Faesce, I think you are misunderstanding scyld's comparison. He isn't comparing guns and dogs in terms of which is "better", he is comparing them in terms of practicality and ease of maintenance, which is perfectly valid. He is right about guns/dogs insofar as keeping a dog really is more expensive and more troublesome than keeping a gun. Obviously dogs and guns are two different things, but money is money, and hassle is hassle, and those things CAN be directly compared, and the gun requires less of each. It's their effectiveness, not their cost, that can't be realistically compared. Gun ownership definitely does require more of a commitment than gun ownership, that comparison isn't "apples and oranges".
Just for the record, I have a dog as well as guns in my home. I didn't buy the dog for home defense--I bought it because me and the guys I live with love dogs--but he does have a good, deep, big-dog bark that he unleashes when people come to the door, which I suppose isn't a bad thing if a burglar is snooping around trying to decide which house on the block to hit up. He definitely couldn't be relied on to actually attack an intruder though. Anyhow, there's no question that my guns are cheaper and easier to maintain than my dog, just as sycld said.
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by Syme
Bookmarks