"It should be clear that no physical object is in itself aggressive; any object, whether it be a grenade, a knife, or a stick, can be used for aggression, for defense, or for numerous other purposes unconnected with crime. It makes no more sense to outlaw or restrict the purchase and ownership of grenades than it does to outlaw the possession of knives, clubs, hatpins, or stones."
I just wanted to point out what complete nonsense the original posting is. This is not a discussion of knives, it's a discussion of guns. I have a need for knives every time I cook dinner, I've never had a use for a gun in my life.
The point of limiting handgun sales is not stop "criminals" using them, at least not directly, although for political reasons this is unfortunately the public argument.
It's to stop "normal people" from using them. This is because people really just don't do anything useful with them, but instead they do lots of things they shouldnt.
Most crimes are not done by professional "criminals". Violence is mostly between people who know each other, for example beating your spouse. The rest of it is largely done drunk. None of those situations really have room for good pro-gun arguments. A gun for example isn't likely to protect you from rape, as it's propably done by someone you know and trust(ed).
The good samaritan argument is really pretty laughable, as the number of actual LEGAL gun use in protection of others done by civilians is so low as to be non-existant. People simply don't witness crimes on a regular enough basis for guns to have a significant impact. People mostly witness crime done by people they know. Most crimes people witness are not of the violent type anyway, so adding guns to the equation is simply not legal, let alone morally defendable.
It's also much more common for guns to be used against their owners than it is for them to be used in self-defense, so basicly not having a gun protects you from extreme cases of violence better than having one. (Also if you don't have a gun I would guess you're more likely to do the sensible thing, which is either run or do nothing. Trying to pull out a gun in panic mode isn't usually a good idea.)
As to protection from "random" violence, I've experienced "random" street crime four times in my life, and none of those situations would have had room for gun use, as all situations simply started to fast and surprisingly. (I've been mugged once and three times someone has tried to rob me.)
As to guns used for sport, you don't need a .357 for sport, smaller calibers will do nicely.
Do we really need to approve of something just because some people do it for fun?
You could have lots of fun competitions with grenades too, why are those not legal to have around?
|