Just because the risk is ridiculous, which i suggested already, it doesnt mean you are not adding to it with your choices every day. Driving is dangerous but nobody actually did an analysis how dangerous it is for the avg human vs the avg good driver that has never caused any accident and is careful for decades and who drives over 10k-15K per year. What if its 100 times less dangerous for those that drive carefully?
My point is that accidents with guns happen when you handle guns at higher rates per hour than accidents with other usual activities (but these other activities are much longer and necessary/unavoidable typically) . No point to be chasing these risks unless you are training properly among highly responsible individuals not random amateurs. Of course it is still a stupid low risk. Spending that time doing something else has even lower risk. It still isnt worth being nitty about it of course other than having a discussion of the principle. It only adds up over a lifetime if you include other choices avoided daily too. And even then its not a big difference vs a random person. If it makes your life boring it isnt worth it probably.
All extreme sports activities are also excessively risky in that sense too (in comparison per hour basis etc). In fact probably far worse than guns.
That doesnt mean that if it prevents you from being a drug addict or getting involved in crime, being depressed etc in order to get your fix, it doesnt suddenly become a healthier alternative to experience thrills and feel like you have lived a little!!! It may even lead to valuable experience that can be used as defense one day depending on how risky the area you live is and on whether you own guns personally. I agree that all citizens must have proper knowledge of guns regardless of actual ownership.
One can lead a healthy life eating better and not smoking and then add all kinds of risky activities in it and still be safer overall than some person that is careless with their daily habits but otherwise living a protected life.
This is never supposed to be a comment about which type of life is more interesting etc. A very protected life is the greatest risk of them all in some sense it seems. But it is still true what i said that you are finding yourself in a very vulnerable spot in these places that technically doesnt exist elsewhere in your daily life. Typically out in the street not only its true that very few carry guns eg here in the Bay area but even if 20% did, the guns are basically not drawn out unless something happens or you are at some high risk location to begin with. Its not like you walk outside and people have guns in their hands while saying hi to you...
This is all meant as a per minute or hour basis kind of risk discussion (rate of risk). See it that way too. Going on a space mission is probably around 1 in 50 to die. But really that 1 in 50 is mostly at 2 points, the take off and re-entry, the rest of the time is probably hundreds of times smaller.
A space walk may be less risky per minute than base jumping say. But take off and re-entry will still be worse.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BASE_jumping
Last edited by masque de Z; 05-19-2016 at 11:00 PM.