun-safety-when-should-agi...

I agree we need more plans for dementia, Alzheimer's and similar mental and physical defunks.. with guns and other rights as well.

There will likely come a point when people need to step in and take control of elderly people's finances, weapons, other possession, choices for nutrition and healthcare, all that.

There are people at many ages that are stripped of their rights for different reasons. I hope the world exposes more of these concerns. I recently helped with a site for exposing some people who used the law for taking over people's stuff - family pushed through a busy judge, took over her house and bank accounts, made her broke after a couple years then disappeared. She was left to the state to care for with no money, no house, everything - and she was quite capable of planning her future and retirement, but it was all taken.

I think there are many people who have had rights taken from them in unfair ways. In same cases states are moving to restore voting and gun rights who have served their time and such.

At the same time we need more tests for proving that people are mentally and physically fit enough to wield weapons, cars, and other things safely.

In some of those cases it may make sense to have special teams show elderly people how to use different weapons and different cars should the need arise. In other cases it could be deemed that they should not drive or try to defend themselves.

I'd like to think our society will take care of these older people so they never need to worry about transportation or fighting. We need to make a lot of changes for the future if this is to be however. Right now our society is set to leave a lot of old people to languish without good care and safety - and most just look the other way as they suffer.