Quantcast
MobileRJ | RSS TwitterTwitter FacebookFacebook E-mail Alerts
Home manage Las Vegas Review-Journal
  Jobs Cars Homes Shopping Travel Weddings Golf Best of Las Vegas Photo   Search:

RECENT EDITIONS
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat

Living
Feb. 12, 2008
Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal

FIGHTING BACK: TAKING AIM

When a scary experience hits home, some seek security by purchasing their first handgun

By JOHN PRZYBYS
REVIEW-JOURNAL



In this expanding, population-busting, rapidly urbanizing valley, Southern Nevadans do all sorts of things to avoid becoming crime victims, from installing home alarm systems to signing up for self-defense classes.

Sometimes, they do something that surprises even them: buying a gun.

Most Popular Stories
  • MIKE WEATHERFORD: Days of markups coming to end?
  • BARGAIN HUNTERS: Early birds often catch the best buys at garage sales
  • THE R-J GOES TO A PARTY: UNLV Foundation's dinner honors donors
  • BAZAARS: Consumers, charities benefit from sales at holiday bazaars
  • HUMAN MATTERS: Text messaging and love can be a tricky combination
  • LEGENDARY LAS VEGAS HEADLINERS: RUSTY WARREN: Life of the Party
  • GARDENING: Use softball-sized 'brain fruit' to help ward off bugs
  • LIFE ON THE COUCH: 'Married ... With Children' stars break from Bundy personas
  • TRIP OF THE WEEK: Grapevine Canyon great spot for history, recreation
  • NFL FOOTBALL: LINE UP FOR A NEW SEASON




    • Teasing out how many of Southern Nevada's gun owners are new owners is difficult. So is figuring out how many guns are purchased strictly for self-protection as opposed to recreational uses.

    However, the number of handguns in Southern Nevada has grown in recent years. Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department records indicate that there were 46,522 handguns registered here in 2007, up from 40,821 in 2006 and 32,538 in 2005.

    While that's at least in part a reflection of the valley's growth, it's safe to say that first-time gun owners are represented in those numbers.

    Veteran Southern Nevada gun shop owners Ron Montoya of American Shooters Supply and Bob Irwin of The Gun Store see it almost daily: someone who has never owned a gun, and hadn't planned to ever own one, stopping in to buy, or at least mull over, the purchase of a firearm.

    This universe of prospective first-time buyers "really cuts across all demographics," Irwin says, adding that, during the past five years or so, his store has seen "probably more women than we used to have."

    Usually, the customer's decision to buy is driven by something -- an experience, a news report -- that has hit home on a personal level.

    "It's not, 'The crime rate is up.' It's 'My neighbor's house was broken into last night' or 'My friend's or my ex-husband's or my ex-wife's house was burglarized,' " Irwin says. "Generally, they're talking about a personal thing and not a statistical thing out of the paper."

    The major exception is when a TV or newspaper story about a home invasion runs. That, Irwin says, will create "an immediate response. The next day or two, we're usually 10 (percent) to 15 percent busier."

    Montoya has noticed that among his shops' universe of prospective first-time gun owners are single mothers who live on their own and who opt to purchase a gun to protect themselves and their children.

    "Whenever the media relates any information related to crime or burglary or anything like that, it instills a sense of fear in people's minds," he explains.

    Sometimes, that sense of fear can be exaggerated. Take, Montoya says, local news programs that offer footage of violent crimes not only here but across the country, until a viewer gets the erroneous impression that "30 people were murdered (here) last night."

    Yet, the decision to buy a gun seldom is reached easily. Typically, the neighborhood robbery, the home invasion on the news or any single incident serves, Irwin says, merely as "the straw that broke the camel's back.

    "I don't think they just come in to get a gun on the spur of the moment. I think they have thought it through," he says. "To most people who aren't gun-oriented, it's a big decision: 'Boy, do I really want to shoot somebody if he comes into my house?' "

    Police agencies typically are reluctant to take an official stance about civilian ownership of guns for security. For example, a Las Vegas police spokesman said the department declines to comment on the advisability of homeowners buying guns for self-protection.

    North Las Vegas Police spokesman Mark Hoyt says that, for many homeowners, owning a gun does equate to "peace of mind," even if they never have to use it. When he was working patrol duty, Hoyt occasionally did get questions from people considering a gun.

    "I can't tell them to get a gun or not get a gun," he says. "I can tell them that, if they do get a gun, gun safety is vitally important, and so is education."

    Absolutely vital, Hoyt adds, is that the new gun owner learn how to use and safely store a gun, and that the entire family also be educated about safe gun ownership.

    Henderson Police spokesman Keith Paul says if residents "feel more comfortable owning a gun, that's well within their rights to do it. The only thing we'd encourage to do is to not only buy a gun but get trained in how to use it.

    "Take a gun safety class. Practice with it. Don't leave it in the box and never use it and then think you have some concept of how to use it when the time arises."

