All about "Gun Safes" or "Why a RSC is not a

The place to discuss adding firearms to your emergency preparedness plans.

Moderator: ZS Global Moderators

User avatar
Krustofski
* * * * *
Posts: 1494
Joined: Mon Oct 05, 2009 2:40 pm
Favorite Zombie Movies: Night of the Living Dead (1968)
Location: The Teutonic Woodlands

Re: All about "Gun Safes" or "Why a RSC is not a

Post by Krustofski » Thu Apr 04, 2013 2:57 pm

Tabgentially related to this thread:

DEFCON 19: Safe to Armed in Seconds: A Study of Epic Fails of Popular Gun Safes:

Off the internet until further notice.

Doctorr Fabulous
ZS Lifetime Member
ZS Lifetime Member
Posts: 12210
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2009 3:06 pm
Favorite Zombie Movies: Evil Dead, Zombieland, 28 Days/Weeks Later

Re: All about "Gun Safes" or "Why a RSC is not a

Post by Doctorr Fabulous » Thu Apr 04, 2013 5:04 pm

feedthedog wrote:
JayceSlayn wrote:
feedthedog wrote:Sort of on topic: Is there a rule of thumb for the ratio of expense between the stuff stored inside of a safe and the safe itself? Are we talking 10:1 , 5:1, 2:1 , or like 1:1 . Presumably, a set of five Mosins don't require the safe level of security than a set of five transferable M2s.
To me, the reason things are being put in a safe is because they are at least one of three things:
1) Monetarily valuable (guns, cash, PMs, etc.)
2) Personally valuable (important documents, family heirlooms, etc.)
3) Sensitive/dangerous (keeping guns from kids/criminals, important documents from ID thieves, etc.)
Some of these things you can't put a replacement "price" on, so it's a bit difficult to give an exact ratio of what is right. I think people have to consider that within their own personal circumstances and balance that with what kind of cost seems reasonable to you to keep those things.

For me, the most-likely thing that I expect to happen to my valuables is not theft, but fire/water damage, so having a good fireproof safe is important to me. I also have a smaller fireproof/waterproof safe within that, mostly for documents, that has a seal which doesn't require fire to activate (like some Palusol doors might), in the case that there is just a flood minus the fire.
Yeah, that is kind of where I am right now, but I was wondering if there was a more definitive measure. Maybe you have to quantify risk as well?
For me it's like this:
1. Check legal requirements.
2. Check what my insurance company requires. I highly recommend having a log of you firearms with pictures, serial numbers, cost, and value. That's why I'm so adamant that everyone understand how easy it would to breach most RSCs. Locks are for honest people, your insurance is what actually protects your investment.
3. Sentimental value or hard-to-replace items. For me, this is the biggest kicker. NFA stuff and some heirloom stuff means I'm gonna spend a bit more on a safe than I would otherwise. Normally I'd just be satisfied with a $500 special, but I may end up putting out a bit more just because of the real fun toys.
Opinions subject to change in light of new information.
Image
http://i.imgur.com/wG6ZMjE.jpg

rodspade
Posts: 2
Joined: Fri May 10, 2013 11:51 am

Re: All about "Gun Safes" or "Why a RSC is not a

Post by rodspade » Fri May 10, 2013 12:05 pm

feedthedog wrote:
JayceSlayn wrote:
feedthedog wrote:Sort of on topic: Is there a rule of thumb for the ratio of expense between the stuff stored inside of a safe and the safe itself? Are we talking 10:1 , 5:1, 2:1 , or like 1:1 . Presumably, a set of five Mosins don't require the safe level of security than a set of five transferable M2s.
To me, the reason things are being put in a safe is because they are at least one of three things:
1) Monetarily valuable (guns, cash, PMs, etc.)
2) Personally valuable (important documents, family heirlooms, etc.)
3) Sensitive/dangerous (keeping guns from kids/criminals, important documents from ID thieves, etc.)
Some of these things you can't put a replacement "price" on, so it's a bit difficult to give an exact ratio of what is right. I think people have to consider that within their own personal circumstances and balance that with what kind of cost seems reasonable to you to keep those things.
Yeah, that is kind of where I am right now, but I was wondering if there was a more definitive measure. Maybe you have to quantify risk as well?
Take the "average" number of times you expect your safe to reduce or prevent a loss. Multiply by the average value of the loss. That's the "value" of the safe.

