Really? I like my chances to win a fight alot better. Not sure about you.
Ever heard the term "don't bring a knife to a gun fight."
Same principle applies. Knives are far less dangerous than guns, arguing otherwise is the furthest thing from a valid point.
Just thought I'd point something out. Living here in Hawaii, guns are fairly rare in Honolulu or on Oahu in general. However, crime is prevalent. There are gangs, and drug dealers/addicts in the streets and they are brazen. I'm not talking about in ghettos or low-income areas.. I'm talking about Waikiki, a tourist town. I've seen more than several incidents of a guy getting jumped while walking his girl down the street just because he was in his dress blues. Every criminal here carries a switchblade -- all of them. They are not afraid of stabbing or being stabbed, as to them, it's part of the process.
I feel safer walking through East Cleveland simply because people know to mind their own fucking business than walking through parts of Honolulu. The primary difference? In EC you have no idea whether or not I've got a .38 in my pocket. In Hawaii, the criminals walk around with impunity and police are stretched thin protecting tourist areas leaving the more urban areas like Kalihi, Nuuanu, Waipahu, etc to gang violence. Drugs, murder, and plenty of robbery, rapes, and burglaries - but not necessarily gun related.
edit:
Boobie, I honestly respect your point of view, I'm just trying to get you to understand that there is a logical counterargument that's not tied to irrationality or tradition or fear; but a reasonable desire to want to protect yourself, your loved ones, and your freedom. Like Max said earlier, I don't necessarily think the government will collapse one day, or a tyrant will come into the White House - but I am at least somewhat prepared if such an event took place.
Think about what happened in 2007/08. If the government bail-out had not happened and the Fed had forced many of those banks to show their books in bankruptcy, the entire monetary system of the world, which is entirely built on trust (an intangible concept, not an impregnable fortress), could have collapsed. In such an environment, I don't want to be prey to gangs where numbers of men makes the difference between living and dying (or worse).
Even if we take the worst case scenario off the table, I'd like to protect my home, and my family from a burglar. What am I to do in the instance someone breaks into my home? I'm a big guy, but what if he's carrying a knife or what if there's three of them? What if they don't just want my stuff, what if they want my daughter, what then? Should I call the cops and wait, or should I do whatever I can to protect what's most dear? I have the God-given right to protect my home, my family, my freedom, and my life. As Optimus would say, the government nor the People can either give or take that right away, as it is inherently mine. We as a society recognize these rights, whether or not we always agree with how people choose to exercise them or, in many cases, choose not to.
Our American society is special in that way. Australians are compelled to vote, Europeans don't generally have freedom of speech, Britons cannot own firearms, the list goes on... As Tylons said, days like yesterday may just be the cost of living in a free society. There are things that can be done, like improving the quality of life for everyone, embracing our culture, fighting against apathetic citizenry, complacency, and cynicism. We can make a difference, I'm sure.
My only point is that we shouldn't use tragedies such as these as a means of restricting the freedoms of law-abiding citizens. Adam Lanza did not purchase the firearms used, he stole them. He had a history of mental illness and wasn't even old enough to buy a handgun (21 yrs minimum) in Connecticut. So I do object to the idea that somehow, only if we had 'more sensible' restrictions on firearms, 20 kids would not have been butchered. Hope I'm getting my point across...
