Sunday, April 22, 2007

Why are Guns the Best Tool for Self Defense?

Howdy, Friends;

Why do we need guns for self defense? (Note - this discussion does not apply to long guns or hunting.)

You've probably heard them called 'equalizers'. Well, they are. They allow anyone to successfully defend themselves against single or multiple large assailants. And in fact, disparity of force is one of the factors taken into account when self-defense cases go to court.

Nobody has invented anything that comes close. Pepper spray doesn't work effectively in all cases. Tazers only have one shot without reloading, so if you miss, you're defenseless. Both of these are short range, as well. Both of them likely do not perform well in the rain, for instance, although I have no data on that.

A reasonable replacement for guns for self defense would have to be something non-lethal that has all of the good characteristics of a gun, such as: multiple shots; high certainty of success; small enough to carry concealed; safe to carry; extremely reliable; decent range; will work in all weather; cannot easily be defended against; cheap enough to be able to own one, along with whatever you load it with; will cause the aggressor to not move until the cops have time to show up. Also must work on dogs, bears, snakes, etc. The science-fictional "stunner" ray gun.

Of course, as soon as somebody invents this 'stunner', and if we give up our guns, the crime rate will skyrocket. A lot more people would be willing to "pull the trigger" if it was non-lethal, as they wouldn't risk the death penalty if caught. Stunning (and robbing and raping) shoppers in the Wal-Mart parking lot would become a whole new worldwide sport. Another new sport for thugs using such a device might be to shoot drivers in passing cars on the interstate, as well. Much carnage, difficult to catch the perpetrator - thugs might see this as great fun. Think about the D.C. Serial Snipers back in 2002. Multiply that by 1000. You anti-gunners may want to be careful what you ask for.

And, such a device wouldn't be an adequate weapon for the intent of the 2nd amendment to keep the government in check. Might still need to keep a gun somewhere to help along those lines if ever needed.

Footnote: Without fail, everywhere it's been tried and all other factors the same - passage of right-to-carry laws results in a decrease in violent crime. The statistics are there if you care to look. http://www.gunfacts.info/ is a good place to start. Be aware that the far left gun-grabbers put out a lot of unsubstantiated claims and outright lies.

On reflection, I'll keep my guns. Nothing better is currently available.

-Pop

No comments: