>>64023558
>This argument always bugs me.
Because you're a fucking retard anon who insists on inventing strawmen to knock down instead of actually responding to reality.
>If you think all security is worthless "because it can be defeated anyway"
That's not what anyone thinks nor what anyone said. The point isn't invincibility it's HOW hard it is to defeat, what the positives are vs negatives. A safe isn't neutral, if there's a "safe" at all, then that tells anyone "VALUABLES HERE". You could just plain hide your funs instead, and most burglaries are very fast, average time is like 8-14 minutes. They aren't going to spend an hour going through rando boxes in your basement or attic or removing ceiling tiles or whatever.
The problem is the scam gun "safes" that are sheet metal and drywall literally won't keep someone out for even a few minutes. They don't require any special tools. A motivated burglar can pry them right open, hack right into them with an axe, rip them right out and run off with most of them. And since guns are extremely attractive theft targets, that generally makes a "gun safe" literally worse than worthless. The only point of them is to keep guns from tiny hands if you don't have, like, a closet you can put a lock on or whatever. Or if you live in a non-free shit state where you're forced to obey some arbitrary BS "safe storage" and want to spend the absolute minimum required whether it does anything or not. They also don't meet any insurance requirements. They rarely provide any significant fire or flooding protection.
tl;dr: if it's not worth 5 figures of money it's not worth a safe at all. If it's worth a safe at all it's worth a true UL rated safe. And even that is only after you've spent sufficient money and effort on all the basics like, as you mention, an actual decent door to your house not one that can be kicked in in 15 seconds.