    Otherwise, Paul says, "that'd be a situation where having a gun actually makes matters worse."

    Whenever prospective first-time gun buyers enter his stores, Montoya says they are asked what the firearm is for.

    If the answer is self-defense, buyers are asked whether they have any experience or training in using a gun. If not, Montoya says, "we lead them into the range and put them through a basic handgun orientation course."

    That course runs about two hours and includes practical experience in using a variety of guns that may fit the customer's needs, the basics of firearm safety, how to store guns safely in the home, and the legal responsibilities with owning and using a firearm.

    The course -- which, Montoya says, often can be conducted on the spot -- costs $80. In the 24 years he has owned gun stores in town, "I've never, to this day, had anyone actually come in as a first-time buyer who's refused the course," Montoya says.

    A point that's underscored to the first-time owner is "if you're going to take a gun into your house, you're incurring a liability to yourself and your family," he says.

    The course doesn't always lead to a purchase, Montoya adds. "What it leads to is better education. You'd be surprised how many people come in and (say), 'Let me think about it.' "

    The "counterargument" to buying a gun for home protection, says Alicia Horton, director of community mobilization for the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, "is that we don't educate people on the risks involved in owning a gun."

    In such quickly urbanizing cities as Las Vegas, residents probably do "become more cautious," she says, "and your natural inclination is to go toward these kinds of weaponry."

    The Brady Center doesn't advocate the banning of guns and "we don't say people shouldn't own guns," Horton says. "But we would like for them to be fully educated and be fully responsible gun owners."

    For example, Horton says, one study indicated that a gun in the home is 22 times more likely "to be used by somebody you know than to kill in self-defense," in the form of anything from the gun being used in a suicide, to an argument that gets out of hand, and even the accidental killing of a child.

    "Until you understand the risks involved, you just can't make an educated decision about it," Horton says.

    In fact, some prospective first-time gun buyers ultimately decide a gun isn't for them. In that case, Irwin says, other items, such as Tasers -- which use electrified darts shot out of a hand-held device to incapacitate assailants -- and pepper sprays can be effective options.

    For some, cost also figures into the equation. Irwin says a Taser costs from $250 to $300, while "decent guns start above that and work their way up to $400 to $600," and pepper sprays can be purchased for just a few bucks.

    Both Tasers and pepper sprays also are nonlethal -- and, from a standpoint of legal liability, less risky -- options to a gun. And that leads to the most significant question anybody who considers buying or using a gun must ask.

    "The obvious question is: Would I use it if it came down to that? Could I shoot at somebody?" Irwin says.

    "My belief is that most people think they don't want to. But if the chips are down, and it's you or him, there is a survival instinct in there saying, 'I've got to do something.' "

    Contact reporter John Przybys at jprzybys@ reviewjournal.com or (702) 383-0280.

    Newsvine Digg Fark Technorati reddit StumbleUpon del.icio.us Slashdot Propeller Mixx Furl Twitter MySpace Facebook Google Bookmarks Yahoo! Bookmarks Windows Live Favorites Ask MyStuff myAOL Favorites

    Leave Your Comment 13 Reader Comments
    Terms & Conditions
    The following comments are provided by readers and are the sole responsiblity of the authors. The reviewjournal.com does not review comments before publication nor guarantee their accuracy. By publishing a comment here you agree to abide by the comment policy. If you see a comment that violates the policy, please notify the web editor.

    Some comments may not display immediately due to an automatic filter. These comments will be reviewed within 48 hours. Please do not submit a comment more than once.
    Current Word Count:

    Note: Comments made by reporters and editors of the Las Vegas Review-Journal are presented with a yellow background.

    DarrellM wrote on February 14, 2008 11:30 AM: This is a very well written article. Although the claims made by Alicia Horton concerning the Brady Centers' stance on banning handguns is false, you were only quoting her. The study that she refers to where a gun is 22x more likely to be used in the home... has been proven false many times over. Excellent writing.


    TaserBoi wrote on February 14, 2008 11:27 AM: I am not sure I would bet my life on a Taser. While a Taser is better than nothing and is a good choice for a person who is a dedicated pacifist, it only has one shot and has about a 15 foot range. Cartridges for the gun are expensive, so practicing is really not an option. Practice with something like a Taser or a gun is very important - you don't know if you can reliably hit a target unless you shoot a hundred rounds or so. Practice is not practical with a Taser. If Tasers were so great, why don't cops carry them as their primary weapon?


    Wendy Weinbaum wrote on February 14, 2008 10:41 AM: As a Jewess in the US, I would like to remind all that America wasn't won with a registered gun, and that criminals are stopped by FIREARMS, not by talk. That is why all REAL Americans put our 2nd Amendment FIRST!!


    Charles P wrote on February 13, 2008 09:18 PM: The Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence should NEVER be listened to.

