Consumer Reports 'Your Security' - "Thinking a gun is your best defense"

[majormadmax]

Honestly, I have come to hate Consumer Reports and do believe they are not anywhere near as impartial as they claim; but I saw this article on how to better protect yourself and thought I'd give it a read as this is always a topic of interest for me.

Now I wish I hadn't when I saw this portion...

Thinking a gun is your best defense
Gun ownership is a controversial topic, but research has shown that homeowners with guns increase the risks in their home. Homeowners might make the mistake of not getting proper training and not securing their firearms. Thirty-two percent reported having a gun as a security measure. And 73 percent of gun owners thought it was very good or excellent for protection.

Whereas I do somewhat agree with people not getting training and securing their firearms does increase the risk of having a firearm in the home, I don't like how it implies that having a firearm is not a good option for self-defense!

I am also actually surprised where it states that only 73% of gun owners felt it was "very good" or "excellent" for protection! Of course this statistic is probably take out of context, but to say that less than three-quarters of of gun owners don't believe firearms are good for defending oneself is almost unbelievable to me!

I suspect some of the Brady Bunch anti-gun coalition have gotten to Consumer Reports, and it wouldn't be the first time some lobby group was able to influence their assessments. I just worry that the average American probably actually believes this crap!


Cheers! M2

 

[Texas1911]

Owning a firearm is more risk, just the same as owning a gas stove is more risk. You are significantly more likely to commit suicide as a gun owner.

Without knowing the question or context of the question the results are meaningless for the most part.

I don't see how it's a big deal, they aren't really pro or con.

 

[TrailDust]

I gave up CR a few months ago because they'd turned way too "green" and openly liberal in their commentaries...err, I mean, articles. Same thing with National Geographic magazine and perhaps Scientific American in the near future. Can't they just offer the facts without editorializing?

 

[DoubleActionCHL]

It's a false premise designed by the agenda-driven, aimed at the ignorant, and happily accepted by the anti-gunners. If you have a gun, you're more likely to be involved in a firearm incident than if you don't have a gun. Common sense. You're more likely to cut yourself when you own a knife. You're more likely to drown with you go swimming. You're more likely to fall down the stairs when you have stairs.

What they don't take into account is what happened to the folks who didn't own a gun. How many people are attacked, abused, raped or murdered in their own homes because they didn't or couldn't protect themselves with a firearm?

 

[Texasjack]

Yeah, these liberals are saving me money right and left as I cancel magazine subscriptions. Who would have thought that National Geographic would become liberal porn? If you really want to be scared, read the comments readers have submitted. Some are not far from "..we must erase humans from the planet before Mother Earth is destroyed..."

Everyone likes to get some info before making a major purchase and one would think Consumer Reports would be just the ticket. But read one or two issues and you suddenly realize that they set up an idea they want to push and make the reviews fit that. I remember looking for a lawn mower years ago and I found one I thought was great. Looked in CR and they wouldn't rate it because it lacked some particular safety device they thought needed to be there. Typical.

 

[TrailDust]

Yeah, these liberals are saving me money right and left as I cancel magazine subscriptions. Who would have thought that National Geographic would become liberal porn? If you really want to be scared, read the comments readers have submitted. Some are not far from "..we must erase humans from the planet before Mother Earth is destroyed..."

Wow, that is the absolute truth!

 

[zembonez]

Typical CR report.

I would not use their magazine to line a bird cage.

They are agenda driven and anything but objective in their reviews. I gave up on them long ago when they consistently gave favorable reviews to Japanese badged vehicles and poor reviews to American badged vehicles when they were actually the same vehicle produced on the same assembly lines.

 

[Texastransplant]

I am surprised at all they had a gun article in it. Last place I would go for a gun review. I don't give my money to liberal businesses. I remember the last electcion cycle and walked into Borders Books. I looked around, there were no gun mags or muscule car mags. There was a lot of books on the new president. I love history, specifically WWII and Vietnam. Their section of that was next to the gay section. I made sure my wife was next to me there, but decided it's the last time I would be there. When buying anything of real value I look at whom they support, I don't want to give money to someone that will use in to fight agaist us.