[Stearns]

Originally Posted by BullDog

Saying that those opposed to citizens arming themselves with either concealed or not concealed weapons is not saying this: " Let the predatory criminals do whatever they want, and god forbid someone try to stop them." That's a false argument.

Having ordinary citizens (many of whom are not "innocent" and most of whom are not sharp shooters) will not decrease crime or violence in any way, shape or form.

This reminds me of the argument of trying to say that having nuclear weapons that can blow the world up to smithereens somehow makes the world safer. More guns just increases the odds more violence is going to happen- simple math.

Having more people with guns- do you really think the "predatory" criminals are going to be deterred by ordinary citizens carrying guns? Personally I think they will be rolling in the aisles at the thought of Sam and Sally Sharpshooter trying to take them down.

It's always quite telling the international response to the gun issue versus Americans (USA variety). People in other countries are just as concerned about crime and protecting their loved ones as we are. They don't see guns as the answer.

Good points, Bully, but I don't think citizens who arm themselves for protection have any expectations or intentions to deter and affect the overall crime rate. They just want to protect themselves and their loved ones should the need arise. Deterrence connotes proactivity. Guns for self-defense are RE-active; reacting to a situation one is dealt through no fault of their own.

I'm curious, why did you put predator in quotes?

Still waiting to hear WHAT to do, not what NOT to do.