    WHY? Because I happen to be the person who reported information to the U.S. government, concerning the John Hinkley assassination, BEFORE the crime occurred. The U.S. Government and the Brady Center have been lieing to all of you for decades. Hinkley had been drugged and brainwashed by Hollyweirdo subversives. It was These KNOWN CRIMINALS/SUBVERSIVES that caused the President and Mr. Brady to be shot!!!

    The Government had KNOWN about this group since the FORD PRESIDENCY, AS IT WAS THE SAME GROUP THAT TRIED TO KILL PRESIDENT FORD!!! TO THIS DAY, NOTHING HAS BEEN DONE TO PUNISH THE REAL CRIMINALS!! THEY ARE RICH AND FAMOUS, while the rest of us are DENIED THE RIGHTS WE HAVE, AND WE ARE DENIED THE TRUTH THAT THE GOVERNMENT/ LAW ENFORCEMENT IS SUPPOSED TO PROVIDE TO US!

    IF the Brady Center to Stop Gun Violence expects to EVER get any respect, THEY NEED TO STAND UP TO THE CORRUPT U.S. GOVERNMENT AND DEMAND THAT THESE SUBVERSIVES BE ARRESTED AND THEIR SUBVERSIVE GROUP BE STOPPED!!

    The Brady Center would rather spend HUGE amounts of money LIEING TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE!! BRADY CENTER: SPREAD YOUR BULL MANURE SOMEWHERE ELSE, as AMERICANS DESERVE MORE RESPECT THAN YOU HAVE EVER GIVEN THEM!


    Ed Sizemore wrote on February 13, 2008 07:13 PM: The old saw about a gun being used 22 times more likely to kill a family member, rather than an intruder, has been pretty well put to rest. The NRA can cite the studies involved (I have seen them, but cannot cite them at the moment).

    The emphasis upon training in gun sagety, proficient usage, and the lagal aspects are all very important, as is the insistence upon responsible ownership.

    Ed Sizemore
    ED3332Wmsn.com
    Davenport, Iowa


    howard goodman wrote on February 13, 2008 07:12 PM: One of those Smith & Wesson moments when a gun and a smile will do more to terminate a violent attack than a smile alone, could be in your future. One was in my past and I have a future because I was carying at the time.


    Mike wrote on February 13, 2008 04:57 PM: The Brady Bunch does not want to take anyone's guns away??? I have just one thing to say: Go to their website, take a look and then tell me they don't. They want to restrict gun rights to the point you would be afraid to own a gun for fear of going to prison, for shooting a tin can!


    GMEADE wrote on February 13, 2008 03:30 PM: Horton's "22 times more likely to kill a family member/someone you know, than an intruder" statistic comes from a very biased study done years ago. While technically true, that statistic stems from the fact that most home defense incidents don't involve actually firing the gun, much less killing anyone. However, another fact from the same study, but which they don't advertise, is that more than two-thirds of the actual home shooting deaths (I think the figure was 68%) that they refer to, involved a battered wife shooting her husband in self-defense. Another statistic from that study found that the average number of police visits to the homes where there was a shooting, during the year leading up to the shooting, was 13. That's more than once a month on average! How many times have the police been to YOUR house in the last year? Obviously, these were hardly typical American homes. While you had to really dig through the study to find these latter two statistics, they might be of great interest to those who are contemplating buying a gun for self-defense. John Lott, in more recent studies, found that the probable number of times a gun was used annually in the US for self-defense (again usually just brandished, sometimes actually fired, and only rarely resulting in someone's death) ranged from a conservative estimate of around 1.5 MILLION times to a more liberal estimate of 3.5 MILLION times per year. Another interesting statistic (from the Journal of Emergency Medicine): More than 90% of gunshot victims are treated and released without spending even a night in the hospital. While it's not good to get shot, it's not all that likely to be fatal either.


    lewis casto wrote on February 13, 2008 10:32 AM: the brady campain.is lieing when thay say that thay don't want to take our guns away!the whole perpess of thier
    camp. is to scare people into not buying a gun.thay are closely tied to
    the u.n."s anti-gun agenda.so when thay say that thay are on the side of the defenciluse women in our sociaty thay lie.and as mr. motoya say's gun shope
    oweners don't want first time gunbuyers
    to go out of thier stores without
    knowing how to use thier guns. if thay should need to!safty is alway's a majer concern! also when to shoot and when not to.i'am a marine,a former security officer. with a lot of expr.in close
    encounters with bad guy's on the streets
    of the san frenando vally. and i never hade to use my gun.i found just havingit gave more respect.then when i worked unarmed.
    unarmed!


    Mike wrote on February 13, 2008 09:52 AM: The real news in this story is the astounding statement that "the Brady Center doesn't advocate the banning guns." Well, yes they do.

    And I'd like to have attribution for the study that "indicated that a gun in the home is 22 times more likely "to be used by somebody you know...." What exactly does that mean, "somebody you know"?? Sounds like another pseudo-statistic created to make a political point.


    Read All Comments