Pro-gun arguments generally follow a pretty consistent three-step script:

One: It’s my moral right to be able to defend myself from violence and oppression.
Two: It’s my Constitutional right as a law-abiding citizen.
Three: I’m not hurting anybody so fuck off and leave me alone.

Anti-gun arguments can be endless rationalizations of why you don’t need a gun and your rights should be restricted by the government.  One common theme of anti-gun arguments are: you can protect yourself more effectively with something other than a gun.

Every once in a while, an anti-gunner will make an argument so ridiculous that you wonder what type of reality they live in.

Gabrielle Blair is a mommy blogger.  She runs a website and wrote a book about how to be a mom and live in a house that looks like its being featured in Better Homes & Gardens or Martha Stewart Living.  We used to call these “catalog homes,” as in every room looked like a still frame from a housewares catalog.

She and her family live in the San Francisco bay area.

Clearly firearms use, culture, and politics is an area of her expertise.

She decided to chide gun owners about how they don’t need a gun to protect themselves and instead should have…

There are far better ways to protect your family than a gun. Get a life insurance policy. https://t.co/sKtXngJft0

— Gabrielle Blair (@designmom) November 24, 2019

Does this woman understand how life insurance works?

You have to die for it to pay.

While my wife receiving five times my annual salary in a single lump sum will make it possible for her to pay off the mortgage and all of our debts, will a big fat check help her bathe the kids and put them to bed at night?  Will it make my children daddy’s special French toast on Saturday mornings?  Will it help them with their homework?

I think I am worth far more to my family alive than dead.

Ms. Blair here disagrees.

I wonder if she feels that way because her husband runs a web video series about their kids with fewer than 1,200 followers, and looks so beta that I wonder who really sired their six children.

That was just the first Tweet in a thread about why you don’t really need a gun (unrolled for easy reading):

I know you truly believe that you’ll need to defend your family at gunpoint. You need to let that go. Statistically it’s just not going to happen. I know it’s boring, but if you want to protect your family, things like seatbelts, fire alarms, and life insurance are your best bet.

None of these things are mutually exclusive.  I have car seats for my kids and I wear my seatbelt.  I have fire extinguishers in critical areas of my house.  In fact, if you look at my nightstand, I have a large fire extinguisher sitting right next to my biometric gun box.  I can use many different things to protect my family against many different threats.

The reality is, you’re probably going to die of heart disease or diabetes, or just old age and natural causes. I know it’s not as cool-sounding as an armed-standoff, but it’s still true.

Nobody wants to die in an armed standoff.  We want to be prepared in case something bad happens.

If the topic of protecting your family comes up, a gun extremist will immediately imagine an armed intruder who has come to murder. That’s not going to happen. It’s rare enough that it’s not something people need to worry about or make decisions based on.

Well ackshually… according to the CDC, there are between 500,000 and 3 million defensive gun uses in the US in a year.  According to the NPFA, there are about 350,000 house fires every year.  So statistically you are more likely to need a gun than a fire extinguisher.  So maybe having both is a good idea.

If the topic of protecting your family comes up among people who actually interact and care for children each day, they think of things like using car seats, preventing hormones and dangerous chemicals in food, child-proofing the cleaning supplies, and schoolyard bullying.

I’ve done all that, and I child-proofed my guns too.

Hundreds and hundreds of you have explained to me that a life insurance policy won’t protect against an armed intruder.

I never said it would.

She wants her husband to die so she can take the money and run off with her kids’ biological father.

The thing you don’t understand: There isn’t going to be an armed intruder. That’s just your paranoia.

Tell that to the guy in Miami who was just robbed in his van.

How Often Do People Use Guns In Self-Defense?
Many gun owners say the primary reason they own a firearm is self-defense. But for years, experts have been starkly divided over how often people actually use guns for this purpose.

Not according to the CDC.

A gun in the home is FAR more likely to kill or maim a household member than it is to protect them.

This is bullshit.

Enjoy your daydreams about armed stand-offs. But that’s all they are. Daydreams.

Update: A shocking number of you are CONVINCED that armed intruders will enter your home at 2 AM. And specially at 2 AM. Is there like an NRA ad about a 2 AM break in? Some meme I missed?

Nothing good happens after midnight.

Don’t answer. I don’t actually want to know. Muting this thread now.

She enjoys the comfort of the moral superiority of her ignorance.

As a responsible father it’s up to me, and nobody else (except maybe my wife) to decide what steps I can take to protect my family.

I have life insurance, and fire insurance, and all sorts of other coverage, that I hope I never have to use.  I have a fire extinguisher, activated charcoal, and tourniquets that I also hope I never have to use.  I have security cameras and a gun, also that I hope I never have to use.  But just in case the shit ever hits the fan, I have them and will be glad that I do.