Quote:
Originally Posted by bigbadjoe108
You assume that all people assaulted put themselves in some kind of self imposed danger. What if they have no car, and a job that ends late and live Ina bad part of town (perhaps cause she spent all her $$ on fishing gear  )? Is her life not as deserving of protection than someone who can simply drive through that neighborhood to a better job from a better home?
How about the lady who works 10 hour days, has two young kids and a husband that travels a lot? Will she get charged for defending her home with a firearm like Ian Thompson did?
Sure there is the my gun is bigger than yours people out there. There is also the tacticool *******es out there as well. But for each one of those you'll find eve more just honest citizens who carry. The stats for the amount of firearms In the US versus the actual amount of incidents does not support your line of thought.
Also, in regards to escalation, as of now the bad guys already have the weapons. And all the PALs, ATTs and other bureaucratic restrictions don't stop it. All people like me suggest is that we should be able to put the honest citizenry on equal footing.
Sure Rio may be bad, but there is other factors at play there. |
The percentage of people that get assaulted out of the blue would be an interesting stat. I suspect not being in the wrong place at the wrong time is critical. Unless she walks with the gun drawn any could walk up and wrestle her down.
If a woman has two young kids and the husband travels and she lives in such a bad neighborhood that she needs ready access to a gun...firstly I would move. Safety comes first. Secondly that gun needs to be stored properly because accidental child deaths from guns are significant. So bad even the NRA reluctantly had to appear to help.
Fortunately there is no place in Calgary I would be terrified of and feel I needed a gun. In the stats there are places I would not go even with a gun.