KD5NRH

Actually, I'd be willing to bet the majority do live in cities, and every incorporated city over a few hundred population that I'm aware of has an ordinance prohibiting shooting inside the city limits. Most states also consider a shot that crosses a public road to be prima facie evidence of recklessness. Additionally, in any built up area, a negligent discharge can net a deadly conduct charge. That would be why so many of us with access to rural land tend to host various shooters who want to practice something the nearest ranges aren't set up for.

Well, maybe if you could avoid getting run out of town long enough to really get familiar with an area, you'd find out that the vast majority of American gun owners don't shoot in their yards because it would be unsafe and/or illegal; the known likely consequences far outweigh the convenience.

Kontact 

Again, I don't think your idea that gun owners generally live in fear of prosecution is much of a factor in their attitudes toward safety. Also, you may be surprised to find how many people don't live in a city.

But thank you for the stern warning against broad experience. When you only spend 5-10 years in a place, you probably don't know what's going on, right?

KD5NRH

Just under 20% don't live in incorporated cities. Since 42% live in households with guns, even if every person living outside a city had a gun, there would still be more gun owners living in cities.

Kontact 

I've known lots of gun owners. None of them ever expressed fear of prosecution as motivation to handle their guns in any particular way. I think it's a silly idea.

Rollfast

Is this a bike or a gun thread?

Kontact 

It is a thread about the effectiveness of legal punishments in coercing changes in behavior for people using dangerous machinery. Gun laws seems a reasonable parallel since there really isn't anything besides cars and guns that are so heavily regulated but commonly owned.

BillyD