Yes, because those means of defence could also be turned to attack by someone.
Attack by someone who has taken the weapon off someone. Attack by someone legitimately possessing a firearm and in a fit of pique drawing it as a weapon.
You have a very dewy-eyed sentimentality about the benefits of legalising firearms. You're right, of course, if someone REALLY wants a handgun, legal or not, then they will get one.
However.
By making firearms legal then they become EASIER to get. Yes yes yes - criminals can get guns already. But they're not that prolific (in the UK) yet (anyone reading this who has experience of gun crime - real or imitation - please speak up. Unlike our American friends - who have already illustrated how they have experienced gun crime in their gun-rich country). Gun crimes DO happen. Some of the crimes are by people wielding imitation firearms. Which carries as stiff a sentence as a real firearm offence. So presumably they could not get their hands on real firearms. If made legal that would by necessity change - after all, they are easier to obtain. That is a self-evident truth: guns are legal, therefore easier to obtain.
By controlling gun availability it clearly becomes more difficult for a criminal to possess a gun (remember, I am talking about the UK).
The US has looser gun ownership laws. And yet they still have a higer, per capita, incident of firearm offences than the UK (I can't be bothered quoting a source. You will inevitably refute it, believing your source to be more reliable. Odd that). So much so, that US residents feel the need to carry firearms on a regular basis (if there was no threat, after all, there would be no need to defend against it). Equally so, the US has capital punishment - supposedly a deterent against serious crime. And yet those same serious crimes continue. Not much of a deterent. And neither, therefore, are armed civilians.
If your cause is to stop crime, then you seem to be coming at it from the wrong direction. Rather than put a plaster on the wound, why not try to heal the infection?
If your cause is to exact retribution on criminals...well, that doesn't sound like morality to me - that's just looking for public permission to kill. Not many morals to that.
Since you are commenting much on my society, as a member of it I'll respond.
My life was saved by a legally owned and carried handgun.
I was solo backpacking and two guys armed with knives tried to jump me. Believe it or not in a nation where ammunition is apparently sold in gumball machines (according to UK perception), criminals still use knives. In this case as they rushed me I turned and they RADAR LOCKED on my holstered handgun and froze. I did not have to draw the gun to stop them, but I was really, really close. They tried to laugh it off as just trying to scare me. If I hadnt been armed or had been carrying concealed (open carry is legal here) I would have been under the threat of death or serious bodily injury at their whim. As a law abiding US citizen I dont have to give them that option if I choose not to.
I got my first carry permit back in 1989 after a neighbor was beaten to death a few blocks from my home. He was trying to parallel park and got on the nerves of three guys trying to drive down the street. This mans wife watched in horror as they beat him to death with a pick handle and he tried to fend off the blows with a trash can lid. They had been married a year, just like me at the time. She is still a widow, they are still in prison, and he is still dead.
In my case, the idiots who tried to attack me are still out there, hopefully a little wiser, I am now a happily married father of three, my oldest will be going to college next year. In 98% of civilian defensive gun uses the gun is not fired. Its sudden presence is a game changer that causes criminals to quickly go to plan B, exit stage right. The overwhelming numbers of such incidents never make it into the police reports let alone the paper, technically they are non-events.
To legally employ lethal force in the US there must be three conditions
#1. Ability The aggressor must have the ability or means to inflict death or grave bodily injury.
#2. Intent The aggressor must display by actions or words the intent or determination to inflict death or grave bodily injury.
#3. Proximity The aggressor must be close enough to inflict death or grave bodily injury with the means he has.
These three conditions are subject to the reasonable man standard, would a reasonable person interpret the actions of the aggressor as such to cause death or grave bodily injury. Given those circumstances defense is moral and the citizen has every right to defend himself using whatever means necessary. In many cases of self defense the district attorney has the power to make the determination if those conditions were present and no charges are filed.
Here in PA there are severe penalties for carrying a gun without a permit and using a gun in the commission of a crime nets you five years mandatory sentence for each use. As a vetted law-abider I have the right according to state law to be armed, concealed, with any handgun I own anywhere in my state, at any time, for any reason. My permit is recognized in 28 other states. Our permits are good for five years and cost $25.
Carrying (or even owning) a gun is a huge responsibility not to be taken lightly. It doesnt make you safe, it merely makes you armed, but sometimes thats a good thing. Mac
