Quote:
Originally posted by Say_hello_for_me
And for every massacre victim that you can't point to in a conceal-carry or more state, I'll do my best to avoid googling to find the dozens of uncharged survivors of gun violence who have survived only by flouting the law and having a gun handy when a gun was needed to ward off an armed criminal. Happens all the time in the anti-gun spots, and I'll be damned if I can think of even one time when anybody has been willing to prosecute the armed self-defender.
But no, I'm not saying the evidence uniformly supports me. I do, however, think that the weight of the evidence supports me. If nothing else, these massacres you point to in places like Texas pale in comparison to the homicide rates in, get this, Chicago, Detroit, Los Angeles, New York City and Washington DC. I'm not 100% certain, but guess with me what these cities have in common?
And why is it my inability to "identify a shooting incident similar to the 101 California massacre that occurred in a state without strong gun control laws", its not like I'm the only one trying to think of one.
|
There was a group that offered cash rewards to people who used a gun to prevent or disrupt a crime. The number is very low, especially so considering the number of deaths/injuries from accidental shootings. Speaking from personal experience, having a gun with me would not have helped me because the criminal had the element of surprise -- the gun was pointed at me before I even knew what was going on.
I'm not anti-gun, but more guns do not make society a safer, more law-abiding place. An extradordinary percentage of drivers in Houston are armed (see RT's post, supra), but haven't noticed that it makes Houston drivers more polite.