It's somewhat subjective. How much you value your collection might be more or less than what you paid for it (or the current replacement cost). The ability of the safe to ameliorate the loss is also debatable. Maybe in a fire, some of your stuff is lost (or depreciates in value), but some isn't. Or maybe some punk messes up your safe and costs you money even if he's not able to steal what's inside.

Anyway, if your collection is worth $2000 to you, and you think there's a 50% chance of fire or theft, but the safe will perfectly prevent that loss, then the theoretical value of the safe is $1000. If you think a safe will save your butt twice, then it's worth twice the value of the contents. Etc.

It's not worth the money to spend more on a safe than its expected value. But part of the value is how it helps you feel better about the security of your stuff. So make some educated guesses, then buy whatever makes you feel good.

feedthedog
* * * *
Posts: 959
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2012 1:55 pm

Re: All about "Gun Safes" or "Why a RSC is not a

Post by feedthedog » Fri May 10, 2013 1:39 pm

rodspade wrote:
feedthedog wrote:
JayceSlayn wrote:
feedthedog wrote:Sort of on topic: Is there a rule of thumb for the ratio of expense between the stuff stored inside of a safe and the safe itself? Are we talking 10:1 , 5:1, 2:1 , or like 1:1 . Presumably, a set of five Mosins don't require the safe level of security than a set of five transferable M2s.
To me, the reason things are being put in a safe is because they are at least one of three things:
1) Monetarily valuable (guns, cash, PMs, etc.)
2) Personally valuable (important documents, family heirlooms, etc.)
3) Sensitive/dangerous (keeping guns from kids/criminals, important documents from ID thieves, etc.)
Some of these things you can't put a replacement "price" on, so it's a bit difficult to give an exact ratio of what is right. I think people have to consider that within their own personal circumstances and balance that with what kind of cost seems reasonable to you to keep those things.
Yeah, that is kind of where I am right now, but I was wondering if there was a more definitive measure. Maybe you have to quantify risk as well?
Take the "average" number of times you expect your safe to reduce or prevent a loss. Multiply by the average value of the loss. That's the "value" of the safe.

It's somewhat subjective. How much you value your collection might be more or less than what you paid for it (or the current replacement cost). The ability of the safe to ameliorate the loss is also debatable. Maybe in a fire, some of your stuff is lost (or depreciates in value), but some isn't. Or maybe some punk messes up your safe and costs you money even if he's not able to steal what's inside.

Anyway, if your collection is worth $2000 to you, and you think there's a 50% chance of fire or theft, but the safe will perfectly prevent that loss, then the theoretical value of the safe is $1000. If you think a safe will save your butt twice, then it's worth twice the value of the contents. Etc.

It's not worth the money to spend more on a safe than its expected value. But part of the value is how it helps you feel better about the security of your stuff. So make some educated guesses, then buy whatever makes you feel good.

I'm not sure that I have enough data to quantify that sort of risk. I've live in the same place for roughly 12 months, and nobody has tried to break into my safe.

50% seems like a shitload of risk. What is the time period? Hell, 1% seems like a lot if it is done per day.

rodspade
Posts: 2
Joined: Fri May 10, 2013 11:51 am

Re: All about "Gun Safes" or "Why a RSC is not a

Post by rodspade » Fri May 10, 2013 2:14 pm

feedthedog wrote:I'm not sure that I have enough data to quantify that sort of risk. I've live in the same place for roughly 12 months, and nobody has tried to break into my safe.

50% seems like a shitload of risk. What is the time period? Hell, 1% seems like a lot if it is done per day.
The time period is however long you own the safe.

You're right that it's hard to truly quantify the risk. Maybe it's more important to feel secure than to do a full cost/benefit analysis. If you're happy with your purchase, that's good enough. For someone who's not happy until he spends $10,000 on a safe, maybe moving to a nicer neighborhood is a better option.

Post Reply

Return to “Initial Firearms Prepping Q&A”