Lois-haha you’ve obviously never stepped on a lego in the middle of the night...hahaha
I’ve never said they make a person safer even when in argument with Psi. I didn’t say that in any of my post. In fact I would agree but add that they don’t make thing less safe. As I’ve said before, what makes a person safe is what’s between their two ears. A firearm is nothing more than a tool, what makes having a firearm safer than not having one is proficiency. Without training and I mean training for failures, multiple attackers, training under stress, training in low light situations, understanding fatal funnels, understand what a projectile does once it enters the body, understanding how a person on drugs or alcohol can soak up rounds and keep coming, medical aid for shot victims, proper firearm maintenance, at least basic understanding of functions, understanding of local and federal laws, situational awareness and so on and so forth. These things make a person safer as long as they are practiced. Skills and tactics make us safer. Being in a fire fight is not as much fun as many want to think it is tho there is an adrenaline dump that can be quite exciting. In no way have I ever said a firearm itself makes you safer. Some get lucky tho and without training are able to eliminate a threat from the two legged monsters and the four legged ones.
If you are only okay with firearms for hunting then why do you have a .357 mag? Protection right. By the way, that .357 is very effective against dogs and coyotes as long as you practice and know how to use it, and understand there are limitations to a pistol. So I’m not sure why you make it sound like hunting is the only place for firearms. Also if you feel a .22 or shotgun would better fit your needs against coyotes and stray dogs then why not sell your .357 and buy something that better fits your needs? I understand the need part. Maybe a pistol caliber carbine like say a Kel-Tec sub 2000 would fit your needs as well. A pistol caliber carbine would extend the effective range and give you more points of contact. Felt recoil is reduced for an added bonus.
The fact is, the 2 amendment doesn’t say a thing about hunting. I hunt Elk, deer, bear, cougar, and wolves here in north Idaho and have firearms to meet my needs on my hunts. I also have firearms I collect and that have been handed down. Then I have firearms that are for protection, competition, demonstrations, trainings, and fun. We have been raising 4 children on the meat from the harvested animals. My kids have also be being raised around firearms. I also always have a firearm on me no matter what. I can handle myself well hand to hand or even with a knife or really anything close at hand that can do damage and help to eliminate a threat. Unfortunately not all threats are equal and some require at bare minimum the convenience of a pistol. If a rifle is needed which in my opinion is every time then hopefully my skills and tactics while using the pistol will get me safely to a rifle to finally eliminate the threat or threats. All that being said, I would rather not fight be it hand to hand or with firearms. There is nothing to be gained. You don’t get a trophy or money for protecting yourself and loved ones.
To think that a firearm is going to get you out of every situation is foolish. That doesn’t mean they are not necessary.
As far as the studies show...well that can be argued because many confrontations where a firearm is deployed or used but missed the target are not reported. I’ll leave it at that.
The “gun” or firearm is designed to send a projectile down range. The projectile is designed to do the damage. These are facts!